home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac of the 20th Century
/
TIME, Almanac of the 20th Century.ISO
/
election
/
88elect
/
88elect.018
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-02-28
|
19KB
|
373 lines
<text>
<title>
(88 Elect) Iraq's Power Grab
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1988 Election
</history>
<link 01982>
<link 01863>
<link 01592>
<link 00004>
<link 00030>
<link 00036>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
August 13, 1990
WORLD, Page 16
COVER STORIES
Iraq's Power Grab
</hdr>
<body>
<p>Audacious and ruthless, Saddam Hussein seizes tiny Kuwait--and
no one is sure where his ambition will end
</p>
<p>By LISA BEYER--Reported by William Dowell/Cairo, J.F.O.
McAllister/ Washington and Christopher Ogden/Moscow
</p>
<p> With hindsight it looks so obvious, so wickedly brilliant.
There sat Kuwait, fat and ripe, bulging with enormous reserves
of oil and cash, boasting an excellent port on the Persian Gulf--and
utterly incapable of defending itself against Iraq's
proficient war machine. Saddam Hussein, hungry for money but
greedier still for regional dominance, knew before the first
of his soldiers crossed the border that it would be a walkover--and
it was. In 12 hours, Kuwait was his.
</p>
<p> With his brief romp through the desert, the imperious Iraqi
President doubled the oil under his control to some 20% of the
world's known reserves; only Saudi Arabia, with 25%, has more.
He strengthened his claim to the position he has long coveted:
overlord of the Arab world. And he made the entire world quake,
weak-kneed, at his raw power. Not since the brilliant military
leader Nebuchadnezzar ruled the Babylonian Empire more than two
millenniums ago had Baghdad exercised such sway.
</p>
<p> Just how far will Saddam Hussein's lust for power carry him?
By provoking the first major military conflict of the post-cold
war era, he provided the maiden test of the proposition that
the U.S. and the Soviet Union can create more peace working
together than apart. As recently as a year ago, such an
incursion in the Middle East would probably have caused a
fearsome rift between the superpowers. But in the summer of
1990, the Iraqi blitz prompted Washington and Moscow to act in
stunning unanimity, each abhorring the raid and demanding, in
an unprecedented joint statement, that the invaders retreat.
That position was also endorsed by the United Nations Security
Council. While all parties were clearly loath to take on the
mightiest army in the Arab world--a force of 1 million
fighting men--the rare convergence of views raised the
possibility that Iraq's expansionism can somehow be contained.
</p>
<p> Or can it? To Saddam, the end of the cold war, the breakup
of the Soviet empire and America's re-evaluation of its
military spending offered a safe opening for his claims of
hegemony. He has the army, the arsenal and the audacity to
pursue his grand ambition to rule the region--or rock the
world. In effect, Saddam has leveled a brazen challenge: Stop
me if you can. Last weekend one of his spokesmen snarled that
if anyone moved against Iraqi forces, Baghdad would "chop off
his arm from the shoulder."
</p>
<p> Saddam's power grab is a bold reminder of the role brute
force will always play in the history of nations. Without the
threat of escalation to superpower conflict, countries with
sophisticated weapons and thuggish rulers will try to take
advantage of the shifting international climate to assert their
will. The threat to U.S. interests is not some distant danger.
It is very real, and not only because of the region's oil
reserves. Does America really want to let the Saddams of the
world shape the new global power structure?
</p>
<p> Saddam's aggression immediately cast the financial markets
into turmoil. Some economists believe that even a slight surge
in prices could push America's economy, already weakened by
sluggish demand, the federal deficit and the S&L crisis, over
the brink into recession. Perhaps more important, Saddam's move
on the Middle East is an unexpected test of whether nations
will pay the necessary price to assure peace and stability in
the new global climate. Said a senior State Department
official: "You just cannot allow this kind of behavior to go
unchecked."
</p>
<p> But Saddam is not easily intimidated. He is convinced that
no nation has the nerve to take him on. His conquest might have
been deterred, but undoing it now will be nigh impossible.
Baghdad radio warned that Iraq would "make Kuwait a graveyard
for those who launch any aggression." The feckless
international response to his muscle flexing during the past
decade has nourished his belief that he has little to fear if
he misbehaves. A loner, he has rarely if ever been told no--probably
because the few who tried to do so tended to wind up
dead. So no one can be very sure what, if any, message will
derail his ruthless drive to be the paramount power in the
Persian Gulf. Fortunately, Saddam has few friends around the
globe, and his truculence is knitting unlikely partners into
a broad-based opposition.
