The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. Leading the news from the War in the Gulf this Tuesday, there were more Iraqi missile attacks against Israel and Saudi Arabia. One missile did severe damage, killing at least five people, hurting seventy, in Tel Aviv. And Iraqi forces set fire to oil facilities in Kuwait. We'll have the details in our News Summary in a moment. Robin.

MR. MacNeil: On the NewsHour tonight we have reports from Israel on the latest Iraqi missile attack, we analyze Saddam Hussein's reasons for blowing up oil facilities in Kuwait. From the Gulf, Charlayne Hunter-Gault reports on new assessments of the air war, and we examine Mikhail Gorbachev's hard line in the Baltics and what it means for U.S.-Soviet relations. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: An Iraqi missile hit a residential area of Tel Aviv, Israel today. It did damage to at least 20 buildings. Israeli officials said there were some 70 casualties, at least five deaths. We have a report from David Chater of Independent Television News.

MR. CHATER: The streak of Patriots seeking out the incoming Scud missiles from Iraq lights up the sky over Tel Aviv tonight, emphatic proof that the lull over the last three days is finally over. Moments later the sound of two impacts somewhere in the city. Helicopters and spotter planes took to the air immediately. I saw large plumes of smoke rising over buildings, but it was too dark for the camera to pick up. The first priority of the Israeli defense forces to find out whether there are any casualties and to coordinate the emergency services. One of the Scud missiles has got through, evading the Patriot missiles and landing in a suburb. Special emergency units for gas attacks were mobilized immediately, beds laid out in the streets ready for casualties. That's the all clear sounding over the city, so Saddam Hussein once again has proved he has the ability to strike at the heart of the Israel civilian population.

MR. LEHRER: In Washington, the White House issued a statement calling the attack a "brutal act of terror". The statement said consultations with the Israeli government are continuing. Israel's deputy foreign minister, Benjamin Netanyahu said tonight in Jerusalem his country would at some point respond to these attacks. He said they would do it in their own time, in their own way. There was also another missile attack on Saudi Arabia today. Four missiles were again aimed at Dhahran, a major center for allied military activity. All were intercepted by U.S. Patriot missiles. Robin.

MR. MacNeil: For more on the latest situation in Israel, we now have on the line John Hull, Time Magazine's Jerusalem chief, and Charlie Sennot, a freelance journalist in Tel Aviv. First, Charlie Sennot, has this created a new atmosphere in Tel Aviv?

MR. SENNOT: Yes. I was out at the site where the bombings actually hit and after a day of an attempt to return to normalcy, there were people working and buses running, there was a sense at the site that Israelis are very angry. There was new anger in their voices on the street. They were demanding that their country retaliate after seeing the third day of bombs actually hitting in Tel Aviv. And there were many people on the street who were adamant, saying -- one man who I spoke with said, "Saddam doesn't know how powerful God is and he doesn't know how powerful Israel is." Another man said, "The Israelis can no longer be patient. We will bomb him back to the dark ages." So there's a very probable sense that the mood has changed dramatically with this latest bomb.

MR. MacNeil: What were they saying about the effectiveness of the Patriot missiles, Charlie?

MR. SENNOT: Well, from my hotel room there was a flash, which we've been able to confirm that there were at least two Patriot missiles which intercepted Scuds. Apparently, the flash I saw was one of them being intercepted. There is no confirmation as to how many Scuds were intercepted, or one thing people seem to be concerned about is whether or not Patriot missiles would return and cause any damage in any of the areas in Tel Aviv, if they missed their Scud target.

MR. MacNeil: I was wondering what the people in the street in the affected area were thinking about the effectiveness of the Patriot screen now.

MR. SENNOT: Okay, yeah. The people on the street were, felt that they were confused. I think there was a sense of security all day today. When you drive in a certain part of Tel Aviv, you can see the Patriot missiles, the defense system set up in fields. And I talked to some people today who were kind of cheering the American soldiers on and there was a sense that we're defended. And today on the street tonight when I was out, people were confused. They didn't understand why they weren't defended, and that sense of security they had earlier in the day has vanished.

MR. MacNeil: John Hull in Jerusalem, has this created a new situation for the Israeli government?

MR. HULL: Well, I think it certainly has. I think this is going to put a great deal more pressure on Israel to retaliate. I mean, just prior to this attack, Israel had promised the U.S. that it, in fact, would not retaliate, at least not immediately. Deputy Sec. of State Lawrence Eagleburger is in town sealing that deal. In fact, both sides insist there is no deal, but it's quite obvious that there has been an understanding reached and an understanding that seems to entail additional promises of U.S. aid. Now I think that the Israeli government is going to have to rethink its position.

MR. MacNeil: Just because of the pressure from its own public, or its own political credibility with its own people do you mean?

MR. HULL: I think both. I think there's a concern here about satisfying the Israeli public's understandable desire for revenge and secondly, there's a concern here among Israel's current government, a hard line government, that it must send a message out to the Arab world that it must retaliate, it must show the Arab world that you cannot strike Israel without being hit back hard.

MR. MacNeil: Do you get any indication from any government officials tonight that this will be the thing that pushes them beyond their patience, or could they continue to extend what has been pretty remarkable patience up till now?

MR. HULL: You know there's going to be a lot of pressure on Israel to extend its patience. Again, Eagleburger is in town here. Officials here describe this mission as one of holding Shamir's hand in the event of an attack. There has been an attack tonight and I think that Eagleburger's going to be a busy man, but I'm not sure that Israel will retaliate now. There is a great deal of pressure against Israel and it's got a lot of incentives not to retaliate at this moment.

MR. MacNeil: So it's conceivable they will continue to exercise restraint, you mean?

MR. HULL: It's conceivable that it's getting increasingly difficult and I don't think tonight's attack is the last one.

