Policy At Sea Tacking toward the gulf

The signals emanating from Washington last week over the issue of U.S. involvement in the Persian Gulf were decidedly mixed. Press reports described a U.S. contingency plan to launch a pre-emptive strike against the Chinese- built Silkworm missiles that Iran is installing along the Strait of Hormuz. Drawing up a wide range of such plans is routine procedure. Testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee, Admiral William Crowe, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said nothing directly about the Silkworms. But speaking of the Reagan Administration's plan to have U.S. warships escort Kuwaiti tankers through the gulf, he warned, "There are no absolute guarantees that such an operation will be casualty free or that Iran will not escalate the sea war, which will present us with further difficult choices."

Behind the scenes in Washington, however, the sounds were far more muffled. The Reagan Administration appeared to be in no hurry to implement its plan to send more warships to the gulf to begin the escort operation. Private briefings given to Congress suggested that the Administration will take some time to think through how big a fleet it plans to send and exactly what the ships will do. Most legislators appeared content with the White House's promise to spell out the rules of engagement under which the ships would be allowed to open fire in advance of any actual deployment. That deployment seems several weeks away. One factor inhibiting the Administration from hatching any quick, ambitious military plans is the reluctance of U.S. allies to join them. President Reagan promised to appeal for support at the Venice economic summit this week, but indications were that he would not get very far.

! As the Administration continued to weigh its next move, the Navy released its report on the May 17 Iraqi missile attack on the U.S.S. Stark, which killed 37 sailors and crippled the frigate. The report left unclarified the central mystery: Why had the Stark not taken prompt action to defend itself when an Iraqi plane's radar locked on to it? According to the Navy, the Stark's antimissile weapons were "operational," meaning they could have been activated by the push of a button, but no button was pushed.

At minimum, the Stark's commander, Captain Glenn Brindel, will face many more questions on that score. The Navy confirmed that it has told several officers they are "parties to the investigation"; it would not name them, but other sources said they were Brindel and three of his subordinates. If any charges are brought against them, they will be subjected to a hearing to determine if they should be court-martialed.