</p>
<p> The emerging harmony of international opinion, however, was
scant consolation for Kuwait, since no one appeared actually
willing to come to the defense of the tiny state and its 1.9
million people. While Iraq in the face of the world's
condemnation promised to bring its troops home beginning five
days after the invasion, a subsequent announcement made
nonsense of that pledge. Baghdad said it was raising a new army
for Kuwait in which--surprise--100,000 Iraqis had
volunteered to serve. What's more, Baghdad named a new
government, composed of nine Kuwaiti army officers, that would
clearly be a puppet regime. For all practical purposes, Iraq
has annexed its southern neighbor.
</p>
<p> Iraq's land grab drew inevitable comparisons with the 1930s,
when Hitler began to gobble up Europe in pieces small enough
not to provoke a military response by the other powers of the
day. It did not take long before fears grew that Iraq, having
devoured Kuwait, would turn next to other appetizing and
vulnerable gulf nations--most notably Saudi Arabia, the
richest of them all. The extent to which the NATO countries,
the Soviet Union and the threatened Arab states move to thwart
Saddam will determine whether they have learned the lesson of
history or are doomed to repeat it.
</p>
<p> Even in the fine points of his strategy, Saddam evoked
echoes of the past. He excited his people with impassioned
speeches full of grievances toward their neighbor. He exploited
a border dispute, scheduled negotiating sessions that were
intended all along to be fruitless, and cooked up a request for
intervention by supposedly downtrodden locals. The invasion
sequence itself was classic '30s: bluff, feint and grab.
</p>
<p> Baghdad's bitterest complaint against Kuwait was that the
gulf state had been grossly overproducing oil in violation of
OPEC quotas. Combined with similar cheating by the United Arab
Emirates, Kuwait's excess pumping had depressed the average
price of an OPEC barrel nearly $7. Iraq, which relies on oil
for 95% of its export revenues, claims that every $1 drop in
the price of a barrel of oil costs it $1 billion a year. As
Saddam saw it, the Kuwaitis might as well have been stealing
from his treasury.
</p>
<p> That business, however, was supposedly settled late last
month at OPEC's midyear meeting in Geneva. Just before that
session began, Saddam resorted to outright intimidation: he
marched his 30,000-strong elite Republican Guard, the troops
who did the toughest fighting in the gulf war, to the Kuwaiti
border. Through Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who called
the spat "a cloud that will pass with the wind"--a comment
he would soon bitterly regret--Saddam promised he would not
attack his neighbor, at least for the moment. Still, Kuwait and
the U.A.E. got the hint, meekly agreed to abide by their
production caps and consented to the first hike in OPEC's target
price in four years.
</p>
<p> But rather than pull its forces back, Iraq sent in 70,000
reinforcements. Saddam had other scores to settle with Kuwait.
There was the quarrel over the rich Rumaila oil field, a
finger-shaped deposit whose tip reaches just into frontier
territory claimed by both Iraq and Kuwait. Baghdad insists that
when its attention was turned to fighting Iran in 1980, Kuwait
surreptitiously moved the border 2.5 miles north to tap into
Rumaila. Now Saddam wants $2.4 billion in compensation for oil
he claims Kuwait withdrew.
</p>
<p> Then there was Baghdad's insistence that Kuwait forgive $10
billion to $20 billion in loans it extended to help fund Iraq's
eight-year war against Iran. Saddam, who started the conflict,
maintains that he fought off Iranian fundamentalism on behalf
of all Arabs and is therefore entitled to relief from the
entire $30 billion to $40 billion debt he racked up with the
rest of the Arab world.
</p>
<p> Finally, Iraq saw in Kuwait a way to compensate for the
disadvantages--enormous for an oil exporter--of being
virtually landlocked. Iraq has just 18 miles of shoreline, and
most of that is blocked by Kuwait's Bubiyan Island. Baghdad has
long pressed Kuwait to cede or lease Bubiyan Island, but the
Kuwaitis refused, figuring they would never get it back. Then
there is Iraq's long-standing claim that all of Kuwait
rightfully belongs to it. Once part of the province of Basra
under the Ottoman Empire, Kuwait has never been acknowledged as
a separate entity by Baghdad. Iraq tried to reclaim the land by
force in 1961, when Britain granted Kuwait independence, and
again in 1973 and 1976.
</p>
<p> All the points of discord between Iraq and Kuwait were on
the agenda of talks between the two countries last Wednesday.
From the outset the Kuwaitis made it clear that they were
willing to pay Baghdad a sizable sum for peace. But the Iraqis,
who demanded Kuwait's total capitulation on every count, were
determined to see the negotiations break down. After a
fruitless two hours, they did. At exactly 2 the next morning,
the 100,000 Iraqi soldiers massed on the border--a force
nearly five times as great as the entire Kuwaiti military--spilled
south. Two additional commando units swarmed in by air
and sea.
</p>
<p> Rolling unchallenged down the empty superhighway Kuwait had
built--as a token of friendship with Iraq--to link the two
countries, the troops made the 37 miles to the capital, Kuwait
City, in just four hours. "It was chaos in the streets," said
Stephanie McGehee, a photographer who witnessed the attack.
Panicked residents tried to flee south toward Saudi Arabia, but
the Iraqis forced people out of their autos and angrily ripped
out car phones--no rarity in a country with so many wealthy
citizens--presumably because they could be used to
communicate troop positions.
</p>
<p> While an estimated 300 Iraqi tanks prowled the city, an
additional 50 surrounded the Emir's palace and the nearby U.S.
embassy. But the Emir, Sheik Jaber al-Ahmed al-Sabah, and his
family were able to flee to Saudi Arabia by helicopter. Though
the invaders had quickly seized Kuwait's radio and television
station, a hidden transmitter continued to broadcast
exhortations to resist the raiding foreigners and pleas for
help from other Arab states. "O Arabs, Kuwait's blood and honor
are being violated. Rush to its rescue!" cried a voice thought
to be the crown prince's. "The children, the women, the old men
of Kuwait are calling on you."
</p>
<p> Though help never came, Kuwaiti troops put up small pockets
of resistance. At the palace, the country's symbolic heart, the
Kuwaitis held their own through a two-hour artillery barrage.
During the battle, the Emir's younger brother Fahd was killed.
The Iraqi force assigned to secure the oil rigs off Kuwait's
shores saw the most action. Kuwaiti troops and missile boats
managed to sink and burn an unknown number of Iraqi landing
craft and escort ships. By early afternoon, however, nearly all
Kuwait's guns had been silenced. In all, it is estimated that
200 Kuwaitis were killed in the assault. No figure for Iraqi
casualties was available.
</p>
<p> Concocting the flimsiest of excuses for an invasion, the
Iraqis announced that they had entered the country at the
invitation of the Free Interim Government, which had supposedly
seized control of the country from the Emir. This previously
unknown organization was said to be made up of "young
revolutionaries." But no one bought the tale. "Instead of
staging a coup d'etat before the invasion, they got it the wrong
way around," said Thomas Pickering, Washington's U.N.
ambassador.
</p>
<p> To one and all, it was obvious that the Iraqi assault was,
as President Bush termed it, "naked aggression." Resource-rich
but sparse in people, Kuwait was a timely acquisition--an act
of piracy, pure and simple--for Iraq, whose war with Iran
left the country with $70 billion in debts and tremendous
reconstruction costs. While Saddam does not face an immediate
cash shortage, he is intent on proceeding with some $40 billion
worth of self-memorializing development projects that he has
been unable to finance. Among them: the Baghdad metro, 2,000
miles of railway and two gigantic hydroelectric dams. Now Saddam
can not only pocket the profits of Kuwait's oil wells but also
manipulate their production levels to ensure a high price for
his own oil.
</p>
<p> Equally tantalizing were Kuwait's enormous investments
overseas, estimated at $100 billion, which provide the gulf
state with more than $6 billion a year, a sum roughly
equivalent to its oil revenues. What's more, Iraq's new piece
of real estate, which includes Port Ahmadia and 120 miles of
coastline, gives it direct access to the Persian Gulf.
</p>
<p> Of course, Saddam had more on his mind than money. Having
won--by his lights--the war against Iran, he is intent on
making himself the new Gamal Abdel Nasser, master and hero of
the entire Arab world. As Robert E. Hunter, former director of
Middle East affairs for the National Security Council, points
out, "If you're going to run a protection racket, every once
in a while you have to blow up a dry cleaner."