MR. MacNeil: What are they saying in Jerusalem? What is the official Israel saying about the effectiveness of the Patriot missile screen?

MR. HULL: Well, you know, before this attack, they were pleased. Israelis were tuned to their televisions, they saw the performance of the Patriots in Saudi Arabia, they were impressed, and it gave them a great deal of comfort. Now I think that people are going to take a second look at this and perhaps feel that they cannot rely entirely on outside systems.

MR. MacNeil: Well, John Hull and Charlie Sennot in Tel Aviv, thank you both for joining us. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: American military officials said allied air raids have seriously damaged Iraq's air force communications systems. They said allied pilots have now flown more than 10,000 sorties. In Riyadh, the deputy commander of the British forces in the Gulf gave his assessment of the air war.

AIR VICE MARSHAL BILL WRATTON, Royal Air Force: Air superiority has been achieved in very short order, as was forecast. Air supremacy through reasons best known to Saddam Hussein has not been achieved because he has chosen to keep the majority of his airplanes on the ground. We are then embarked upon the progressive dismantling of his ability to wage war through the air campaign alone or essentially alone at present. Now how long that takes is I suggest largely up to him.

MR. LEHRER: Reports from Iran said the Iraqi Port of Basra was a target for allied bombing throughout the day. The Iranian News Agency said the impact of the bombs was felt in an Iranian city 25 miles away. Basra has been used by Iraq as headquarters for the defense of Kuwait. The U.S. Command said Navy planes sunk two Iraqi ships in the Northern Persian Gulf Monday. One was a mine layer; the other was not identified.

MR. MacNeil: In Riyadh, the U.S. command said the Iraqis blew up oil production and storage facilities at three places in Kuwait. Several oil wells were blown up at one center and oil tanks were set afire at all three. Oil industry executives in the Gulf area speculated that they may have done it in preparation for an expected ground attack by the allies. The U.S. command said the fires did not affect allied air operations. In Iraq, two men described as captive American airmen were shown on television. Both were identified as Air Force officers previously listed as Missing In Action. A poor quality videotaped copy of the broadcast was made available to Worldwide Television News and here is part of it.

CAPT. HARRY M. ROBERTS, U.S. Air Force: I fly the F-16-C.

IRAQI ANNOUNCER: What was your mission?

CAPT. ROBERTS: I was to attack an oil refinery near Baghdad.

IRAQI ANNOUNCER: How were you shot down?

CAPT. ROBERTS: I was shot down by a surface to air missile.

IRAQI ANNOUNCER: Your type of aircraft.

MT. JEFFREY S. TICE, U.S. Air Force: F-16-C.

IRAQI ANNOUNCER: Your mission.

MT. TICE: A bombing mission South of Baghdad.

IRAQI ANNOUNCER: Where were you shot down?

MT. TICE: I was shot down before reaching my target South of Baghdad.

MR. MacNeil: Iraq today linked the treatment of allied POWs to that of Palestinians in the Israeli occupied territories. According to Baghdad Radio, monitored by the BBC, a spokesman for Saddam Hussein said that Iraq would study any document submitted regarding the treatment of prisoners on the basis of the Geneva Conventions provided this covers the people of Palestine in the occupied territories.

MR. LEHRER: The chairman of the Federal Reserve Board said today the Gulf crisis has played a role in the nation's economic downturn. Alan Greenspan said business activity declined significantly in the last quarter of 1990, but he said there were some hopeful signs beginning to emerge. He testified at a hearing of the House Budget Committee.

ALAN GREENSPAN, Chairman, Federal Reserve Board: Events in the Persian Gulf clearly were a key factor in explaining why business activity weakened so remarkably this past autumn, specifically the jump in prices of petroleum products cut into the real disposable income of households and thus contributed to the softness in spending for a wide range of goods and services. But the damage from the Persian Gulf crisis went beyond the direct effect of higher oil prices. Indeed, the enormous uncertainty about how and when it would be resolved contributed to a marked erosion of consumer and business confidence about prospects for the economy. But as best we can judge, the latest data contain some hints that the effects of the initial shock last August have largely worked their way through the system, and that the downward pressures on activity may be lessened.

MR. LEHRER: The financial and oil markets continued to react negatively to the news from the war. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 26 points. The price of oil on the New York market was up more than $2.00 to $24 a barrel.

MR. MacNeil: The price of mailing a first class letter will go up 4 cents starting Sunday, February 3rd. The governors of the U.S. Postal Service made the new 29 cent rate official today, along with several other increases. Among them a stamp for a postcard will go from 15 cents to 19. Today was the 18th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision to make abortions legal and it was marked by anti- abortion rallies in several cities. Speaking by loud speaker from inside the White House, Pres. Bush urged those at the Washington rally to keep the anti-abortion movement alive. A counter demonstration was also held in Washington. The National Organization for Women erected a wall containing signatures of more than 25,000 abortion rights supporters. At the Supreme Court, the only remaining all male eating club at Princeton University failed to overturn a ruling that requires the club to admit women. Without comment, the Supreme Court let stand a lower court ruling against the Tiger Inn. The Princeton Eating Clubs are similar to fraternities and lawyers for the clubs said the case could affect 7,000 fraternities and sororities throughout the country.

MR. LEHRER: Soviet Pres. Gorbachev said today the military crackdown in the Baltic states did not mean he was moving toward a dictatorship. He said it in comments to reporters in Moscow this evening. He said he was deeply moved by the recent balance, and he promised a thorough investigation. The European Community today suspended a plan to send $1 billion in aid to the Soviet Union. The action was taken because of "repression in the Baltic states". The EC's parliament could reconsider its decision in late February. The vice presidents of Latvia and Lithuania asked the United States for help today. They testified before a human rights commission on Capitol Hill. They asked Congress to send a U.S. observer team to the Baltic states. They also said humanitarian aid should be sent directly to the republics, not to Moscow. Latvian Vice Pres. Dainis Ivans said the U.S. Congress must call on Pres. Gorbachev to immediately withdraw troops from the Baltic states.

