Raid on Iraq: Cautious Clinton adopts softer line on Saddam: New US Administration

WASHINGTON - 'Based on the evidence we have, the people of Iraq would be better off if they had a different ruler,' Bill Clinton said of Saddam Hussein yesterday. 'But my job is not to pick their rulers for them. I have always told everybody I am a Baptist. I believe in death-bed conversions. If he wants a different relationship with the United States and the United Nations, all he has to do is change his behaviour.'

It was a surprisingly moderate stance on a day when most US politicians were making bellicose noises. Mr Clinton told the New York Times he was not 'obsessed' with President Saddam, an implicit criticism of President George Bush, and could envisage a normal relationship with him so long as the Iraqi leader abided by international norms.

Even before Mr Clinton enters the White House, the actions of Mr Bush in his last month in office ensure that the US role in Iraq and Somalia will be central issues during the Democratic President's first months in office. But, going by Mr Clinton's tone yesterday, he wants to keep himself a little distanced from the conflict with Iraq.

For two years, since the end of the Gulf war, the central theme of US policy has been devising a way to get rid of President Saddam. Suddenly Mr Clinton was speaking in much less confrontational terms. He said that if President Saddam spent half as much time thinking about the welfare of Iraq as he did about the precise positioning of missile batteries, 'I think he would be a stronger leader and in a lot better shape over the long term.'

This was in contrast with Mr Bush whose main aim since the war has been to ensure that President Saddam does not have a long term. Mr Clinton's words also indicated a more moderate stance than that adopted by Warren Christopher, his Secretary of State-designate, who was telling the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that in the past the United States 'had tolerated and supported dictators too long in many countries, including Iraq'. This was, he added, a 'terrible mistake'.

As the difference between the two points of view was pointed out, Mr Christopher was quick to say Mr Clinton fully supported President Bush's actions on Iraq and there was no change in policy. As for the belief that President Saddam might change, Mr Christopher said: 'I'm not very optimistic about redemption for Saddam Hussein. I find it hard to share the Baptist belief in redemption.'

Nevertheless, Mr Clinton's comments suggest that he will be less hawkish on Iraq than might have been supposed during the election campaign. There may also be a current of resentment against the Bush administration for trying to determine his foreign policy by its actions during its final days in power. One lesson of Mr Clinton's race for the White House and the subsequent transition is that he does not like sharing final authority with anybody.