The Times, London, has reported that the Soviet Union has resumed supplying arms to Iraq. It has not provided any details. It does not, for example, say when the supply was resumed and why. Indeed, the development has been reported in a story on the Iran-Iraq war. All in all, it is difficult to assess the accuracy of the report. But if it is accurate, it represents a significant move on the part of the Kremlin to improve its position in the Arab world. The move would place the Soviet Union on the same side as the West in the Iran-Iraq conflict. Not just the United States, the Western alliance as a whole has a vast stake in Iraq’s success in beating back the Iranians. For the fall of Iraq to the Iranians or, indeed even the overthrow of the present regime in Baghdad as a result of an internal uprising or coup touched off by Iran’s military successes, would put at risk the stability of the whole of the Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia. The West has, therefore, made no secret of its sympathies for Iraq as well as the set-up in Baghdad. Thus in terms of the cold war, the Soviet Union could be expected to be better disposed towards Iran than towards Iraq.
The mullahs in command in Teheran have not been easy to befriend for the Soviets. They are bitterly anti-communist and they are opposed to the Soviet military presence in Afghanistan. But so far the Soviets have generally ignored these irritants and continued their efforts to woo Iran. The pro-Soviet Tudeh Party supports the mullahs. North Korea has supplied Soviet-manufactured hardware to them. So have Syria and Libya. Indeed, there exists a formal agreement among the three countries to assist one another. The Kremlin might not have initiated these deals. But there is nothing to suggest that it has been unhappy over them or has sought to discourage the recipients of its equipment from transferring it to Iran. If anything, evidence has pointed in the other direction. Despite their concern over the possible impact of Islamic fundamentalism on their own Muslim population in the Central Asian republics, Soviet academics have praised the Iranian revolution on the ground that it was anti-imperialist. In the face of all this, it becomes rather difficult to accept as accurate the report that Moscow has resumed military supplies to Iraq. But often things are far more complicated than they appear on the surface. Of late Arab leaders have made moves to persuade President Saddam Hussein (Iraq) and President Assad (Syria) to end their feud. President Assad’s dependence on Saudi money may have increased in the wake of Israeli successes in Lebanon and with it his willingness to listen lo Riyadh. The Russians could have concluded that the Iranians are unlikely to be able to overthrow the Iraqi regime any way. Above all, the Soviet leaders may be calculating that when the Reagan administration fails to produce results, as in their view it is bound to, they will have an opportunity to win influence with the Arabs provided they do not alienate them.