VICE PRES. IVANS: We cannot defend ourselves against an overwhelming aggressive force alone. We know that without forceful and consistent pressure by the United States on the Gorbachev government, democratization will be destroyed in the Baltic states, Russia and beyond.

MR. LEHRER: This afternoon, Sec. of State Baker met with two Baltic leaders. He said the crackdown had jeopardized the progress of U.S.-Soviet relations. We'll have more on this story later in the program.

MR. MacNeil: That's our summary of the News. Now it's on to Iraq's destruction of Kuwait oil fields and the allied air war against Saddam Hussein. FOCUS - SCORCHED EARTH

MR. LEHRER: We go now to oil story, the Iraqis setting afire oil fields and refineries in Kuwait. The fires were in three centers in Kuwait, hitting oil wells and oil tanks as well. Charles Maxwell is vice chairman and senior energy strategist of C.J. Lawrence, a New York brokerage firm, he worked for a major oil company for 12 years and has been an adviser to the U.S. government on oil policy. Dov Zakheim was a deputy under secretary of defense during the Reagan administration. He is now a consultant. Mr. Maxwell, why in the world would Iraq destroy the oil fields of Kuwait, or try to?

MR. MAXWELL: Well, they have said, Jim, for some time that if there was an attempt to rest those fields away from them through an invasion of Kuwait, that they would blow the fields. It's a form of threat. And I think at the same time we're seeing more and more of what you might call a mad dog psychology her, if we can't have them, no one's going to have them sort of thing. They also see some outcry in the West on the possibilities of major pollution occurring in the Gulf and so on and they're just simply stirring the pot here by giving us a fore taste of what might come.

MR. LEHRER: Stirring the pot, Mr. Zakheim, or could it be seen as an act of resignation that they're going to lose Kuwait so they might as well leave it behind burned up?

MR. ZAKHEIM: I don't think they're there yet. I believe that what they're trying to do is implement psychological warfare. It's of a piece with the terror attacks on Israel. They are trying to win this battle in the United States, because they know they can't win it in the Gulf.

MR. LEHRER: But if they are serious in their belief or their statements that Kuwait is now the 19th province, those oil fields and those oil tanks and those oil refineries belong to them. Why would they destroy their own property?

MR. ZAKHEIM: Precisely because they feel that the effect on the war might be far greater than anything else they can do militarily. Think about it. They have not come out of their, what you might call their dens. Their planes are being hidden, generally speaking. They cannot confront us. They haven't. They've surprised us by not confronting us. What have they done? Fired missiles at Israel, which isn't even a player in this war. Now blow ups in oil fields. Again, the price of oil has gone up. It's going to, in their view, terrorize the West. It's part and parcel of their claim of what they promise to do if a war would start. They've also promised, by the way, terrorism. That hasn't come yet.

MR. LEHRER: In terms of damage, as I understand it, they set fire to several oil wells, they set fire to some storage tanks and to some refineries.

MR. ZAKHEIM: Right.

MR. LEHRER: What kind of damage does that do to Kuwait's ability to generate oil and gas?

MR. ZAKHEIM: Well, obviously those refineries would have to be rebuilt and they would have to dig the wells. The oil is still there, of course. It's interesting that what they didn't set fire to were the Rumala fields, the area that they claimed prior to this crisis beginning, something that even under their old Iraqi borders they felt was theirs. So there's something more than just blowing up wells in order to prevent Americans from seizing them. In any event, that could have waited some time.

MR. LEHRER: How do you interpret that, that they're saying that they're going to save that for a deal?

MR. ZAKHEIM: They're sending messages. They're sending messages when they hit Tel Aviv, they're sending messages when they blow up oil fields. They're trying to fight the battle in the streets of the United States. I think Mr. Hussein is trying to take a lesson out of Gen. Job's book, who argued the North Vietnamese -- who argued that the way to beat the United States was in the United States.

MR. LEHRER: And you think that this will have a terrific or at least they believe this will have a terrific psychological effect here, is that right?

MR. ZAKHEIM: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: Is he right?

MR. ZAKHEIM: No, I don't think he's right. I think all he's doing is getting Americans' backs up more and more, but again he sees demonstrations on the television networks. He may not recognize that that's a relatively small proportion of the population. And he may feel that this is going to whip the Americans up into a greater frenzy.

MR. LEHRER: But back to your first point, Saddam Hussein going into this said that he was going to drop missiles on Israel and he was going to destroy the Kuwaiti air force --

MR. ZAKHEIM: That's right.

MR. LEHRER: -- on this particular -- all within a matter of few hours he did both.

MR. ZAKHEIM: That's right.

MR. LEHRER: He'd had two previous attacks, successful attacks on Israel, but he's had a serious one that worked today, so psychologically he's getting there, right?

MR. ZAKHEIM: Well, he may or may not be. What's interesting and I think what surprised him was the fact that the Arab members of the coalition have recognized Israel's right to defend itself. That's unusual, since Syria for some time didn't recognize Israel's right to exist. It's not working out as he thinks, but he continues to follow this particular course and terrorism may be on its way as well.

MR. LEHRER: So our audience will know, the reason I have not gone back to Mr. Maxwell in New York is that there has been a demonstration in our studio in our New York where Robert MacNeil were sitting and we are unable to at this point to go back to Mr. Maxwell. As soon as whatever's going on up there has been cleared up, we will go back to New York and resume my conversation with Charles Maxwell as well as Mr. Zakheim. Should the allied forces now being prepared for Iraq to move against the Saudi oil fields as well?

