The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Leading the news this Tuesday, Pres. Bush condemned Saddam Hussein`s announced withdrawal from Kuwait and said the war would go on as Kuwaiti authorities declared Kuwait City liberated and U.S. commanders said Iraqi troops were in full retreat. We`ll have the details in our News Summary in a moment. Robin.

MR. MAC NEIL: On tonight`s NewsHour we look at all aspects of the Gulf War with reports on the fighting and political statements. Then we examine the military situation with former Gen. John Wickham and military analyst Jim Dingeman, The diplomatic issues with former National Security staffer Geoffrey Kemp and journalist Raghida Dergham. We close with a conversation about the moral and political issues for Americans as Frederick Downs of the Veterans Administration and author Michael Norman, who both fought in Vietnam.

NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: Pres. Bush today forcefully rejected Saddam Hussein`s announcement of withdrawal from Kuwait. The Iraqi President said on Baghdad Radio all of his forces would leave Kuwait. Mr. Bush`s response was delivered to reporters In the White House Rose Garden.

PRES. BUSH: Saddam`s most recent speech is an outrage. He Is not withdrawing, His defeated forces are retreating. He Is trying to claim victory in the midst of a route. And he Is not voluntarily giving up Kuwait. He is trying to save the remnants of power and control In the Middle East by every means possible and here too Saddam Hussein will fail, Saddam is not Interested In peace, but only to regroup and fight another day. And he does not renounce Iraq`s claim to Kuwait, To the contrary, he makes clear that Iraq continues to claim Kuwait. Nor is there any evidence of remorse for Iraq`s aggression or any Indication that Saddam is prepared to accept the responsibility for the awful consequences of that aggression. He still does not accept UN Security Council resolutions or the coalition terms of February 22nd, including the release of our POWs, all POWs, third country detainees and an end to the pathological destruction of Kuwait. The coalition will, therefore, continue to prosecute the war with undiminished Intensity. As we announced last night, we will not attack unarmed soldiers In retreat. We have no choice but to consider retreating combat units as a threat and respond accordingly. Anything else would risk additional United States and coalition casualties. The best way to avoid further casualties on both sides is for the Iraqi soldiers to lay down their arms as nearly 30,000 Iraqis already have. It is time for ail Iraqi forces In the theater of operation, those occupying Kuwait, those supporting the occupation of Kuwait, to lay down their arms, and that will stop the bloodshed. From the beginning of the air operation nearly six weeks ago, I have said that our efforts are on course and on schedule. This morning I am very pleased to say that coalition efforts are ahead of schedule. The liberation of Kuwait is dose at hand.

MR. LEHRER: Saddam Hussein`s speech came shortly before noon Baghdad Time. The prospect of ending the war brought expressions of joy in the Iraqi capital. We have a report narrated by Louise Bates of Worldwide Television News. The pictures are cleared by Iraqi censors.

MS. BATES: Saddam Hussein`s dramatic announcement was heard across Baghdad on transistor radios. Sustained allied bombing has blocked out the regular television networks. Some hailed the defiant speech as a victory. But it was sobering news for most Iraqis. While claiming a victory of sorts in defying an allied coalition of some 30 countries in the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was ordering a complete pullout from Kuwait, He declared It was no longer the country`s 19th province. The official Iraqi line was that the withdrawal was In accordance with a recent Soviet peace plan and United Nations resolutions. But It was impossible to disguise the fact that the Iraqi armed forces were in full retreat.

MR. LEHRER: The Soviet Union called today for a cease-fire In the Gulf War, but it was said In different ways in Moscow and at the United Nations. An official Kremlin statement said Iraq had capitulated. Soviet Pres. Gorbachev said In a speech the Gulf War had strained U.S.-Soviet relations. He said the relationship was still fragile and he called for responsible behavior so that what has been achieved Is not destroyed. But at the United Nations, the Soviet ambassador joined with the U.S. ambassador In saying Iraq must comply with all 12 Security Council resolutions on Kuwait if it wants a cease-fire. The Security Council suspended consultations today without reaching any formal decisions. Charlayne Hunter-Gault will have more from the UN later in the program. Robin.

MR. MAC NEIL: Allied forces reached Kuwait City today. U.S. commanders said American Marine forces had engaged Iraqi tanks at the city`s airport. This evening It was reported that U.S. Marines had regained control of the American embassy In the capital. Other coalition forces continued to advance on the city. These pictures showed Saudi armored forces heading for the city. Coalition commanders said they were encountering only small pockets of resistance. We hare more on today`s ground action from Jeremy Thompson of Independent Television News. The report was cleared by the U.S. military.

MR. THOMPSON: A convoy of Saudi armored troops weed their way carefully through an Iraqi mine field. But word of Saddam`s withdrawal had done nothing to halt the allied momentum as they pressed on towards Kuwait City. By now, the advance was relentless, this huge army almost unstoppable. Now their final objective was almost within sight. But the fire fights continued in many places along the 300 mile battie front. Allied artillery engaged a number of defiant Iraqi units. These American Marines were still taking heavy incoming fire. But most lack real accuracy. As the allies plowed forward In an endless dust cloud, there was a confidence, almost a cockiness, about their advance Into Iraq. Heading up towards that Euphrates Valley a vast fleet of attack helicopters leapfrogged the ground troops, flying on 100 miles into Iraq. They met tittle resistance as they tried to cut off Saddam`s supply routes. This huge outflanking maneuver deceived the Iraqis and allowed allied tanks to take on units of the Republican Guard, who had been sucked Into a narrow valley close to the Kuwait border.

MR. MAC NEIL: The U.S. 7th Corps today pinned down units of the Republican Guard. Lead elements of the unit and Britain`s First Armored Division were more than a hundred miles Inside Iraq. In Washington, Pentagon officials said the allied troops stood between the Republican Guard and Baghdad. They said the Guard would have to surrender or suffer a major defeat, but they said there was no sign yet that the elite Iraqi troops were ready to give up.

