Editorials
Saturday, November 21, 1998

No more reprieves
for Saddam Hussein

WHEN President Clinton called off an attack on Iraq last weekend, Americans couldn't get very excited. They had been through these exercises too many times. People expected Saddam Hussein to back down before he got blasted, and he did -- although he almost waited too long.

But the appearance that this was just another repeat of past performances may have been deceiving. High officials of the United States and its allies say this is different. Bombing Iraq is almost inevitable, they say. They don't expect Saddam Hussein to cooperate fully with the United Nations weapons inspectors, and when he balks a military response will follow without more agonizing in the United Nations.

In the Security Council, the Iraqi dictator is said to have run out of room to maneuver. Governments that defended Iraq in the past have reportedly washed their hands of his cause.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair's comment that next time there would be "no warnings, no wrangling, no negotiations, no last-minute letters" reportedly reflects Washington's view. A senior American official said the United States has positioned itself well diplomatically to deal with any further Iraqi defiance.

The United Nations inspectors are said to have more support from the Security Council than they have had in nearly two years. There is thought to be no chance of another reprieve like the deal negotiated by Secretary-General Kofi Annan in February, which Saddam Hussein has violated. He has reneged too many times to permit another futile exercise in diplomacy.

This time U.S. and British forces are standing by within striking distance of Iraq and can be sent into combat in a matter of hours, not the days required for the recent buildup.

It may take no more than two or three weeks for the critical test to come. That is the time period needed for the chief U.N. inspector, Richard Butler, to assemble the experts needed for surprise inspections of sites where the Iraqis have denied access. Saddam Hussein could cooperate fully and surrender his weapons of mass destruction, but that is unlikely.

If he balks, the word is that the U.S. attack will follow immediately. It should -- and with enough force to do real damage to Iraq's ability to renew its aggression against its neighbors and to compel the regime to comply with United Nations demands.

President Clinton has wavered before on Iraq -- as when his administration urged the U.N. against provoking a confrontation by conducting surprise weapons inspections. One more instance of backing down would destroy the United States' credibility on containing this outlaw regime.

Dash and Starr

AT first glance, the news report on former Senate Watergate counsel Sam Dash looks like a rebuke of independent counsel Kenneth Starr. Dash resigned as Starr's ethics adviser to protest Starr's decision to testify in the House impeachment hearing. In a letter to Starr, Dash said that by testifying Starr had "unlawfully intruded on the power of impeachment."

That view is certainly debatable. Would justice have been served if the independent counsel had refused to testify? Didn't Congress have a right to question him about his impeachment report and, as many Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee did, challenge him on aspects of his investigation?

In any case, there is more to Dash's opinion than that. Dash's letter says, "My decision to leave has nothing whatsoever to do with the many unfounded and misinformed attacks on your conduct as independent counsel." He says Starr and his staff conducted themselves "with integrity and professionalism."

That doesn't read like a condemnation of the independent counsel. It's a strong endorsement. Starr's critics had better not wave Dash's letter around as a vindication of their "unfounded and misinformed" attacks.

A new space station

A new era in space and in Russo-American cooperation has been launched with the orbiting of the first part of the new international space station, a 24-ton cargo module. The launching, from Baikonur in Kazakstan, was the first of 45 needed to put all components of the station into space.

When completed, the station will replace Russia's trouble-plagued Mir, which may be retired next year. The new craft is scheduled for completion in 2004 and is expected to serve as a home for astronauts for at least 15 years.

The space agencies of 16 nations are participating in the project, but the key partners are the U.S. and Russia. The cost is estimated at $40 billion, of which the U.S. will contribute $24 billion.

Russia's participation has been hampered by financial problems. The launch of the first segment was delayed more than a year, mainly because the Russian space agency couldn't afford to complete a Russian crew module that is scheduled for launching next July or August. The agency sold research time on the station to NASA for $60 million to complete the crew module. But the Russians were pleased, viewing the launch as vindication for their troubled space industry.

NASA chief Daniel Goldin, at a press conference after the launch, observed, "Now we only have 44 launches to go, about 1,000 hours of space walks and countless problems, but because of the trust and mutual respect ...the international space station is going to be a reality."

Cooperation on the space station should be valuable in maintaining friendly relations between Washington and Moscow despite continuing stresses. Even more important, the project ensures that the space age will not be prematurely ended when the Mir completes its useful life.

---

Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership

Rupert E. Phillips, CEO

John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher

David Shapiro, Managing Editor

Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor

Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors

A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor