(2 of 2)
Then came the standoff last month at the Agriculture Ministry when the Iraqi leader refused to let a U.N. team through the doors. According to Pentagon officials, infuriated allies were on the brink of launching strikes against military targets around Baghdad. At the last moment Saddam backed down, but the victory proved hollow when the U.N. allowed him to dictate who could enter the ministry. Soon after, British diplomats say, allied leaders determined that whatever the next provocation, they would issue an ultimatum, then strike if Saddam did not comply.
Plan A called for the next U.N. inspection team to enter an off-limits Iraqi ministry. Anticipating Saddam's refusal, a special U.S. Air Force air-control group was dispatched to Saudi Arabia to guide the expected aerial attacks. When press leaks last week forced the mission to abort, the mounting atrocities in the south came into focus as an attractive alternative. Plan B calls for establishing the "no-fly zone" over the Shi'ite marshes. U.S. officials say an ultimatum will be issued this week giving Saddam just 24 hours to clear the southern airspace. The stated purpose is to insure unimpeded reconnaissance missions, but if Saddam dares to field his air force, said National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, "then we will take appropriate countermeasures."
The political objectives are less clear. Is this just another shot at weakening Saddam, or do the allies hope it might provoke a coup? Given the talk of genocide, does the mission imply a long-term commitment to insure the safety of Shi'ites? In the wake of Desert Storm, the West put a premium on keeping Iraq intact for fear of sparking destabilizing Kurdish and Shi'ite rebellions. Today Western leaders are willing to take a calculated risk with Iraq's integrity, as long as Saddam is put in his place.