MR. LEHRER: Overview reports on the progress of the war were given today by allied commanders in Saudi Arabia. Charles Krause reports from Riyadh.

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: Let there be no mistake, the war is not over.

MR. KRAUSE: In Riyadh today, Brig. Gen. Richard Neal made clear that the U.S. had no Intention of allowing Saddam Hussein to escape with his army or his honor intact.

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: Saddam Hussein has described what is occurring as a withdrawal. By definition, a withdrawal Is when you pull your forces back, not under pressure by the attacking forces. Retreat is when you`re required to pull your forces back as required by action of the attacking forces. The Iraqi army Is in full retreat.

REPORTER: Are the Iraqis stopping and fighting, getting into defensive positions because the allies are attacking? Are the allies -

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: You`re damned right.

REPORTER: But would they be retreating, do you believe, would they be Just heading toward Baghdad if the allies were not continuing with air strikes and ground strikes?

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: A retreat by its very nature is an attempt to break engagements with attacking forces. It`s unplanned, and that`s exactly what we`re doing. We`re attacking them and continuing to attack them and they`re continuing to fight and so the results are bearing fruit. I don`t know -

REPORTER: Okay. The only way you would stop attacking them then is if they got out of their tanks and put their hands up?

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: I think we have made that point abundantly clear throughout the last two or three days.

MR. KRAUSE: As of tonight, Neal said the allies had defeated or neutralized 21 Iraqi divisions, approximately half the divisions In Saddam`s half million man army. The allies have also taken some 30,000 prisoners of war, and destroyed more than 400 enemy tanks. Allied casualties remain light, 12 GIs killed in action, fewer than 150 wounded so far, according to the Central Command. On day three of the ground war, the picture emerging from the battlefield Is this, continuing air, land and sea operations to defeat what`s left of Saddam`s army. But Neal refused to be more specific about the Republican Guard. All he would say is that Iraq`s toughest units are so far holding firm.

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: I think it`s too premature forme to give you actually how the engagements are going, but suffice to say, we`re -- they`re still in a lot of the revetted positions that they have been In previously and they`re fighting from those revetted positions, and we`re outflanking them, out- maneuvering them, and destroying them In place.

MR. KRAUSE: In some cases, Neal said the Guard and other Iraqi troops have been putting up, In his words, stiff resistance. More often though, Saddam`s soldiers are simply surrendering at the first opportunity. So many have given themselves up, in fact, some allied commanders are complaining that prisoners of war are swelling their advance.

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: I must tell you that we really almost stopped counting at about 26,000, because of the numbers of people that, In fact, are becoming enemy prisoners of war.

MR. KRAUSE: But even as whole Iraqi brigades were surrendering, Neal described a fierce battle for Kuwait`s International Airport.

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: There Is an Intense tank battle going on right now and the Initial reports are the Marines are carrying the day In that battle. Other Marine forces and Army forces are moving towards the outer limits and civilian areas of the Kuwait City environs and I`ll leave it at that.

MR. KRAUSE: I`ve been given a piece of paper here. It`s an AP story that says the Kuwaiti government is declaring Kuwait City liberated.

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: I`ll say, relative to that statement, obviously, that`s the first time I`ve heard It, is Kuwait City will be liberated, but I can`t make that comment yet.

MR. KRAUSE: Neal also refused to predict when the war will end, but he did promise significant new details from the battlefield within 24 to 48 hours.

REPORTER: Is that a hint that this thing will be over In 24 to 48 hours?

BRIG. GEN. NEAL: Those are your words, Pat, not mine, but we`re moving ahead of schedule, as I said. The campaign plan has been executed almost flawlessly.

MR. KRAUSE: Clearly, there Is tremendous optimism on the ground In Saudi Arabia tonight. U.S. forces are racing for control In Kuwait City. They also appear to be close to decisive battle with the Republican Guard. The only real question appears to be whether Saddam Hussein can survive, what now appears to be the Inevitable defeat of his army.

MR. LEHRER: The U.S. Central Command said the death toll from yesterday`s Scud attack on Dhahran was 23 American servicemen. Another 100 were wounded when the Scud struck their barracks. Officials said the missile broke up In flight and therefore was not picked up by Patriot missile defenses. The attack was the deadliest of nearly 70 Iraqi Scud attacks since the war began.

MR. MAC NEIL: Exiled Kuwaitis celebrated today as reports came of the arrival of allied troops at Kuwait City. In London`s Free Kuwait Campaign Office, there was a mixture of excitement and hope as reports filtered In from Kuwait. Officials of the office said they`d established communications with Kuwait and learned that the Iraqis had left the capital. In Jordan, Saddam Hussein`s withdrawal order was met with a mixture of anger and sadness by the Kingdom`s predominantly Palestinian population. In Amman, several hundred angry pro-Iraqi demonstrators tried to reach the U.S. embassy. They were driven back by police. There was also violent protest in Egypt. Students at Cairo University attempted to take control of the campus. The student said they were demanding an Immediate cease-fire and opposed Egypt`s role En the allied coalition.

MR. LEHRER: In Israel, Prime Minister Shamir said Saddam Hussein`s ouster was essential to his country`s security. He also said Israel could not agree to trade land for peace with the Arabs after the war.

FOCUS - CHECKMATE

MR. LEHRER: Now we look in more detail at the military situation on the ground. We start with details from a Pentagon briefing this afternoon, the first since the ground war began three days ago. The briefer was Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Kelly, and he was asked what could go wrong In the allied ground campaign now.

