Bush, U.S. Leaders to Discuss Gulf : Policy: The President schedules bipartisan meeting with key members of Congress for Jan. 3 to review his plans if Iraq ignores U.N. Jan. 15 deadline to withdraw.

President Bush, suddenly faced with increasing bipartisan opposition to his plan for an early military strike against Iraq, Friday scheduled a Jan. 3 meeting with top congressional leaders of both parties to discuss his Persian Gulf policy.

The move came as Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and Majority Leader George J.Mitchell (D-Me.) criticized Bush’s plan--reported by The Times on Thursday--to order an early attack if Iraq fails to abide by the Jan. 15 deadline for its troops to withdraw from Kuwait.

It was not immediately clear whether the President’s tough new position would prompt any serious move in Congress to force his hand--either by forbidding the use of military force or by specifically ordering an attack. Both houses will be in session from Jan. 3 through Jan. 15.

Nevertheless, it was plain that top congressional leaders are extremely anxious about the reports of Bush’s decision to move quickly once the U.N. deadline has passed.

Declaring that there is “still a lot of concern in the country about getting into a shooting war,” Dole said the United States “should not be doing anything over there until we’ve pursued every other possibility”--including high-level talks between the two countries.

And Mitchell, who has repeatedly insisted that the U.S. Constitution requires the President to seek congressional approval before launching any offensive military action, said other senators are also apprehensive.

“I detect widespread and deep unease among members of the Senate about the manner in which the President appears so insistent and determined to use force as a first resort rather than a last resort,” he said.

The meeting between Bush and congressional leaders was scheduled as both the United States and Iraq continued their apparent preparations for war, and--in a new twist--some Iraqi opposition groups in Beirut announced plans to try to oust Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

There were these developments:

* Two aircraft carrier groups, comprising 17 ships and 16,000 sailors and Marines, left Norfolk, Va., on Friday for a two-week voyage to the Persian Gulf, joining three other carrier task forces already on station in the region.

* Iraq test-fired another Soviet-made Scud ballistic missile, prompting U.S. military commanders to send their troops to battle stations for an hour and a half. It was the third such incident this month.

* The Pentagon confirmed that it will begin inoculating some American soldiers against biological weapons that could be deployed by Iraq in a war. But officials declined to say how many troops would receive the vaccinations or when the effort would begin.

* Britain ordered 390 medical reservists to active duty for deployment to the Persian Gulf--its first mandatory mobilization of reserve forces in 25 years.

While the White House did not formally announce the Jan. 3 leadership meeting, Dole disclosed in an interview that Bush’s national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, had told him that the President planned to schedule two meetings with congressional leaders for that date.

Bush plans to meet first with Mitchell, Dole, House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) and House Minority Leader Bob Michel (R-Ill.), and then hold a second session to include about 20 others, among them the chairmen of the Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees.

Scowcroft, Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, Secretary of State James A. Baker III and other senior officials are expected to attend the meetings.

The growing sentiment in the Democratic-controlled Congress for greater efforts to seek a peaceful settlement of the Persian Gulf crisis drew a lukewarm response Friday from one of the key Democrats, Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

Aspin issued a report arguing that almost any peaceful solution is likely to be perceived by Arabs as a victory for Iraq’s President Hussein.

“Almost any outcome that includes Saddam’s survival is likely to be trumpeted (in the Arab world) as a great victory for Saddam,” he said.

Even so, Aspin stopped short of calling for the early use of military force to make sure that the Iraqi strongman does not survive.

Dole said he would still like to see the United States try to arrange for Baker to travel to Baghdad to meet with Hussein and for Iraqi Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz to come to Washington and meet with Bush before the Jan. 15 deadline.

So far, Washington and Baghdad have been unable to agree on dates for reciprocal talks on the crisis. A planned visit by Aziz to Washington was canceled after the Bush Administration rejected the Jan. 12 date that Iraq had proposed for a meeting between Baker and Hussein, terming it too close to the Jan. 15 date set by the United Nations.

