THE PRESS SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1987. Pressure on Iran — and Iraq

Press, 12 September 1987, Page 24

THE PRESS SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1987. Pressure on Iran — and Iraq

As the war between Iran and Iraq enters its eighth year, the United Nations is attempting once more to persuade the two countries to accept a cease-fire while a permanent settlement of their differences is worked out. The Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr Javier Perez de Cuellar, is visiting Teheran and Bagdad in the next few days; so far, the omens for the success of his mission are far from promising. After the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution on July 20 that demanded a general cease-fire, there came a lull that lasted six weeks. The Iraqis accepted the resolution, on the condition that Iran did the same. Iran described the resolution as “promising,” but it continues to refuse any end to the fighting until Iraq is pronounced the “aggressor.” In the sense that Iraq attacked Iran, back in 1979, the Iranians are right, although bitter differences divided the two countries for years before that. At the end of August it was again the Iraqis who broke the tacit cease-fire. They claimed, with justification, that Iran was gaining most from the lull because it was able to ship its oil unimpeded by Iraqi air strikes. Those strikes have resumed, followed quickly by Iranian retaliations at sea and on land. Two separate campaigns are being fought. On land, Iran holds the upper hand and the Iraqis for years have been fighting defensive actions along their frontier. At sea and in the air, Iraq’s superior air power allows it to attack Iranian targets almost at will. The intention is to cripple Iran’s exports, and its will to fight. So far, the exports and the will remain intact. In the long run, it would almost certainly be the Iranians who broke out from the military stalemate. Defeat on land for Iraq is a real possibility; hence the greater enthusiasm of the Iraqis for a cease-fire and negotiations. As more and more countries have tjeen drawn in on the fringes of the conflict a new strategy has opened up for the Iraqis. Six outside countries, with the United States to the fore, now have warships in the area or plan to send warships soon. The object is to protect commercial shipping from mines (probably laid by Iran), and from Iranian

attacks by aircraft and fast patrol boats. The intention is sensible enough, but it hardly indicates an even-handed attitude. Iraqi strikes against Iranian oil exports continue with no more than expressions of disquiet from outsiders. The United States, determined to exert its influence, has put neutral Kuwaiti tankers under its protection and has built up a fleet of 40 warships in the region. So far, there has been no direct clash between Americans and Iranians, but the risk is high and must be increasing. Iraq has a strong incentive to provoke such a clash. If the United States could be drawn to make a direct attack on Iran, the Iraqis would suddenly gain the world’s most powerful country as a reluctant ally. If that were to happen, the Soviet Union would find it difficult to resist the temptation to meddle, though so far it has shown itself keen to see an end to the war. By steering clear of any part in the war, the Soviet Union would be able to stay in a favourable light. Equally, the United States must do its utmost to avoid direct conflict with Iran, for there is no hope of winning a war there. All the outside powers want the SecretaryGeneral of the United Nations to find a way through the tangle of Iranian and Iraqi grievances. The best hope may come not from increasing the threats against Iran, but from applying pressure to the Iraqis. The United States would do better to seem more evenhanded in its approach to the protection of shipping in the Gulf. If Iraq is persuaded that it cannot depend on the United States being drawn in to help fight its war, there may be a better prospect of Iraqi concessions towards Iran.

However much other States may dislike and fear the Ayatollah’s Iran, any right that remains in the conflict is probably on the side of the Iranians. A gesture of conciliation, perhaps even of apology, will be required from Iraq if the fighting is to stop. In the interests of maintaining world peace, and of ensuring the flow of oil from the Gulf, countries such as the United States, Britain, and France have compelling reasons to apply pressure to Iraq. Otherwise, Mr Perez de Cuellar’s mission this week-end is hardly likely to make progress.