LT. GEN. KELLY: There could be a concerted attack on the part of the Republican Guard and other forces that are still In the theater, Remember they represent a viable military force so we have to be very vigilant to make sure that doesn`t happen. We are being very vigilant to make sure that doesn`t happen. We have to be careful that units that appear to be retreating, and this has happened before, don`t turn around and start shooting at us, we will be careful of that. So I think the major concern is to keep our guard up and make sure we don`t let down and we`re not going to let down,

REPORTER: What about chemical weapons?

LT. GEN. KELLY: We have not seen chemical weapons used to date. There have been no Indications I don`t think In the theater that they`re present, however, during the Iran-Iraq War, a technique that they used was to pull their forces back when they were getting ready to use chemical weapons, so again we`ll remain vigilant there. Go ahead.

ADM. MIKE McCONNELL: U.S. Navy: Just to offer a follow-up, what could happen. You recall the Republican Guard Is reportedly the best, there are eight divisions and they`re all located just outside Kuwait on the Northern border. That`s three armor, four Infantry, and one special forces division, so It Is not, that element has not been defeated, so they could certainly mount some kind of an attack. REPORTER: What about the rest of Kuwait City, are there still Iraqi forces In the city, itself, or is the airport as close as they`re still located?

LT. GEN. KELLY: We don`t know if there are Iraqi forces Inside Kuwait City. I`m sure I heard the same television conversation that you did. We have not entered Kuwait City yet. I think that that`s going to occur shortly. When we, the coalition, do enter Kuwait City, it wilt be with great care because just a handful of people Inside a city can cause you a lot of problems and there could be casualties, so we`ll be prudent.

MR. MAC NEIL: To discuss today`s military developments, we have Gen. John Wickham, former Army Chief of Staff and Analyst Jim Dingeman who`s written extensively on Middle East military affairs and sits with our map. From piecing together all that you`ve heard of the briefings today, what Is the situation on the ground in Kuwait and around Kuwait City, Mr. Dingeman?

MR. DINGEMAN: Okay. Well, it seems that the Marine Corps has used their Force Recon Company, the 2nd Force Recon Company, to take the embassy. At the same time, mobile task forces of the Marines have been fighting with the Iraqis to seize the airport. It should be noted that the briefers reported earlier that an air field has been seized and the Marine air wings that support the two Marine divisions are now operating from It, so this means - and the Marines are organized to do this very quickly. So there seems to be concerted fighting going on around Kuwait City. I might add that the Palestinians organized a militia division, and it raises an Interesting question as to whether there`s going to be any sort of restraint on the Kuwaitis with the Palestinians who have been fighting with the Iraqis, whether they`ve been pressed into service or not. So we can see the prevention of anything like that that occurred during the `82 war.

MR. MAC NEIL: Let me Just ask Gen. Wickham, Gen. Kelly was a little coy there. That television conversation he referred to was Bob McKuen of CBS who drove into Kuwait City in a car and broadcast out, saying there were no Iraqis left In there. Clearly, the U.S. forces are being very cautious about going In In force.

GEN. WICKHAM: They have to be, Robin. As we said last night, there`s a potential for booby traps and there could be some snipers left In there, but my guess Is that the Iraqis listening to the orders from their high command to withdraw, they have probably left in large numbers. Now a few may be left behind, but by and large, I think the problems have gone away, But I might just add a couple of comments -

MR. MAC NEIL: Sure.

GEN. WICKHAM: to your preamble piece here about why we are continuing to press the attack, because I think it`s Important for viewers to understand. There`s a couple of reasons, it occurred to me. One of them Is Is Pres. Hussein has said and our Pres. Bush has said they have not agreed to ail of the resolutions and If Saddam Hussein were to take the residue of his military out with all of Its equipment and go to Iraq, we hadn`t settled the problems, because If he still regards Kuwait as part of Kuwait, then there`s a problem later on, and so we need to resolve this right away, and I think pressing the attack to separate Saddam Hussein and his military from their equipment will lead to a much more peaceful end game than the other way around. Now there`s another reason why we`re pressing the attack, and that is a withdrawal is not without sacrifice to our own people, because units that are withdrawing are still shooting. They`re using artillery to screen their withdrawal. Tanks will fire to allow infantry to disengage. They`ll move to another position and they`ll fire to delay the attackers.

MR. MAC NEIL: That`s a fighting retreat.

GEN. WICKHAM: That`s a fighting retreat. Now the only way to avoid the risk of casualties with a fighting retreat Is for the enemy to put up a white flag and say we give up our equipment and we surrender and let us go North minus our equipment, which Is related to that first point, that separating Saddam Hussein from his equipment Is going to be very Important. I think someday the Iraqi people are going to have to realize that the tragedy that`s been visited on them by this despotlcal leadership and when they realize that the equipment Is gone, that there has been a catastrophic, defeat.

MR. MAC NEIL: Mr. Dingeman.

MR. DINGEMAN: Well, yes, Gen. Wickham I agree with him 100 percent and we`re attempting to turn the mother of all retreats Into the mother of all routes. I should also note that the British briefer earlier today referred to the British First Armor Division, and we don`t know where exactly they thrusled, but he described an operation where they engaged an armored division. Again, we aren`t sure whether it`s a Republican Guard or regular army division.

MR. MAC NEIL: Destroyed 40 tanks.

MR. DINGEMAN: Destroyed a battalion size force. And I would also suggest that another pocket was developing, another envelopment Is occurring, and that is forces that are relatively Immobile, that is Infantry units that are along the border, I believe forces are pressing forward from this breakthrough and attempting to link up with the British First Armor Division and envelope that force if, in fact if this Is where they are operating.