MR. ZAKHEIM: It's going to be harder for them to do that. Of course, they could target them with missiles. Again, it depends on the message that Saddam is trying to send. Maybe at some point he'll do that. Clearly, he is not following a purely military strategy. After all, why intersperse attacks on the Saudis with attacks on Israel? Why has there been some lull between the previous attack and today's attack? He's trying to get things to sink into people's minds and particularly in this country. I believe he's failing but you've just talked about a demonstration in your own studio. He may think he's succeeding.

MR. LEHRER: The details of that I do not have. Apparently, some demonstrators were able to go into the building at WNET in New York and got into our studio there and they are now being -- it's a very peaceful kind of thing, however, it is disrupting -- it is impossible for us at this point to continue to broadcast from New York. Somebody has handcuffed himself to the desk that Robert MacNeil and Mr. Maxwell are sitting at in our studios in New York. We will see what -- see how that progresses. The oil prices went up today. This is Charles Maxwell's specialty and if I get an opportunity to talk to him again in a moment, I will press him on this in detail, but oil prices went up again today by $2 a barrel, up to $24 a barrel. How do you read that?

MR. ZAKHEIM: Again, I think it's how Saddam reads it. He sees a very volatile nervous oil market. He sees the oil market actually dropping. That's not what he wants either from a psychological point of view or, in fact, an economic one. After all, dropping the price of oil doesn't help him if he's got any oil to sell, so that it's in his interest to get the price of oil to go up and at the same time to hit the United States and the West in yet a different way. He can't implement an embargo on the West. It's exactly the reverse of what's being done to him. But by attacking the oil fields, he sends another message.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Look, we can now go back to New York and I want to ask Mr. Maxwell a question, but before I ask Mr. Maxwell a question, I want to ask Robin a question. Can you tell us what happened, sir.

MR. MacNeil: Yes. It was a group of people who called themselves "non-violent demonstrators" from the ACT UP AIDS Group who complain that we in the media are spending too much time and attention on the war in the Middle East, which they say will never kill as many people as are dying of AIDS. And I told them that this program has spent a lot of time on the AIDS matter and will be interested in it, and we will be covering it more in the future.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Charles Maxwell, we've been talking about the damage that was done to the oil fields in Kuwait, and what this may do. What do you think -- I know nobody knows, but what do you think Saddam Hussein is up to? Is it likely -- I asked Mr. Zakheim -- I'm not sure you were able to hear, but I asked Mr. Zakheim if we should now expect Saddam Hussein to deliver on his promise to try to destroy the Saudi oil fields. Is that possible and what effect is this having overall in the oil market in the world do you think?

MR. MAXWELL: That is the major question, Jim. The Kuwaiti fields of course have been off stream since the invasion on August 2nd and the Kuwaiti refineries have also been not operable. So the oil markets are in the grips of the possibility that Saddam Hussein might be able to knock out some of the production in Saudi Arabia on which we really do depend. The good news is that the Scud missiles are quite inaccurate, even though from time to time they may get through. Most of the Scud missiles, particular down on the Saudi side, are being stopped, and the chances of his being able to disrupt Saudi production now is falling away almost day by day and that's one of the reasons the oil markets are down so sharply, the war premium is being reduced a bit.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Maxwell, put the Kuwaiti oil production capabilities into the world picture, both in terms of the oil that comes out of the ground, its refining capabilities and whatever.

MR. MAXWELL: Well, the total production in the free world today is about 53 million barrels a day. It is an awful lot, and Kuwait is only one, one half million barrels a day of that. But the Saudis are eight million barrels a day of that and that's what so critical about Saudi production. Now in the refining side, the ability to make gasoline of an unleaded sort that we need for environmental reasons is really becoming quite constricted, and the Kuwaitis have 5 percent of the world capacity to make that type of specially attractive gasoline. That will hurt us. Those refineries if they're blown will take three or four years to be reproduced, built over again. So the fields, themselves, can't be destroyed. They'll destroy the upper works and we'll replace them. They'll fire the fields but we can put the fires out over the next six months to nine months. The refineries will hurt, and it's a mad dog psychology now.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Maxwell, within the oil expert business that you're in was there some feeling -- here again I asked Mr. Zakheim this while you were otherwise occupied -- but is there some feeling among your folks that this may be, could be a signal from Saddam Hussein that he's giving up the ghost that he's about to get out of Kuwait and he's going to leave a scorched earth behind him?

MR. MAXWELL: I think he probably is going to leave a scorched earth behind him, but I don't think he's doing this particularly for that reason. I think it's more of a threat. He's saying, after all, I've said I'm going to do it, and I'm going to deliver on that promise and I'm going to give you a little taste of what it's going to be like if you don't cease and desist. I think that's his principal objective.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Maxwell, thank you for being with us. Difficult situation there for you in New York. Thank you for hanging in with us. Mr. Zakheim, thank you.

MR. MacNeil: Still ahead on the NewsHour, the air war and Gorbachev's tough line with Baltic independence and what it means for U.S. relations. FOCUS - WAR FROM ABOVE

MR. MacNeil: We turn now to an area of growing concern, assessing the damage caused by the massive allied air attack. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said today that Pres. Bush was frustrated by the lack of specific information. So was the press corps in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where the quality of damage assessments was the major topic at today's briefings by allied military spokesmen. Charlayne Hunter-Gault was there.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: At today's daily briefing, U.S. central command continued its optimistic assessment of the air campaign.

