Dealing with Iraq

If Saddam Hussein were not such a recidivist, it might be possible to fashion a less confrontational approach to restrain Iraq and prevent it from producing and using weapons of mass destruction. Pressure to ease up is building on the Security Council following the American and British air strikes this month. But the dangers of relaxing the international grip on Iraq are too great to consider the kinds of changes proposed by France and Russia, including a lifting of economic sanctions.

The French foreign minister, Hubert Vedrine, proposes to deal with Saddam Hussein by rewarding his belligerence. Mr. Vedrine would dismantle the present United Nations inspection program and replace it with one more acceptable to Iraq's friends on the Security Council, then lift the embargo on Iraqi oil sales. Firing Richard Butler, the chief weapons inspector, and allowing Iraq to replenish its treasury with billions of dollars in oil revenue, sounds more like a strategy for winning France new business opportunities in Iraq than for restraining Saddam. Russia would also like to see the Security Council lighten sanctions.

Any approach to Iraq that depends on Security Council unity is destined to be weak. While France seeks trade, Russia hopes to collect money it is owed from arms sales to Baghdad a decade ago. China is indifferent to Iraqi threats. The United States and Britain may soon be left with no choice but to veto a move to reduce or lift sanctions, with the prospect of enforcing an unpopular oil embargo.

The Clinton administration should not paper over the difficulties ahead by talking casually about finding new leaders for Iraq. The Saddam problem is not likely to be fixed by giving millions of dollars to disorganized and divided Iraqi opposition groups or by beaming uncensored radio broadcasts into Iraq. There is no painless way to deal with Iraq. If there were, Saddam Hussein would not have managed to remain in power for 19 years of brutal rule.

-- The New York Times