Escort Service for the Gulf

By Jacob V. Lamar Jr

The questions would not go away. But every time a Reagan Administration official tried to clarify the U.S.'s role in the Persian Gulf last week, the issue only grew muddier. Finally Ronald Reagan appeared in the White House briefing room Friday afternoon to justify his policy in the wake of Iraq's accidental assault on the U.S.S. Stark. "Mark this point well," he said. "The use of the vital sea-lanes of the Persian Gulf will not be dictated by the Iranians. These lanes will not be allowed to come under the control of the Soviet Union. The Persian Gulf will remain open to navigation by the nations of the world."

Reagan's blunt words came at the end of a week of intense debate about the Administration's plan to provide naval protection to Kuwaiti oil tankers traveling through the gulf. The proposal calls for eleven Kuwaiti vessels to be registered under the U.S. flag and manned by American captains. The Kuwaiti tankers will also receive U.S. naval escorts. The reflagging was initially scheduled to begin this week. But the Administration, caught between lawmakers demanding a greater say in the decision and military strategists trying to define how the Navy should react in case of attack, decided to delay implementation of the plan until mid-June.

While Iran has so far refrained from firing on American vessels in the gulf, Tehran vowed to continue shooting at Kuwaiti tankers, regardless of the flag they fly. Since September the Iranians have attacked 29 ships in the gulf, 25 of them serving Kuwait. In a meeting with foreign journalists, the President denied that he was "daring" the Khomeini regime to open fire. But when asked how the U.S. would react, Reagan replied, "I think it's far better if the Iranians go to bed every night wondering what we might do than us telling them in advance."

Many Congressmen, however, did not want to spend sleepless nights worrying about the U.S. response. "What we're seeing down the road is the U.S. being sucked into this violent and savage war," predicted Democratic Senator James Sasser of Tennessee. Said Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana: "The environment surrounding our Navy in the Persian Gulf is as dangerous as the exposure of our Marines in Beirut." Those fears were hardly allayed when Congress learned that U.S. ships had twice escorted Kuwaiti vessels, once in February and once last week. In both cases, Kuwaiti merchant ships delivered U.S.-manufactured M60 tanks and other military supplies to Bahrain. Last week the White House agreed to sign a bill requiring Reagan to report to Congress on the threat to U.S. forces in the gulf and the Navy's rules of engagement.

Many Pentagon officials also expressed concern about their mission. "They need to tell us what they want us to do," said one. "Do you want us to shoot down planes that come too close? Do you want us to wait until we're attacked and then turn somebody to ashes?"

By week's end National Security Adviser Frank Carlucci and the Joint Chiefs of Staff had fashioned a plan. According to Administration sources, the U.S. will increase its naval presence in the gulf from six ships to nine. The additional vessels will most likely be frigates, cruisers or destroyers equipped with missiles. Radar reports would be provided by Saudi Arabia-based AWACS and Oman-based P-3C Orions, while air cover would primarily be supplied by a Navy carrier stationed outside the gulf. The Navy ships will probably escort small convoys of three or four Kuwaiti tankers through the gulf every ten days or so. The danger spot for U.S. vessels will be the 40- to 60-mile- wide Strait of Hormuz, where Iran has deployed Chinese-made Silkworm missiles.

Reagan defended his Kuwaiti escort service as the best way to protect oil shipments to the West. Citing the gas lines facing motorists in the late- 1970s, he vowed that "our national economy will never again be held captive." But the Administration has other motives. By assisting Iraq's ally, the U.S. hopes to counter the growing Soviet presence in the gulf. The Administration offered to reflag the vessels only after the Soviet Union aided the Kuwaitis by leasing them three tankers last March. While the Administration insists it is still neutral in the 6 1/2-year war between Iran and Iraq, Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Armitage said, "We can't stand to see Iraq defeated. That specter would lead to instability from Marrakesh to Bangladesh."

Meanwhile, in Baghdad, a team of Pentagon and State Department officials ended its investigation of the Stark attack. After meeting with Iraqi officials, Rear Admiral David Rogers, head of the U.S. delegation, said he was "certain we have the information to piece together what happened." He refused to confirm reports, however, that they had not spoken with the pilot who evidently mistook the Stark for an Iranian tanker and blasted the frigate with two Exocet missiles.

While the architects of U.S. foreign policy struggled to shape their strategy, the widows and families of the slain Stark crewmen struggled to put the tragedy behind them. Last week the remains of 35 of the 37 dead sailors arrived at Delaware's Dover Air Force Base. Under a bruised sky, pallbearers carried the flag-draped coffins from the belly of a cargo plane and into a concrete hangar. After a brief memorial service marked by quiet sobs, the coffins were shipped to grave sites in small towns such as Greeleyville, S.C., and Fitchburg, Mass., all far, far away from the Persian Gulf.

With reporting by Steven Holmes and Barrett Seaman/Washington