LT. COL. GREG PEPIN, U.S. Army: After five and a half days of continuous round the clock air operations, we continue to be very encouraged with the results and the execution of the Desert Storm campaign is proceeding as planned. To date, the Desert Storm air forces have now executed in excess of 10,000 sorties. In the area of air combat, no United States aircraft were lost today either to hostile fire or to non-combat accidents.

ADM. CONRAD LAUTENBACHER, U.S. Navy: At this point, I would like to shift to a tape. There will be three sequences. The first one is taken from an A-6 aircraft and the video comes through a forward looking infrared sensor. We also have on that tape audio of the pilots. You will see at the end of this tape as the target is being struck numerous anti-aircraft batteries lighting up in the target area. [PILOT FOOTAGE]

ADM. LAUTENBACHER: The range of those flashes give you an idea of the intensity of the air defense around that particular target. That was a strategic target that I prefer to identify as a strategic target at this point because of current operations.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: You said a few moments ago you were encouraged. Could either or both of you say specifically what makes you encouraged today?

MS. LAUTENBACHER: I'm encouraged because of the air strikes that have gone in. I'm encouraged because of the disruption of the command and control. I'm encouraged that we are hurting Saddam Hussein across the board and the type of targets we're hitting and I think the campaign is going as planned.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: At a later briefing, the deputy British forces commander sounded as upbeat as his U.S. counterpart and as reluctant to divulge what they called strategic information.

AIR VICE MARSHAL BILL WRATTON, Royal Air Force: Air superiority has been achieved in very short order, as was forecast. Air supremacy through reasons best known to Saddam Hussein has not been achieved because he has chosen to keep the majority of his airplanes on the ground.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: There are reports that the Iraqi air force have moved to Northern bases. There were even reports that some of them had been placed in Iran. Do you know anything about that and to that question, do you anticipate that the damage done by the allied forces is such that even if the Iraqi air force wanted to fly, it couldn't, or can it rise up at a point down the road?L

AIR VICE MARSHAL WRATTON: They sound like two rather long questions. The first as to what his deployments might be, I really cannot answer that. That would be reflecting or revealing a level of knowledge which must remain within the bounds of security and similarly, whether or not he chooses to fly is largely a question, a matter for him to judge. All I can tell you and all I can repeat is that if he chooses to fly, and indeed, when he has chosen to fly he has been confronted with an extremely large and exceptionally well controlled air force of the best crews in the world who are flying the best fighter systems in the world. Now that is a very good reason to stay on the ground.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: I guess my question was sort of aimed at how much damage --

AIR VICE MARSHAL WRATTON: This is the third question coming up.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: No, but how much damage to the runways and radar?

AIR VICE MARSHAL WRATTON: I'm really not going to comment on the degree of damage we've inflicted.

MR. MacNeil: One reason it's difficult to determine how effective the allied air strikes have been is because Iraq has developed an elaborate defensive plan to fool and confuse an enemy. Bob Parker of Independent Television News narrates this report.

MR. PARKER: This is the kind of specifically fortified shelter that is now believed to house a lot of the Iraqi air force. This actual building is in England at RAF Leming, but it will be similar to those in Iraq. Simon Montague has worked on this type of shelter in Amman in the Middle East.

MR. MONTAGUE: They are essentially long corrugated iron or corrugated steel arches over which is poured very heavily reinforced concrete and that provides a structure within which you keep perhaps one, two or three fighter or bomber aircraft well protected from enemy attacks. In that shelter you also have life support systems enabling crews to sleep and eat without leaving the shelter and you're also quite likely to keep armaments within the shelters too so that aircraft could be reloaded in safety before going out and on to the attack again.

MR. PARKER: Many of the allied pilots in Operation Desert Storm have reported that Iraqi planes have fled North. The fear now is that much of Iraqi's considerable air force is now safely ensconced in fortified shelters in the North of the country. That would explain yesterday's air raids from Turkey. But it may be that their bombs and missiles didn't get through to the aircraft, wrapped as they are in shelters of thick layers of concrete.

SIR ANTHONY FARRAR-HOCKLEY, Allied Commander, N. Europe, 1979- 82: Provided they're designed similar to this design which they probably are, they should be very good at withstanding allied attacks, one would have thought, and it's going to take a few direct hits as like as not to actually crack away shelters and to damage the aircraft within.

MR. PARKER: And the extraordinary American video of bombing raids which showed aiming of such precision that bombs could be fired through ventilation shafts may not reflect the true position as to just how impregnable these shelters are.

SIR ANTHONY FARRAR-HOCKLEY: They're designed to take and resist the biggest punishment with ordinance that missiles or aircraft can bring into the air fields. And therefore, it is highly likely that there are still quite large numbers of aircraft inside those hardened shelters with chips on the outside but have not been broken open.

MR. PARKER: These shelters are also thought to house missiles and chemical warheads, as well as other hardware. If this is, indeed, the case, it must raise questions about just how much of Iraq's military hardware has been knocked out by the allied air campaign so far. But perhaps even more worrying is the protection these reinforced shelters have afforded Saddam Hussein's command and control structure from the air attacks in Baghdad. His presidential palace has reportedly been threatened by the allied attacks, but construction sources say that underneath the palace is a large underground network of rooms in which Hussein may have been virtually unaffected. The bunker below is shielded by two foot thick detonator slabs said to be capable of withstanding the blast of a 500 pound bomb. Immediately under this are steel doors with air locks and reinforced entrances. That leads to rooms constructed out of huge, eight foot think reinforced concrete walls. There's everything required for a command center to survive for weeks, including dormitories, canteens and showers. In the middle section are communications and offices and Hussein's personal bedroom. Below there's electricity generation, water tanks and air filtration. The whole bunker is on a bed of hard rubber foundation to cushion heavy impact. They are said by some experts to be virtually immune from aerial assault.

