Congressional Members Skeptical of Iraqi Decision
WASHINGTON, Sept. 19, 2002–Most area congressional members responded Tuesday with skepticism to Saddam Hussein’s recent promise to allow unconditional weapons inspections in Iraq.
“This announcement by Iraq is a first step,” Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., said in a statement. “However, it is rhetoric we have heard before, and compliance with U.N. resolutions will speak louder than any statement Iraq can issue.”
Others agreed.
“I don’t think it changes anything,” Rep. John Sununu, R-N.H., said “It’s perfectly reasonable to believe that anything Iraq does is a cynical move.”
United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan announced Monday that Iraq had agreed to an unconditional return for U.N. weapons inspectors. A timeline for inspections has not yet been set, but Annan said Iraqi leaders were willing to discuss the logistics immediately.
The Bush administration and many congressional Republicans view Iraq’s promise skeptically, while others feel cautiously optimistic.
“If they’re willing to give unconditional inspections another try, maybe we can avoid military action,” Tom Allen, D-Maine, said. “But that’s ultimately the President’s decision.”
He said that Iraq “feels the heat” from mounting international pressure and that its change of policy could be an opportunity for a peaceful resolution. “You can’t ever trust Hussein, but there may be a way to effectively disarm him without engaging in a war,” he said. “If there is an opportunity to do that, we should explore it.”
Rep. Charlie Bass, R-N.H., issued a statement that, while expressing similar skepticism, also supported a peaceful course of action if possible “I am encouraged that Iraq has taken this step…and remain hopeful that military action can be avoided,” he said.
The United States is pressing the U.N. to pass a new resolution addressing Iraq in the coming weeks. International leaders have recently supported measures to resume weapons inspections inside Iraq, but few have openly endorsed the Bush administration’s ultimate goal of regime change.
“The next move is up to the U.N. Security Council,” said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow in government studies at the Brookings Institution, a Washington. think tank. He said that some countries-such as China and Russia-would regard Iraq’s decision as “considerable movement,” and might favor a resolution to re-establish inspections before making any decisions on military action.
.
Some congressional Democrats said that international support-with the principal exception of Britain-for military action might be difficult to find.
“I think we’d be hard pressed to find allies to support anything beyond inspections at this point,” Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., said.
Allen agreed. “The correct policy for the United States is to make the elimination of weapons of mass destruction the goal and not necessarily regime change,” he said. “If we can eliminate weapons of mass destruction we should.”
But most of New Hampshire’s Republicans support the President’s goal of regime change.
“Saddam’s gesture to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq does not negate the threat his regime poses to U.S. interests, and those of our allies and friends,” Sen. Bob Smith, R, N.H., said in a statement. “The President has firmly and unequivocally stated his position on Iraq, and I support his views.”
The Administration is pressing Congress to debate and adopt an Iraqi resolution before its planned October break. But area members of Congress would not say what the resolution might entail or if it would be passed before the recess.
Published in Foster’s Daily Democrat, in New Hampshire.