MR. MAC NEIL: I`d like to go back to Gen. Wickham on the doctrine of attacking retreating troops. For those Americans who might be disturbed by the Idea of U.S. forces kind of shooting fish In a barrel, when -- what exactly is It considered sort of moral for U.S. forces to do? I mean, if they`re driving North In trucks, Is that fair game as long as they haven`t got out of the trucks and waved flags? If they`re driving North In tanks and haven`t got out and put up white flags, when does It become kind of acceptable to the conscience of an American officer to order his troops to fire or an American pilot to fire on them?

GEN. WICKHAM: You`ve got to keep It all In perspective, Robin. As many have said, we`ve seen a lot of atrocities committed in Kuwait, and one day It`s all going to come out, so these are not necessarily moral soldiers that we`re dealing with. The reality -

MR. MAC NEIL: The U.S. ones have to be, don`t they?

GEN. WICKHAM: I`m getting to your question, The reality of the combat there is that as our forces are moving ahead, the coalition forces are moving ahead, they are taking incoming, and your segment showed some artillery landing, and pretty soon that photographer dropped to the ground because it was so close. That Incoming is happening. Tanks are taking rounds, and so as the offense moves ahead, they have to shoot at things that are shooting at them. So the only way for a withdrawal to end without being shot at is for them to surrender or for some politically arranged cease-fire to occur, or for local commanders to work out some cease-fire, but that`s, that`s probably not going to happen so long as the Iraqis are continuing to shoot. And Tom Kelly Indicated that the Republican Guard divisions could be very well a surprise in terms of their fighting ability.

MR. MAC NEIL: Let`s talk about them now, because the really big encirclement that is likely to be the most controversial area of this Is happening, Jim Dingeman, here In Iraq. Describe from what you understand from the information that`s come out today what the situation Is here in Iraq.

MR. DINGEMAN: All right. I also might want to add that Gen. Wickham`s talking about encirclement battles, you know, what we know from the past In encirclement battles Is that that`s when killing in significant numbers can start to occur. The battle of Konai in ancient Rome, you know, when troops are encircled, they just drop their weapons and then are slaughtered, so it does raise moral questions that Americans have to think about. Now in terms of what we know as to what`s occurring in this area, the Towakana Division which the media had reported had been tilted severely by the air operations, that has now been Identified In the briefings today as the first formation that has engaged the 7th Corps. It`s also Interesting that the briefers said that now the entire Republican Guard force corps Is In this area along the Iraql-Kuwaltl border. This means that the forces that initially were in the Western part of Iraq have now been sent as reinforcements to this area.

MR. MAC NEIL: The briefers also said that the U.S. 7th Corps and other elements of the allied forces stand, the French and the British, stand between the Republican Guards and Baghdad.

MR. DINGEMAN: Right. What t guess Is implied In that is what we talked about yesterday when we talked about the airhead being established by the 101st Air Assault, that the brigades have leapfrogged forward and have now established blocking positions around Nassariyah, and at the same time, the 24th Mechanized Division, which was moving adjacent to them, has also reinforced those elements, because remember the 101st Air Assault is not a heavy formation, it`s a light formation, and, in fact, they have blocked the exit routes. So we`re now talking about an envelopment of an even wider scale which Is dependent on fighting through the Guards, because the retreat that`s going on right now and remember, this is extraordinarily disorganized and chaotic fighting that`s now beginning to emerge the Guards are essentially, they`re back stopped to secure their withdrawal. Now granted, their withdrawal can either be towards the Iranian border or Basra, but nevertheless, this is where key fighting Is also going on right now.

MR. MAC NEIL: Gen. Wickham, this Is where the big, If there`s going to be one, the big tank battle of the war could be?

GEN. WICKHAM: Could be because we`re obviously trying to separate the Republican Guard from the equipment, and I think that`s a legitimate goal. We don`t want that equipment to be used for another day and another war.

MR. MAC NEIL: Describe how it happens, General. You have the 7th Corps here. They have 1300 tanks. You have the British First Armor Division behind them. Now if they have blocked these Republican Guards off and surrounded them here and prevented them from going up to Baghdad, do they then, would you think, go In and get them, or would they just encircle them and wait for the Republican Guards to try and break out or surrender?

GEN. WICKHAM: A little bit of the latter, Robin, The commanders of the Republican Guard units there clearly are going to have a difficulty In knowing the state of play of the battlefield, and as they try to break out, they`re going to run Into anti-tank fire from Apaches, from TOWs on the ground, from aircraft, and they`re going to take losses and pretty soon, they`re going to realize that the Jig`s up. Let me come back, one last thing. I may not have given you an adequate answer about the morality of our soldiers. The soldiers carry the morals of their society and the American soldiers and the British and French soldiers, for example, have the morality of their society. They`re not going to kill soldiers who are disarmed. I`ve seen American soldiers In Vietnam, In proximity to North Vietnamese, that have put up their arms and surrendering, and there`s no killing going on, so I`m not sure that that Is a serious problem, and I wanted to be - our people to be very clear about that.

MR. MAC NEIL: Okay, Well, Gen. Wickham and John Dingeman, thank you. Jim.

NEWS MAKER

MR. LEHRER: The United Nations Security Council met in closed informal session today to discuss the Iraqi withdrawal statement. To explore what was said, what was not said, and what ft may mean, afterwards Chariayne Hunter-Gault talked to Iraq`s ambassador to the United Nations, Abdul Amir Al-Anbari.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. Ambassador, what do you see happening in the next 48 hours?

ABDUL AMIR AL-ANBARI, U.N. Ambassador, Iraq; I believe that Iraq would be by then It would have completed Its withdrawal from Kuwait. Perhaps some sort of International as well as Kuwaiti administration might be set up In Kuwait. But I believe the United States will continue attacking Iraq, will continue Its aggression against the Iraqi people, against the Iraqi civilians, and after that 48 hours, I don`t know really what`s going to happen.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Will Saddam Hussein stand up and say, I`m withdrawing from Kuwait, I accept all the UN resolutions, or Is this military campaign going to have to be pressed all the way to Baghdad?