TERRY GANDER, Jane's NBC Protection: If you're thinking in terms of shelters as our older generation knew them, shelters the air raid shelters, you can forget all about that. Modern command and control centers are underground concrete bunkers with every facility you could possibly wish provided.

MR. PARKER: These type of bunkers are thought to be situated under a number of important sites in Baghdad. As well as the palace, there are said to be bunkers at the Ministry of Defense, the Communications Center, and the Security Minister. They are all interconnected by tunnels. It may well be that the air campaign so far has barely dented Saddam Hussein's command and control structure. Today apparently Saddam Hussein appeared on Iraqi television from some kind of underground structure. He may have to stay there for some time and that could be the allies' biggest problem. FOCUS - IRON FIST

MR. MacNeil: Next tonight we focus on the Soviet Union's newest attempts to assert its authority in the Baltic republics. In Latvia and Lithuania, a tense stand-off now exists following violent incidents between Soviet authorities and pro-independence groups. Soviet Pres. Gorbachev addressed that situation today. We have a report from Tim Ewart of Independent Television News.

MR. EWART: Mr. Gorbachev was speaking after a round of negotiations with Latvian leaders. He said he'd been deeply moved by what he called tragic developments in the Baltics, and expressed sincere condolences to the families affected. What happened will be thoroughly investigated. It was the briefest of statements and the Soviet leader took no questions from assembled news men. An uneasy calm settled over the Latvian capital Riga today. There was no sign on the streets of Interior Ministry black beret troops who shot dead four people on Sunday night. Red Army soldiers now guard the publishing house seized earlier by the black berets. Pro independence demonstrators gathered outside the parliament building and city center streets are still blockaded by nationalists fearful of a military crackdown, but some of the tension has been de-fused by today's talks in Moscow. In neighboring Lithuania, paratroopers still stand guard at the television station and defiant nationalists remain barricaded inside parliament. Now many have firearms, mostly hunting rifles, and one man even donned his World War II uniform. The official news agency, Tass, said today that 93 percent of Lithuanians including 3/4 of the ethnic Russian population, support independence, and hard liners are accusing Mr. Gorbachev of bungling events there.

MR. MacNeil: Now Judy Woodruff picks up the story. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: In Washington, the Baltic situation is provoking worry and anger, even amid the preoccupation here with the Gulf War. In Congress, a resolution is on the House floor. And several House members said the February Bush-Gorbachev summit should be cancelled and trade and food aid suspended. At the State Department, Sec. Baker met with the vice presidents of Lithuania and Latvia and afterwards expressed concern.

SEC. BAKER: The United States and the Soviet Union have made tremendous progress over the course of the last two years in improving the relationship between our two countries, and the events of the last ten days to two weeks or so, I'm afraid to say, could have the effect of putting that progress in jeopardy. So we'll continue to make our views known to the Soviet Union in the hopes that there can be a peaceful resolution of this situation and that the hopes and aspirations of the Baltic people to determine their own future is going to give an effect. We've always said for a long time that the only way to resolve this problem is through some sort of a negotiation and some sort of a dialogue.

MS. WOODRUFF: We get three views now on the apparent new hard line in the Kremlin and the possible repercussions here and in the Baltics. They come from Stephen Cohen, a professor of Russian history at Princeton, University, Maxim Kimakov, a former senior editor of the foreign desk of the Tass Agency, who defected to the United States last fall, and Ojars Kalnins, the spokesman for the Latvian embassy here in Washington. Mr. Kalnins, your President met with Gorbachev today and afterwards he told the reporters that Gorbachev was promising not to impose presidential rule on Latvia. Had that been the fear?

MR. KALNINS: Yes, that was the concern. They were expecting it, and it's always welcome that there could be a halt to the violence in Latvian, but this kind of action really doesn't get to the root of the problem of what started the violence, and there doesn't seem to be any indication from Gorbachev that he's changed his position on Baltic independence.

MS. WOODRUFF: Why do you think this doesn't improve the situation? I mean, they metfor two and a half hours.

MR. KALNINS: It seems to put off what could be the inevitable. Gorbachev's policies are what set into motion the bloodshed and the violence in the Baltic states. It was his defense minister that sent the paratroopers in in the first place and if you look at the rhetoric, some of the comments he made earlier, he literally predicted that there would be bloodshed. And these types of actions actually led to it. We get the impression that perhaps there's a new strategy because of the Western reaction --

MS. WOODRUFF: A new strategy since --

MR. KALNINS: A new strategy to try to undermine the Baltic independence movements. They tried a frontal assault, the use of direct force on the governments. That failed largely because there was unexpected resistance from the Baltic people and because there was a very large outcry in the West. Now they seem to be retrenching, perhaps trying to go at it from a different point of view.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mr. Kimakov, what do you think is going on? I mean, we had the violent attacks in Lithuania last week and Latvia over the weekend. Today you have Gorbachev expressing, saying he's deeply moved and expressing his condolences to the families of the victim.

MR. KIMAKOV: Well, clearly, Gorbachev is maneuvering right now and what is essential in today's statement and not its contents, but the timing and the way he made it, he was, the way he made it we could clearly feel that he's under pressure, and --

MS. WOODRUFF: From whom?

MR. KIMAKOV: I think that this reaction, a very strong reaction in the West, really bites him right now. And he is trying to save his aura of the Nobel Prize winner, he is trying to save the international stature of the Soviet Union, and he made some kind of an awkward move. It's not important, it's not the contents of the statement but the timing that is really important.

MS. WOODRUFF: The timing meaning a day or two after the attack in Latvia, what do you mean?

MR. KIMAKOV: No. By making the statement, Gorbachev made it clear that he's really worried about a direction in the West. He is really worried about the future of the summit and --

MS. WOODRUFF: And not so worried about the 100,000 people marching through the streets of Moscow, which is what happened over the weekend?