</p>
<p> No country that shares a border with Iraq can rest easy. It
is obvious that Saddam has the military might to seize more
territory in the gulf, and he could move--who knows?--into
Jordan or Syria as well, a prospect that raises anxieties in
Israel. The first modern Arab invasion of another Arab state
has broken the myth of family that held those competing states
in check. But even if Saddam reins in his soldiers, the threat
that he might loose them will scare his Arab neighbors into
submission. They will find it easier and the better part of
valor to knuckle under.
</p>
<p> Nor can they necessarily count on foreign help. Kuwait
pleaded for military intervention. "My friend, we are desperate
for any kind of assistance we can get," said Sheik Saud Nasir
Al-Sabah, Kuwait's ambassador to the U.S., addressing a
reporter. But the immediate international response smelled of
appeasement. Although the U.S. moved to position three of its
aircraft carriers in the region, President Bush at first said
his government was not "discussing intervention." The Arab
League met for a full day in Cairo and was unable to come up
with even an expression of concern.
</p>
<p> Soon enough, however, the danger of allowing Saddam to get
away with murder began to sink in. The U.S. State Department
reported that some of the Iraqi invaders had moved to within
five miles of the border with Saudi Arabia. Though the Saudis
have stockpiled tens of billions of dollars' worth of Western
military hardware over the years, they have only a 65,000-man
armed force that is no match for the Iraqis. Holding that
neighbor under its guns, Iraq would control more than 44% of
the world's proven oil reserves. Suddenly backbones
straightened up. Bush said he was not ruling out a counterstrike
and warned later that Iraq would be attacking U.S. "vital
interests" if it took on Saudi Arabia. His aides asserted that
Washington had unspecified "contingency plans" in the event of
an Iraqi move beyond Kuwait. Bucking itself up, the Arab
League, though rejecting foreign interference, condemned the
invasion and demanded an immediate withdrawal.
</p>
<p> In a compelling display of the new relationship between the
superpowers, U.S. Secretary of State James Baker quickly flew
to Moscow to consult with his Soviet counterpart, Eduard
Shevardnadze. After what Shevardnadze called "a rather unusual
meeting," the two issued a rare communique, the first team
effort by the superpowers to muster global support to halt a
regional war. Decrying the "brutal and illegal" Iraqi attack,
the two countries called on all nations to join in an arms
embargo of the aggressor state. Signing the statement,
Shevardnadze allowed, was "rather difficult" for the Soviet
Union, since Iraq had long been a close client. But, he said,
the joint declaration was "more consistent with the new
political thinking."
</p>
<p> For the moment, the consensus seemed to be that it was more
prudent to try to squeeze Saddam dry than to outgun him. "There
are two approaches to the problem: confrontation or
asphyxiation," said a Western diplomat in Cairo. "Asphyxiation
is the best, but it requires the complete cooperation of all
the countries if it is going to work." The U.S. immediately
froze Iraqi assets and imposed a boycott on Iraqi oil. Last
weekend the European Community adopted those measures, banning
arms sales to Baghdad and adding on a boycott of Kuwaiti oil.
The U.S. and the European countries have also frozen Kuwaiti
assets to keep the Iraqis from getting their hands on them.
Japan asked its financial institutions to follow suit.
</p>
<p> Whatever countermeasures are taken, they had better be
decisive. "The invasion is the first fundamental challenge to
the new superpower order," says John Hannah of the Washington
Institute for Near East Policy. The implications of failure are
underscored by the fact that Iraq, with its less than
punctilious attachment to the rules of civilized conduct, is
thought to be three to 10 years away from possessing a nuclear
bomb. Already Iraq is one of the world's largest producers of
chemical weapons, and Saddam has shown he is willing to use them
not only to subdue his external enemies but also to cow his
own compatriots.
</p>
<p> As with any bully, the key to taming Saddam is to make sure
he gets away with nothing. Given "the mind-set of a person as
ruthless as he is," says a high-level U.S. State Department
official, "unless you meet this kind of aggressive behavior
very firmly, he's encouraged to try again, and you'll pay a
substantial price later." What the U.S., the other Arabs and
the rest of the international community must come to terms with
is that the time to draw a line in the sand is now.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>