AMB. AL-ANBARI: We are -- we have been actually all the time willing to negotiate and talk and dialogue, through better language, eye contacts, by whatever means, but some others have been so stubborn saying that, no, no, no, simply you have to follow our Instructions, do this and that and that.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So how does It get resolved at this point?

AMB. AL-ANBARI: I don`t know. Perhaps the problem would remain. After all, they would like to keep everyone busy with some problems.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So Is it going to be a military solution and not a diplomatic solution?

AMB. AL-ANBARI: Well, it`s already a military solution. As you know, you have the United States leading about 28 or 29 of the so-called "coalitions" attacking Iraq by sea, by air, and on land. And you will not allow Iraqis to withdraw peacefully. They are bombarding the Iraqi forces while withdrawing to Iraq.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So we can`t expect to hear via the Soviets or anyone else anything new?

AMB. AL-ANBARI: I really don`t know and I cannot speculate simply because I know so-called the United States and its allies, they have their own adjective, which has nothing to do with the Security Council resolution. So pretty soon that`s relevant, whether Iraq Is going to announce It -- even there Iraq Is going to announce that It would abide by all resolutions regardless of the respective validity or fairness -- I don`t think that would be satisfied, they will not be satisfied, that`s the allies or the coalition forces.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So are you saying Iraq won`t do that?

AMB. AL-ANBARI: I really don`t know. I can`t say that.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What do you think the chances of Iraq doing that are?

AMB. AL-ANBARI: Well, the fact that the most important and the fundamental resolution by the Security Council was really 660 and all the other resolutions were passed unanimously or by majority simply because 660 had not been implemented by them. The fact that the most Important thing, resolution, namely the occupation or annexation of Kuwait, had In a way been met now by the Iraqis, so that resolution are not that significant.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But many of the Western ambassadors say the problem is that Iraq Is refusing among other things to renounce claims to Kuwait,

AMB. AL-ANBARI: How fearless they are in settling, because by Implication when we are withdrawing from Kuwait, by implication, you are saying Kuwait Is no longer part of Iraq.

FOCUS - CHECKMATE

MR. LEHRER: Now to some analysis of the diplomatic side of this story, Judy Woodruff is In charge. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: The analysis comes, Jim, from Raghlda Derghara, she`s diplomatic correspondent for the Washington-based Arabic newspaper Al- Hayat, and Geoffrey Kemp, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former National Security Council staff member In the Reagan administration. Geoffrey Kemp, is the ambassador to the U.N, from Iraq correct when he says that the United States and the allies have their own agenda, that It doesn`t really matter what Iraq agrees to, that they`re going to press this war on?

MR. KEMP: In part, he is correct. I think war, Itself, has Its own dynamic and the war aims that we had before the war started are clearly different from the war alms that we have now. Pres. Bush has a domestic agenda to deal with, He has his own flanks to cover, There`s no way the American people are going to be denied a total victory when we`ve come this far, and I think that that means that the Iraqi army has to surrender, and that clearly goes beyond what the U.N. resolution said, but that happens in ail wars.

MS. WOODRUFF: Because a few days ago we were saying, well, they have to get out of Kuwait, and they said, okay, we`re withdrawing, and then we said, oh, but Saddam Hussein, himself, has to say It. He said it and now we`re saying well, that`s not enough.

MR. KEMP: I think quite frankly we`re going to go on saying that until his army is defeated. The American people do not want to have to do this over again three or four years from now and I think the President is capitalizing I think correctly on a surge of patriotism which, you know, reflects the fact that this man has to be beaten.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is this the correct way to end this war, Raghida Dergham?

MS. DERGHAM: It may be from the American paint of view, like Geoffrey said, but 1 don`t think it is so from the general Arabic point of view. It seems that as we know we have two different camps among the Arabs, but this constant humiliating, humiliation of Iraq and It`s not only Saddam Hussein is being pursued beyond the resolutions of the Security Council and I think what we are going to be witnessing after the liberation of Kuwait is probably an occupation of Iraq and that Is going to unleash different feelings in the Arab world. And as you could notice today from your earlier reports In Egypt, there were violent demonstrations because of this Issue of attacking the army while withdrawing, and this is not looked at from the Arab point of view in the same way that it is from an American point of view.

MS. WOODRUFF: Why do you think there`ll be an occupation of Iraq? The United States has said that`s not going to happen.

MS. DERGHAM: Well, If Saddam Hussein stays In power, there are a number of Senators, a number of people have said that the only solution then would be to, far the allied forces to remain In Iraq, In Iraqi territory, and to go on with the sanctions and force him out of power. The acute Interesting point here Is that the Arabs in the coalition had said that they don`t want their forces to go Into Iraqi territory, so we might end up with allied forces, only the Western soldiers and the allied soldiers occupying part of Iraq, Southern Iraq, In order to accomplish the fall of Saddam Hussein`s government.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that likely to happen?

MR. KEMP: That is a possibility and I think Raghlda makes a good point that there Is a danger that If we get stuck in Southern Iraq, particularly the British, the French and the Americans, the Foreign Legion, the Desert Rats, the 87th Airborne, It`s not going to look particularly good. Therefore, we have a strong interest In defeating Saddam`s army as quickly as possible, getting out of Southern Iraq and allowing the Iraqi people, themselves, to solve the diplomatic problem In Baghdad. Our big problems are going to be In Kuwait, cleaning up Kuwait, securing Kuwait City. Kuwait City could become another Paris In 1944, when awful things were committed to those who had sided with the Germans, and we`ve got to be wary of that. We`ve got a big job ahead of us.

MS. WOODRUFF: But do you think there`s a real danger here that this administration, that the Bush administration, and the allies and so forth, but it`s mainly being run by the Americans, could get in a situation where we have to stay there in Iraq?