MR. KIMAKOV: Probably less about that then about the reaction in the West.

MS. WOODRUFF: Steve Cohen, how do you think we should read these events?

MR. COHEN: Well, I guess I have to give you a different point of view. I think Gorbachev's primarily worried about the rising tide of ultra conservative and reactionary forces. He knew what the Western reaction would be and he knew what the liberal democratic reaction in Moscow would be to these repressive policies in Lithuania. I think Gorbachev in these events in the Baltics is trying to save his own process of reform. I think that's what's at stake. If we take these events out of the context of what's happening in the Soviet Union in the last five or six years, we lose sight of what's at stake. What's at stake are these historic reforms.

MS. WOODRUFF: So what are you saying? I mean, what are seeing here, two steps to the right and one step back just in the last few days, or are you saying we're paying too close attention to details? I mean, what are you saying?

MR. COHEN: Well, you can never pay too close attention to details. Everything's in the detail, but there's never been in history, so far as I know, a process of reform that's had a straight upward ascent. Processes of reforms go forward, fall back, zig and zag, and above all, they arouse ferocious opposition. What we've been witnesses in the Soviet Union for the last half a year or so, not just in the Baltics but elsewhere in the country, and particularly Moscow, is the rise of an aggressive opposition to all of these reforms. At the moment, that opposition, which comes from the institutions you know about, the military, the KGB, and what's left of the party apparatus, is focusing on the question of the republics. It is taking the position that Gorbachev has absolutely no right to allow the dismemberment of the Soviet Union. Now you and I may say that these republics have every right to be free. I believe they do have the right to be free. But if you're asking me about the political dynamic in the Soviet Union, that's what it is, opposition to Gorbachev on the grounds that his policies have produced this crisis in the Baltics and he's got to do something about it.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mr. Kalnins, is that what it is, just an inevitable reaction and he's got to respond to it?

MR. KALNINS: He has to respond to the forces that he's feeling outside of the Soviet Union inside. I think that the 100,000 -- I've heard up to 500,000 -- people in Moscow is a major force on Gorbachev.

MS. WOODRUFF: You do?

MR. KALNINS: Because it's not only Moscow; it's Kiev; it's Leningrad; it's Georgia. The pressures that are building are building in all the republics. What's happening in the Baltic states is happening on various different levels throughout the Soviet Union. You cannot reform an empire and I think that if he is trying to reform the existence of the Soviet Union, he's making a very serious mistake, because he will not be able to salvage the Union as it exists today.

MS. WOODRUFF: Steve Cohen.

MR. COHEN: Well, that's possible, but think of the consequences. I personally think, and I base this on talks with three senior Gorbachev advisers just over a week ago when I was in Moscow.

MS. WOODRUFF: People that are still with him?

MR. COHEN: For now, still with him, that these are personal aides to Gorbachev, that his own personal view is, and he's indicated this even to some reporters, that down the road, the three Baltic republics will not be part of the Soviet Union, but if they are going to leave, they must leave by his rules and his timetable through this elaborate process. Now the question is, to turn to the United States, if the Baltics countries go, and they're an exception, is it in the interest of the West, in the interest of everybody, that the entire Soviet Union, all 15 republics come apart, dismember? Do we want where there is now Soviet territory, 15 different countries, by the way of which probably, but I'm guessing here, but it's an educated guess, only the Baltics have a democratic culture, a possibility of democracy. I mean, let me put it to you in the crudest way. We've had one despotism on Soviet territory, there's the risk that we might have ten, if the Soviet Union comes apart, ten armed with highly sophisticated weapons conceivably even, nuclear weapons. We have to think about this.

MS. WOODRUFF: So you're clearly arguing it's not in our interest for the Soviet Union to fly apart. Mr. Kimakov.

MR. KIMAKOV: Well, I have quite different opinion. I think the most important thing right now is to find some kind of a solid power base in the Soviet Union, and this power base, legitimate power base, exists in the republics. They have legitimately elected government and legitimately elected parliaments, and --

MS. WOODRUFF: Power base for Gorbachev or for --

MR. KIMAKOV: No. For stabilizing the whole situation in the Soviet Union, because Gorbachev hasn't been legitimately elected and his policies are really bad, they are not effective, and really what's happening in the Soviet Union, the republics want to walk away from Moscow, want to walk away from these policies, and they will do it any cost.

MS. WOODRUFF: Steve Cohen.

MR. COHEN: Well, Mr. Kimakov hasn't been paying attention. The 15 presidents of the 15 republics have all, each and every one of them, been elected exactly as Gorbachev was elected, through what we could call kind of an electoral college of Congress, which itself in various republics was elected in a peculiar way, half democratic and half not, and we're looking at a Soviet system very much in transition. In all the republics, the democratic institutions remain very, very imperfect. We're in the middle of a process of change, not at the end of that process of change.

MS. WOODRUFF: Of course your view of what's going to happen down the road affects your view of how the West ought to respond. Mr. Kalnins, what should the West do? The European community today voted to delay a decision on sending food, emergency food aid to the Soviet Union. The White House said today that there were more decisions being considered. What should the West do?

MR. KALNINS: I think the West should be looking at the democratic forces in the Soviet Union. The West has always supported the Baltic states and their legal right to independence and anything that can be done to further that I think is very appropriate, but I think they should look beyond that at the democrative movements, at the people like Boris Yeltsin, who have very broad popular support in the Soviet Union.

MS. WOODRUFF: So should we go ahead with the food aid or not?

MR. KALNINS: I think if there's talk of food aid, it should go perhaps to the republics, to the democratically elected governments, the authorities that have contact with the people, not to the KGB, not to the central governments in Moscow.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that realistic, Steve Cohen?

