Analysis: Saddam now clearly Bush’s target

Patrick E. Tyler

Friday, Sept. 13, 2002 | 5:34 a.m.

By Patrick E. Tyler

Patrick E. Tyler is a correspondent for The New York Times.

President Bush has formally changed the face of America's primary enemy from Osama bin Laden, whereabouts unknown, to Saddam Hussein, an old nemesis who cheated both Bush's father and President Clinton out of fulfillment of the terms of surrender that ended the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

The president's forcefully delivered speech at the United Nations significantly escalates the mission he assigned to himself after the Sept. 11 attacks, when he said that fighting terrorism was now the focus of his presidency.

"We must stand up for our security," Bush said from the podium in the vast hall of delegates who gathered under the most stringent security measures ever.

America's security, he said, is "challenged today by outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and have no limit to their violent ambitions."

And so the prospect that the United States could be at war with Iraq by Christmas or soon thereafter began to settle over a country both disturbed and a little numb from the first anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Bush made no case Thursday that Saddam's government in Baghdad was connected in any way to the terrorists who plotted the hijackings and assault on the United States. Nor did he share any new intelligence that Iraq has made any significant strides in rebuilding its arsenal of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, though the record of Saddam's deception, packaged by the White House and released Thursday, is extensive.

Instead, the president moved on to new ground, arguing that the credibility of the United Nations and a secure world order require that the international community respond to the intolerable threat Bush says is posed by Iraq's "weapons of mass murder," developed to brandish against America and its allies. That threat is so strong, he argued, that Saddam should be removed from power.

Bush made no pledge to wait for U.N. approval for military action, only to work with the Security Council for the "necessary resolutions" that would give Washington freedom of action.

A senior White House official said after the speech that Bush was not willing to get drawn into a lengthy tussle over sending U.N. weapons inspectors back to Iraq. "Even when there were inspectors in, he was managing to keep them from doing their work," the official said, referring to Saddam.

In the last several days the Bush administration has moved adroitly to exploit every crack in the edifice of European opposition to war in Iraq. After French President Jacques Chirac said in an interview that the Security Council could set a deadline of three weeks for Iraq to admit weapons inspectors, after which Washington could petition for Security Council backing to use military force, Bush administration officials praised the proposal.

They pointed out that the positions of Britain and France were converging on how to handle Saddam.

In addition, Bush timed this speech to coincide with the anniversary events, reminding the country -- and to some extent the world -- how united both were in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks. Some of those sentiments benefited Bush on Thursday.

"I think the country generally speaking liked what he said even though there is a tremendous amount of concern about war," said Robert J. Strauss, a longtime Democratic strategist, diplomat and admirer of the fellow Texan who sits in the White House. "I also think he has made the decision that he can keep the political consensus behind him."

That may depend on whether an Iraq campaign is short and easy or long and hard.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who faced Bush for the nomination in 2000, made a point of saying Thursday on Capitol Hill that, "I am very certain that this military engagement will not be very difficult. It may entail the risk of American lives and treasure, but Saddam Hussein is vastly weaker than he was in 1991."

He also said it was possible that military action may take place before Congress comes back in January.

McCain appeared with the Senate's Republican leader, Trent Lott, to express strong support for the president's call to arms. They said they would work to persuade the Democrats, who control the Senate, to pass a resolution authorizing military action against Iraq before Congress adjourns for midterm elections.

But the Senate majority leader, Tom Daschle, laid out three specific questions and a more profound concern "about the politicization of this whole issue" as the White House has seemed to orchestrate the convergence of a fall war strategy with its fall campaign strategy to maintain control over the House and take back the Senate.

Daschle said, first, it was important to gauge foreign reaction to Bush's speech. He also wondered whether a major diversion of military resources to Iraq would undermine the war on terrorism that still is under way in Afghanistan, and he said the administration has yet to address "to whom will we turn for leadership in Iraq" after Saddam is overthrown.

But Daschle said the Democrats were "not prepared to make any commitment" to voting on a war resolution "until we've had more of an opportunity to answer these questions."

What was most striking about the speech was how Bush shifted his ground to address the criticism that continues to dog his administration, that it is hostile to international institutions and their role in regulating national behavior.

Thursday that criticism came from Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who proclaimed in introducing Bush, "I am a multilateralist." Bush answered by asking how a multilateral institution such as the United Nations could assert its role in keeping the peace -- indeed, remain true to the very principles for which it exists -- if it failed to act against the willful defiance of a militaristic dictator such as Saddam.

"We want the United Nations to be effective," Bush said, "we want the resolutions of the world's most important multilateral body to be enforced. And right now those resolutions are being unilaterally subverted by the Iraqi regime."

In Bush's view, Saddam is the unilateralist.

"The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace," Bush said. "All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?"