MR. KEMP: I think there was a possibility that we will sit on a foothold of Southern Iraq while some change of power is taking place In Baghdad, because we will want leverage with a new Iraqi government that we can deal with, because Iraq is going to need a lot of help when this war Is over. There may be cholera epidemics. We`re going to need food and medicine, but we don`t want to deal with Saddam Hussein, and I don`t think, by the way, any of our Arab allies are going to deal with Saddam Hussein either.

MS. WOODRUFF: But Just to back up for one second, Raghlda Dergham, what the both of you are saying, I understand, is that you don`t think what happens at the U.N. or what Iraq says or anything else really makes any difference?

MS. DERGHAM: Yes, it Is what I`m saying. I think there may be -- I don`t want to call it a show but It looks like a show at the United Nations, that there Is an attempt at a cease-fire and now the conditions are that Iraq must comply with all the resolutions and then of course, It`s added that Saddam Hussein personally must do that. I think it`s to buy time, because It Is not In the cards to have a cease-fire at this point until, unless the military operations are over exactly as the allies want them, and I feel that the action, the diplomatic action at this point is only a smokescreen, it is the military action that Is taking the stage.

MS. WOODRUFF: Well, what do you think is the outlook for Saddam Hussein personally? What threatens him at this point, and what are the factors that may keep him in power? Is that Just out of the question?

MS. DERGHAM: I wouldn`t have Inside information about what`s happening within Iraq, but it seems that there might be a feeling amongst the army that he`s not done any favor with this whole episode of seven months. I know that the opposition, Iraqi opposition that is governing In different places amongst which Riyadh in Saudi Arabia, they are making sure when they speak about what they expect in the future that the army should remain a backbone of their government, to be of their rule, that Is to say not the army of Saddam Hussein that Is as huge as it Is, It would be more of a voluntary army, two to three hundred thousand. It would not be a coup making army, not a political army, more of the size of Iraq, If you will. So they are thinking that they cannot go back on the wave of humiliating the army and maybe I could mention that when Gen. Wickham said a little earlier that the Iraqi soldier has no morality or that these are not morale soldiers, I don`t that even helps the Iraqi opposition In gaining ground to go back.

MS. WOODRUFF: Well, If it is, if It`s a scenario that Raghida describes, Geoffrey Kemp, Is that something the United States can live with?

MR. KEMP: The United States can live with a stable government In Iraq, and I would even say a stable government made up of current members of the Baathlst Party and the army, but that does not Include Saddam Hussein, I mean, we have focused the effort on getting rid of this one man, this one man got us into all this trouble, and I think his demise would get us out of it.

MS. WOODRUFF: But how do we accomplish that? Our troops are In Southern Iraq, Southeastern Iraq, look at a map. He`s in Baghdad, from everything we understand. What are we going to do?

MR. KEMP: Well, we shouldn`t go to Baghdad. I think It would be very, very unwise to go to Baghdad. I think we have to wait It out. You know, It may be that Saddam does survive, but I think If that happens, Iraq is going to find It very difficult to break the economic sanctions, to have any dealings with foreign governments, and even to perhaps receive all the humanitarian aid it needs.

There are going to be enormous pressures building up on what`s left of the Iraqi elite to do a deal with the West, with the other Arabs, and that means I think telling Saddam to go away.

MS. DERGHAM: And if I might, however, add that there is a danger that we might witness a Lebanonization of Iraq, If you will, If Saddam Hussein does not fall immediately, and that would be terribly dangerous for Iraq, Itself, because as Lebanon was along religious lines only, you have in Iraq probably the same Lebanon problem In every city or every province, so that Is a danger that is existing as long as Saddam Hussein is In power and as long as the coalition`s decision is not to have him remain in power.

MS. WOODRUFF: So you`re saying that`s an argument to keep a strong army and not to destroy any more or much more of this army. Is that what you`re saying?

MS. DERGHAM: I`m not arguing that there has to be a strong army, but I`m saying that even the opposition that is being groomed by the allies cannot go back at the expense of the army being humiliated. In fact, it is Interesting to note that there is no "shame" as In the past that they will go riding the American victory but they cannot ride American victory at humiliation of their own army and their own people, so it is rather important even for that opposition to rule later without Saddam, that is, even without Baath, that it shouldn`t have to suffer with this Issue of humiliating the army as well.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that something Americans understand?

MR. KEMP: Well, I think that Raghida`s right, that preferably whoever takes over In Iraq should not be seen to be Imposed by the United States and the victorious allies, and that If the army is humiliated, I think it will be because of Saddam Hussein. But I don`t think that Is going to be the Issue in the next 24 hours. We`re now dealing with a military problem, that is how to get the Republican Guards to surrender, and I don`t think anybody on Gen. Schwarzkopf`s staff is thinking too much ahead about how --

MS. WOODRUFF: About humiliating them too

MR. KEMP: They want to humiliate them. I`m certain they do, because that`s the way they will put down their arms. I don`t think at this paint people are thinking ahead to the political consequences In Baghdad, and I think that`s Inevitable.

MS. WOODRUFF: And is that a serious mistake, Raghlda, just quickly?

MS. DERGHAM: I think so, because If we just-- of course, it has to be done for the time being for the military considerations, but I think we really ought to pay attention to the political Implications not only for the people In Baghdad, but for the people outside In the whole Arab world, and again I mention what we saw In Egypt. After all, there has been a ban on demonstrations and this broke a ban. So It`s telling. We should be careful about that.

MS. WOODRUFF: Well, Raghlda Dergham, Geoffrey Kemp, we thank you both.