MR. COHEN: I wish it were. I wish -- and again I want to put the Baltics aside because they're an exception. Gorbachev has treated them as an exception. I wish it were true to say today that the democratic forces in Russia in the Soviet Union could rule the country. These are my personal friends. I wish I could say to you power should be given to them, we should deal with them, they can rule the country. The reality is they cannot, they remain an island in a sea of authoritarian, anti-democratic traditions. That's a fact.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mr. Kimakov.

MR. KIMAKOV: As to the food aid, I think that probably other channels have to be tried and probably --

MS. WOODRUFF: Other channels --

MR. KIMAKOV: For distribution of the food.

MS. WOODRUFF: -- than the central government?

MR. KIMAKOV: Than the central government, of course. Probably it is a worthwhile trying the church.

MS. WOODRUFF: The church?

MR. KIMAKOV: The church, which has at least the widespread support in the Soviet Union and it is not leaning particular political movement.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that realistic, Steve Cohen?

MR. COHEN: Let me say something that will be exceedingly unpopular. It's very good to seek freedom of religion in the Soviet Union. It is also historical fact that the Russian Orthodox Church has never supported democracy in Russia, not before the revolution, not afterward.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mr. Kimakov.

MR. KIMAKOV: Well, it is true in a way, yes. In some way, the orthodox church in Russia has been compromised by the support of the government, but any way there is no other institution in the Soviet Union that could be trusted, such kind of operation as food distribution.

MS. WOODRUFF: No other institution. Mr. Kalnins.

MR. KALNINS: It seems so, except that again as Mr. Cohen brought up, the Baltic states have institutions in places that could work. They have been working closely with the governments in Byelorussia, in Ukraine. Again, I think if the West started working with these movements, they could start developing the kinds of contacts that they needed.

MS. WOODRUFF: What about the Bush-Gorbachev summit that's scheduled for just three weeks from today, Mr. Kimakov?

MR. KIMAKOV: I think --

MS. WOODRUFF: Should we go ahead or not?

MR. KIMAKOV: Yes, I think we should go ahead with the summit, despite all of the things that happened in the Baltics. The main reason for that is otherwise the Soviet authorities could go even wilder, because they have some kind of tied hands by this summit.

MS. WOODRUFF: What do you mean, how?

MR. KIMAKOV: Well -- and the statement Gorbachev made today, he made looking forward and the prospect of the summit so he tried to make some kind of adjustment.

MS. WOODRUFF: You think he's trying to smooth things over.

MR. KIMAKOV: Smooth things down, of course.

MS. WOODRUFF: Go ahead.

MR. KIMAKOV: And so if the prospect of the summit still remains, they will always look at it and adjust their activities, so if we want to --

MS. WOODRUFF: It's a governor on there --

MR. KIMAKOV: If we want to save some democratic achievements in Russia, we have to go ahead with the summit, but probably not have it in Moscow.

MS. WOODRUFF: Where?

MR. KIMAKOV: In some neutral country like Geneva.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mr. Kalnins.

MR. KALNINS: When the vice president of Latvia spoke to Congress today, he said that if Pres. Bush were to raise the Baltic question and other human rights questions in Moscow, he'd use the summit for that, perhaps it would be useful, but he made another suggestion, and that is that Pres. Bush meet with the presidents of the Baltic states before he meets with Mr. Gorbachev.

MS. WOODRUFF: Steve Cohen, what about either one of those, moving the summit out of Moscow to Geneva or somewhere else, and a visit to the Baltic states by Pres. Bush?

MR. COHEN: Well, Pres. Bush would have a fundamental decision to make if he were to do that. It would be perceived in the Soviet Union outside the Baltic states as a major intervention into internal Soviet affairs, and I think it would probably be interpreted as provocative. Let us remember that there are excess of 300,000 Soviet troops still in Central Europe that we wish to get out of Central Europe and if for no other reason, the summit should go ahead to get those Soviet troops out of Eastern and Central Europe.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that the main reason it should go ahead?

MR. COHEN: It's reason enough. I mean, there are other reasons, but that's reason enough in my mind.

MS. WOODRUFF: Should it be held in Moscow?

MR. COHEN: I don't think it really matters. I mean, I can see the Bush administration finding it symbolically more comfortable to move it elsewhere. Why not? I mean, the Bush administration has a bigger question than whether to go ahead with the summit or not, because one could easily postpone it, reschedule it, take the pressure off. The fundamental question for the Bush administration and for all of us is can we imagine an alternative to the Gorbachev leadership in the Soviet Union that would be better for the United States? It comes down to that. To imagine that all of this would be simple and quick, we became euphoric five, six years ago, or two, three years ago about how smoothly things would go. They aren't going to go smoothly. But is there an alternative, is there an alternative? If there's not, then American diplomacy pursues American interest, which means dealing with Mr. Gorbachev.

MS. WOODRUFF: We'll leave it at that thought. Steve Cohen, thank you, Mr. Kalnins, thank you, and Mr. Kimakov, thank you all three. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, today's major developments in the Gulf War, Iraq launched a Scud missile attack on Tel Aviv, Israel. One missile landed in a residential neighborhood. At least three people died, seventy injured, some seriously. Four Scud missiles were also fired in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, but all were intercepted and destroyed by U.S. Patriot missiles. Allied commanders said their forces had achieved air supremacy over Iraq, but not superiority. They said Iraq has so far kept much of its air force on the ground. The U.S. command said Iraq set fire to three oil production and storage facilities in Kuwait, and Iraq showed two more captured American airmen on television. Good night, Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Good night, Jim. That's the NewsHour tonight. We'll be back tomorrow night with full coverage and analysis of developments in the Gulf and elsewhere. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.