Not Soft On Saddam

Just why Saddam Hussein decided to send troops into the Kurdish areas when he was negotiating a $2 billion package of food-for-oil and why Bill Clinton decided to retaliate in such a disproportionate way will become clear in a few days. Until then, the suspicion will be strong that Saddam Hussein was provoked by a split in the Kurdish forces, and by Iranian activities in the region, not to mention the Turkish action of settling around 30,000 Turkish Kurds in the area. If he did indeed have such provocation, do his actions warrant missile attacks by the US?

There are sharp differences between now and 1990. Then, Iraq had invaded Kuwait, whereas now everything is happening within Iraq's borders. Then, the US had the cover of UN sanction. It does not now. The manifest lack of international support for the US action tells its own story. Meanwhile, by the sheerest coincidence, India's foreign minister is once again Inder Gujral. He had, it will also be recalled, made rather a hash of things in 1990 by embracing Saddam Hussein and India had failed to condemn Iraqi aggression sufficiently strongly. India's response this time has been again wimpish, albeit in the other direction