CONVERSATION

MR. LEHRER: Finally tonight a conversation between two Americans with a special perspective on today`s news, the route of the Iraqi army, the U.S. reaction to the Iraqi withdrawal announcement. Both saw heavy ground combat in Vietnam. Michael Norman is a Marine Infantryman. Frederick Downs, Jr., is an Army platoon leader. Mr. Norman Is a former New York Times reporter who now teaches journalism at New York University and is author of the book "These Good Men, Friendships Forged From War". Mr. Downs Is the director of a prosthetic and sensory aid service for the Veterans Administration. For his Vietnam service, he was awarded a silver star, a bronze star, and four purple hearts.

Mr. Downs, do you see a moral Issue in Pres. Bush`s decision to keep fighting today?

MR. DOWNS: I don`t understand what you mean by moral Issue. To me, it`s a fact that they haven`t given up, and until they give up, you keep pounding `em and pounding `em until they finally give up or you`ve killed `em off.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Norman, is that what this is?

MR. NORMAN: I`m not sure exactly what it is, Jim. I confess I feel a certain ambivalence about the whole thing. On the one hand, I think one of the lessons of Vietnam was that a lot of people get killed and a lot of people get hurt when you fight a war with limited rules of engagement, so I am satisfied, part of me is satisfied to see that this war by the United States Is being vigorously prosecuted. The other half of me, the half of me that I think maybe wants to be a pacifist, feels for those thousands, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers that now appear to be in terrible jeopardy. I think I disagree you`re in trouble when people like Gen. Wickham or maybe when all Generals say things like the Iraqis are not necessarily morale soldiers we`re dealing with. When I hear that, I`m reminded of a little village called Mllai in Vietnam and the behavior of a small group of American soldiers there. So I don`t think that this country is fighting with 600,000 Saddam Husseins, and just to borrow Robin`s phrase, I hope that there`s nothing that begins to approach shooting fish In a barrel, to use his words.

MR. LEHRER: Is that what It could be, Mr. Downs, shooting fish in a barrel? Is that okay, to get this war over with?

MR. DOWNS: These are difficult questions here. It would take the judgment of Solomon to decide here what`s going to be done and the soldiers, American soldiers, and soldiers In combat are going to come to a resolution, themselves. An American soldier Is not just going to wantonly kill someone and something that`s different about this war, maybe not so different, but we notice It Is the leadership of the American soldier today over there and also the moral integrity of the Individual, the soldier, himself, the infantryman. Now the people we`re fighting are also the sons and fathers, and they have family, and we have to keep that in mind, but still they are the enemy, as long as they continue to fight, but when they stop fighting, then we will take them prisoner, and it`s not going to be shooting fish In a barrel. I think people are confused about military tactics. What you try to do Is you try to make It impossible for them to want to fight back, so you encircle them and when they see the futility of fighting any longer, then they`re going to give up. Now they`re going to continue to fight as long as It`s feasible, but as a soldier who wants to survive, there comes a time he says I can no longer do this, this is hopeless. As long as he believes he`s got a chance to break out, that soldier`s going to try to break out, and what you have to prove to him Is you`re not going to do it, I`m going to pound you. Now you stop, we`ll stop. You talk about shooting fish In a barrel, when a man stops fighting you, then you stop fighting him.

MR. LEHRER: What about, what`s your feeling about these Iraqi soldiers and the comment that Mr, Norman made that Gen. Wickham had said that these are Immoral soldiers, the Iraqi soldiers are Immoral because of things that have happened In Kuwait? As somebody who Is Involved In combat, is that even a thought when it`s going on?

MR. DOWNS: You know, to kill another man, you have to dehumanize him to a certain extent. And so maybe you hear the stories about these people did this or did that, but you know, when It comes right down to it, it`s like you against that man, and you don`t have time, the luxury of saying, well, he`s an immoral person so I`m going to kill him. The fact Is that a soldier Is a soldier and what I am as a soldier fighting that man as a soldier Is a survival factor that we`re building into this. We are able to sit here and discuss this In cold terms. It`s not that way down there. Down there you`re trying you want to survive, you want to go back home to America, If you`re an Iraqi, you want to go back home to your home In Iraq, That`s really what wars come down to, but you have to force the other enemy to suffer the other side to suffer so much that they`re going to quit fighting so that everybody can go home. And I know it sounds esoteric, but that`s what fighting is ail about.

MR. LEHRER: Is that what fighting was all about for you, Mr. Norman?

MR. NORMAN: Well, Fred`s quite right and fighting Is an existential exercise, and on the battlefield, you only know what`s taking place directly In front of you and what the man on your right`s doing and what the man on your left Is doing. You know, there`s an old axiom, there are no politics In the foxhole or In the fighting holes, the fighting holes, as we Marines used to call them, and that`s absolutely true. But I think one of the things that maybe the men of our generation, Fred`s generation and ray generation might be able to contribute is the long view, the perspective of thinking about these Issues, maybe these moral issues for 20 years, and I`m worried when we talk about the atrocities In Kuwait City perhaps justifying our aggressive pursuit of a retreating army, are we talking about, and I suppose this would be a question I would pose to the General, are we talking about an eye for an eye here? Those kinds of things trouble me, and of course, the other thing I think that you have to point out is that soldiers in retreat are fighting to protect themselves, that`s self- protection. If you`re being fired upon and you`re trying to getaway, you turn around and fire back.

MR. LEHRER: So It is survival, You agree then with Fred Downs, that on a personal basis, a soldier`s a soldier, he`s looking at the other guy and saying I want to survive and he`s looking back and saying I want to survive?

MR. NORMAN: My friend, when there`s a round coming In at you, you turn around and you return that round If you can. It`s Just that simple.

MR. LEHRER: Do you think these warriors, Mr. Downs, these American warriors when they come back from this war are going to be well treated?