Dole said he feels so strongly about the issue that he telephoned Iraq’s ambassador to the United States, Mohammed Mashat, in Baghdad to urge that the Iraqis try to agree on a date before Congress returns to Washington next Wednesday.

“I expressed my feeling that this is serious business, and the ambassador agreed it is serious business,” Dole said. “He’s coming back on New Year’s Day, and I told him I would be available for further discussions.

“I can’t believe that they can’t agree on a date,” he added.

Dole said that while Bush still enjoys “pretty strong support” among the American public, “you’ve got to commit the nation before you commit the troops, and my gut tells me the nation isn’t there yet.

“I can’t think that the American people believe we’ve checked out every avenue short of war,” he said.

“There’s still some confusion out there about whether we’re ready and what our real goals are and whether it is worth it--whether our goal is oil or putting the emir (of Kuwait) back on the throne.”

Several top U.S. military officials have said the United States would not be fully prepared to launch a military offensive until around mid-February, when all the troops and equipment assigned to the gulf region have been deployed.

But Administration officials, and the President himself, have said they believe that enough U.S. forces would be in place immediately after the Jan. 15 deadline to launch an attack if necessary.

Both Dole and Mitchell emphasized that they have supported--and continue to support--Bush’s basic policy of imposing economic sanctions against Iraq and eventually resorting to force if it becomes necessary to drive the Iraqis out of Kuwait.

“The question is whether force is a first resort or a last resort, and whether other alternatives are explored,” Mitchell said.

Despite the two leaders’ concerns, Capitol Hill strategists speculated Friday that Congress most likely would not move on its own, but that instead, the lawmakers would try to position themselves to react to whatever the President does.

“We’re really waiting on events and waiting on the Administration,” a key House staff member said. “I don’t expect Congress to do anything before the 15th (of January). The President is commander in chief. He will use force if he sees fit. . . .”

One key aide said he believes that Senate Democrats, at least, will follow Mitchell’s earlier position--that the United States should not use force without congressional authorization, but that Congress should not act until Bush sends a specific proposal to Capitol Hill.

Asked about suggestions by Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and other Republicans that Congress should vote now on whether to authorize U.S. military action, the staff member replied, “The Democrats in the Congress aren’t going to give a blank check.”

On the other hand, he said, if Bush goes to war without seeking some authorization from Congress, “then you will have what some people up here are calling a constitutional crisis.”

A Republican staff member compared the maneuvering over a Persian Gulf resolution to a game of tag between Democrats and Republicans. “The Democrats are trying very hard not to be tagged ‘it,’ ” he said.

House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) predicted last week that Congress would authorize the use of force, but that the margin would probably be slim, raising doubts about Bush’s support.

Administration officials have made it clear that they do not want a close vote and would prefer that Congress take no action at all unless the President can be assured of an overwhelming victory.

Both Dole and Mitchell referred to a report in Thursday’s editions of The Times that Bush has weighed the military and political consequences of the timing of an attack and decided not to be deterred either by congressional or public sentiment on the issue.

Dole said he is convinced that Bush is “serious and not bluffing” in his resolve to order a massive military attack if Iraq fails to withdraw from Kuwait by the Jan. 15 deadline.

“It’s fairly clear he thinks we’re ready,” the senator said. “He’s ready to go, and apparently has measured all the different scenarios about what would happen if we attack.”

Meanwhile, in Beirut, an assortment of Iraqi opposition groups announced plans to join in an effort to oust Saddam Hussein from power in an effort to end Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait and, they hope, avert any military action.

Leaders said the newly formed Iraqi National Joint Action Committee includes pro-Iranian Muslim fundamentalists, Syrian-backed Muslim groups, Communists, socialists, dissident members of Hussein’s ruling Baath party, Arab nationalists and Kurds.

Staff writers Norman Kempster and Jim Mann contributed to this story.