Analysis: A Muscular First Step

In almost the reverse of his father's path to battle nearly 12 years ago, President Bush is obtaining congressional backing for a war with Iraq even before he has faced a direct military threat, assembled an international coalition or received support from the United Nations.

Moreover, unlike 1991, passage of the resolution does not mean that a war is imminent. Indeed, as the vote neared, Bush and members of his administration in recent days have deliberately toned down their tough rhetoric. The notion that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein must be toppled has been shoved in the background, while instead officials argue that the best way to prevent a war is strong support from Congress and the U.N. Security Council for a possible war, because it will demonstrate to Hussein that he has no choice but to give up his weapons of mass destruction.

It's an argument that swayed many skeptical members of Congress and which administration officials say is beginning to win over equally skeptical members of the Security Council, many of whom fear the consequences of a clash between the United States and Iraq.

With the new congressional resolution, Bush will have extraordinary flexibility on how and when to confront Iraq, even though, unlike 1991, Iraq has not invaded another country or directly threatened U.S. or regional interests.

In key ways, the congressional resolution gives Bush even more leeway than his father received after Iraq overran Kuwait and targeted Saudi Arabia's oil facilities in August 1990. The resolution adopted by Congress the following January — after a massive U.S. military buildup in the region and the careful assembling of a broad anti-Iraq coalition — required the president to inform Congress that diplomacy had failed before he waged war. The current resolution allows Bush to wage war as long as he informs Congress within 48 hours after the onset of military action.

The earlier resolution also specifically tied military action to implementation of specific Security Council resolutions, while the new one is deliberately vague. It allows Bush to wage war to implement "all relevant" U.N. resolutions — though it does not require passage of a future resolution — and it also permits war to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq."

Senate Majority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.), in announcing his support for the resolution yesterday, said he was concerned that the administration would view the broad wording as a carte blanche. "I am not confident that they will not see it as a green light, which is why I admonished the administration to remember this is the first step," he said.

The administration still faces tough bargaining at the United Nations, but one senior U.S. official predicted a resolution outlining a tough weapons inspections regime ultimately would be approved with no abstentions by any of the five permanent members of the Security Council. Another senior official said the congressional resolution "will help us a lot at the United Nations, because the world will now recognize the United States is speaking with one voice."

At the United Nations, the administration has not formally offered its proposal, though it has privately shared it. While there appears to be general agreement for a new Iraq resolution, France and Russia, two members with veto power, still appear reluctant to include language that would grant automatic approval for military action if Iraq fails to comply with a new inspections program. Non-permanent members of the 15-nation Security Council, anxious about the course of the discussion, have been pressing for an open meeting next week to debate Iraq.

In a 30-minute conversation with French President Jacques Chirac Wednesday, Bush said, "If you want to avoid war, vote for a strong resolution," an administration official said. Chirac appeared unmoved, however, on the question of immediate action.

Bush has been careful not to tip his hand on his next move, and divisions within the administration make it difficult to predict the course of policy. Some members of the administration, especially in the civilian ranks of the Pentagon, remain highly skeptical that even an enhanced inspections regime will prove effective in disarming Iraq, and they are apt to dismiss the current wrangling at the United Nations as a pointless kabuki dance.

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, however, is pushing ahead with negotiations on a Security Council resolution, believing that in the end Bush will support even a compromise that mandates a tough inspection regime and tests Hussein's willingness to cooperate with the United Nations. That may put off a confrontation longer than some in the administration would like, but it would ensure broader international support for military action, should Bush decide to undertake it, officials said.

"I don't doubt that some Pentagon officials are probably apoplectic," one official said. "But we need it for the purposes of doing things in Iraq post-Saddam Hussein. We need help then and we are not going to get help unless we have help from the beginning."

Diplomats were cheered when, at a speech in Cincinnati this week, Bush said war was neither "imminent nor unavoidable." Notwithstanding the disagreements within the administration, a Western diplomat said yesterday, "we take it that the president is in charge."

Joseph Cirincione, director of the nonproliferation project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the administration often "appears to be making up their policy as they go along." But he said Bush's ability to bend the international debate to his liking is impressive.

"Whether this is a carefully constructed strategy to talk tough to get a compromise or a splintered administration patching together policies on the fly to see what gels, the result is the same," Cirincione said. "He scared most of the world into thinking he was going to war, and he is likely to get a better inspections regime than anyone thought possible two months ago."