MR. DOWNS: Oh, yes. Yes. I have to tell you I look with delight on the reception, the American feeling towards this. I, myself, feel, I feel goose bumps running through me when I think about the men returning this time, because we`ve learned a tot of lessons since Vietnam, and one of `em Is the support that a country needs to give its soldiers, regardless of what happens to `em, because those soldiers are the people around us when they return. So It`s going to be a good return for them.

MR. NORMAN: But one of the questions I have, Fred, Is five or ten years down the road from now, do you think the government will make any attempt to cut veteran benefits? Do you think the government will make sure that those benefits keep pace wtth the level of Inflation? The real support, will the real support take place?

MR. DOWNS: Well, you know, that`s an interesting question because we deal with that every day In the VA. Something that needs to be brought out here Is that the veterans groups or the lobbyists groups, the Congressmen, the Senate and House Veterans Affairs Committees, they`re always concerned about, the Appropriations Committee, do we have enough, and I think It`s a constant tussle, and It`s Important that people don`t forget the price that`s paid. And so often we get Involved In these battles that we forget that, you know, In the VA what we do and I`ve thought about this before and I may have mentioned it Is It`s strange to me as I`m sitting at my desk and I`m thinking about the Saudi war, and at the same time we`re dealing with veterans from the Spanish American War at the turn of the century, not very many of those left, by the way, and you look forward to the whole panorama of the 20th Century of our wars and here`s the Veterans Administration, We`re taking care of all these millions of veterans and people today really find It hard I think to believe that we still have guys from World War I who were young men once who fought the Germans and men who fought the Japanese and men who fought through every phase of the 20th Century that we`ve been Involved In. So what`s Important for America today Is to exactly not forget, not 10 years from now, not In the year 2050, these men coming back, by the way, will be old vets In the year 2050, and It`s hard to imagine that far forward, halfway into the next century, but that`s something America always has to keep In mind. That`s the reason Memorial Day`s important, Veterans Day Is Important, and I think sometimes we get so commercialized with.

It, we forget what was the real reason for these holidays, and what that Is, It`s supposed to be a remembrance -- maybe we should go back to that and make these days pure, because It`s not commercialization, it`s not hurrah. It Is at one time men paid the ultimate price, and other men, who were their comrades, returned and those who didn`t go, this Is their opportunity to show respect for that period of time. It makes us what we are today. I think It`s very important. That`s the reason that many of us are very emotional and passionate about it.

MR. NORMAN: Well, I just hope that 10 years from now, after the yellow ribbons are put away and after the American flags are folded up and put In the closet that the budget committees of Congress don`t forget the men who are out on that desert floor right now doing what their country has asked them to do.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Norman, let me ask you, how do you account for this enormous public support and enormous patriotism that this war has brought out in the American people?

MR. NORMAN: Well, you know, one of the great lessons of Vietnam that we learned, maybe the only lesson In Vietnam that we learned, was that you have to separate the war from the warrior. And it`s possible, and there`s a lot of evidence of this too, to support the men who are In the field, to admire the fact that they were willing to sacrifice something, that they were willing to take that great risk. It`s possible to admire that, that courage and that nobility and on the other hand, be deeply stirred, as I am, at this government`s policy,

MR. LEHRER: How can you resolve that? Resolve that for me. Explain that. MR. NORMAN: How do I resolve It myself?

MR. LEHRER: If you think the guys, they shouldn`t be there, that you don`t support the Idea that they`re at war but you support them, even though they`re killing people and doing all of that.

MR. NORMAN: There`s a point at which you have to be a realist and the point that you become a realist Is when the first shot is fired. When the first shot is fired, the peace Is over and then I think that people like me or some people like me feel that you prosecute a war, you must prosecute It vigorously. But I think I can still at this stage be upset at the government`s reason for entering us Into the war, and what upsets me, I`ll tell you quite frankly, Is a moral reason, that as long as there was peace, as long as there was no fighting, the sacrifice that the men of my generation make, the sacrifice of 58,000 Americans, was worth it because it was for peace. But as soon as that first shot was fired, then In some ways that sacrifice became meaningless. That`s what really disturbs me,

MR. LEHRER: Does that disturb you?

MR. DOWNS: Well, I`ll tell you what. I said originally that you have to trust your leadership. And I think we did the right thing this time. I think the President did the right thing, and my belief has been vindicated. Now, was It immoral to fight the Vietnam War or any other war we`ve been Involved In recently? I think that sometimes you`ve got to take a stand, do the right thing, and I think what we did In Kuwait is doing the right thing, but I think something that`s amazed me that`s separate from what we`re talking about, but what bothers me a lot about this is t never thought that In my lifetime I`d see another war,

MR. LEHRER: Because of Vietnam, you thought this was It?

MR. DOWNS: Vietnam I thought -- it isn`t that--

MR. NORMAN: You hoped you`d never see it?

MR. DOWNS: It`s strange, I hoped I would never see one, but I`m surprised to see another war. I thought that wars were something that happened far apart even though --

MR. LEHRER: Pro sorry to say that I`d love to keep on talking with you ail, but we have to go. We`ve run out of time. Thank you both very much for being with us tonight.

RECAP

MR. MAC NEIL: Recapping the Gulf War this Tuesday, Pres. Bush condemned Saddam Hussein`s announced withdrawal from Kuwait. He said the allies will wage the war with undiminished Intensity. Kuwaiti officials declared Kuwait City liberated. U.S. Marines engaged Iraqi tanks at the airport on the outskirts of the city. U.S. and Saudi special forces later probed the city, Itself. U.S. military commanders said they destroyed or neutralized 21 Iraqi divisions In Kuwait. They said the Iraqis were In full retreat across the battlefield. Good night, Jim.

MR. LEHRER: Good night, Robin. We`ll see you tomorrow night with full coverage of the war in the Gulf. I`m Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.