Where Is the Outrage?

By Jill Smolowe

Given the gravity of the situation, the quip seemed inappropriate at best. "I was struck by the fact that you haven't brought your gas masks with you," Iraqi Defense Minister Adnan Khairallah chided Western journalists assembled in Baghdad. Yet when pressed, Khairallah was unable to deny categorically the allegation that Iraq employed chemical weapons -- outlawed by the 1925 Geneva Protocol -- in putting down a rebellion of Kurds. Asserting that the use of poison gas was "technically impossible" in the Kurdish villages in dispute, Khairallah reiterated Baghdad's position that, in any case, its war against the Kurds was an internal affair, of concern only to Iraq.

An internal affair? Even in World War II, the combatants shunned chemical weapons, so reluctant were they to invite retaliation in kind. Yet until now, international reaction has been muted about Iraq's apparent crime. Last week ten nations, including the U.S., Japan and most West European countries, finally called on the U.N. to send a team of experts to Iraq to investigate the Kurdish charges. Three other countries, among them the Soviet Union, lent their support to the effort after the Reagan Administration leaked word that the U.S. had intercepted Iraqi military communications confirming that lethal gas had been used against the Kurds. Iraq promptly rejected U.N. inspection as a challenge to its sovereignty and instead invited journalists to tour the disputed area, a move that many interpreted as an artful dodge. A British diplomat dryly observed, "Experts are trained to detect signs that might escape journalists."

Despite the U.N. activity, only the U.S. seemed poised to pursue more forceful action. The Senate has passed, and the House will soon consider, a bill calling for economic sanctions against Iraq. U.S. allies were proceeding more cautiously. Britain was concerned that any criticism of Iraq might be seen as an attempt to appease Iran so as to secure the release of British hostages held by pro-Tehran groups in Lebanon. In France, although officials condemned use of chemical weapons, they also seemed mindful that Baghdad still owes Paris several billion dollars for weapons delivered during the gulf war. Besides, France -- like Italy, Britain and West Germany -- is jockeying for lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq.

Arab countries, including such moderate states as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, have rallied behind Iraq, charging the U.S. press with overdramatizing the situation. These states, preoccupied with the threat posed to them by Iran's fundamentalist regime, are wary of undermining Iraq at a critical stage in the cease-fire. Moreover, no Arab state is eager to antagonize Iraq, which has the strongest army in the region. The Arabs also sympathize with Baghdad's contention that a U.N. investigation would set a dangerous precedent.

Even Turkey, which is host to 60,000 Kurdish refugees, is reluctant to cause trouble with its powerful neighbor Iraq. Turkey has rejected the U.N. inquiry, noting that in its own investigation, 40 doctors and 205 other health personnel reported finding no evidence of chemical warfare. "Why is the American Government putting us in a difficult position?" asked a Turkish official. One answer could be found in Washington's announcement last week that Libya is on the verge of full-scale chemical-weapons production. The unspoken message: unless the world family of nations stands firm against the use of poison gas, that dreadful weapon could become increasingly common in regional conflicts.

With reporting by William Dowell/Paris and B. William Mader/New York