White House Offers to Aid Congress on Gulf Measure : Policy: The crisis, along with snags in weapons pacts, may delay the U.S.-Soviet summit.

WASHINGTON —  The White House said Monday that it will work with Congress to craft a measure on the use of force in the Persian Gulf that can be passed before the Jan. 15 deadline set by the U.N. Security Council for Iraq to pull its troops out of Kuwait.

White House officials also said that the gulf crisis, along with questions over the recently approved conventional arms treaty and unresolved issues in the incomplete strategic weapons pact, could force a delay in the U.S.-Soviet summit conference scheduled for Moscow next month.

With the House and Senate likely to debate the Bush Administration’s handling of the gulf crisis this week, the Administration has been hoping that the two houses would follow up Wednesday’s meeting between Secretary of State James A. Baker III and Iraqi Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz with a forceful endorsement.

A week from now, the anti-Iraq military coalition is authorized by the Security Council to use force to evict the Iraqi occupying troops. And the Administration hopes that the unyielding message Baker will deliver to Aziz in Geneva, followed by a display of unity in Congress and among the other members of the coalition, finally will persuade Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to withdraw his troops from Kuwait.

“We don’t expect to have any other meetings. This is it. We’ve exhausted all the other options,” White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater said, insisting that the Administration has gone “several extra miles” in its search for a peaceful resolution to the crisis.

Baker is carrying with him a letter from President Bush to the Iraqi president that, Fitzwater said, “will be very explicit in letting Saddam know that his only option is to get out of Kuwait.”

But, he said, there will be no new proposals from the United States. “This is not a time for gimmicks or new card tricks or anything else.”

Aziz, in an interview with CBS News broadcast Monday night, said he will be going to Geneva with new ideas and proposals, but he did not spell them out.

The House and Senate are scheduled to begin their debates Thursday, one day after the Baker-Aziz meeting. A House vote is likely by Saturday, but the Senate is not scheduled to vote until early next week.

Both chambers are expected to pass a resolution similar to that adopted by the United Nations, which authorizes military action if Iraq fails to withdraw from Kuwait by Jan. 15. In effect, it would be a declaration of war on Iraq.

But other resolutions also will be offered. Some opponents of military action will seek to force a vote on a measure calling on Bush to simply continue economic sanctions against Iraq. Others will press for a resolution saying it is the sole prerogative of Congress to declare war.

Although the majority for a U.N.-style resolution in both chambers is currently believed to be slim, congressional sources predict that the margin of victory will grow once it becomes apparent to all members that such a resolution is likely to pass.

Nevertheless, House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) said there is no way a resolution can be drafted that will satisfy Bush’s desire for a nearly unanimous vote of confidence from Congress.

“I see the vote much closer than some people are suggesting,” said Rep. David E. Bonior of Michigan, the chief deputy Democratic whip. “I see it about 50-50.”

But a House Republican source, citing the support Bush has found among some liberal Democrats, said: “It’s hard to imagine we can’t pull 100 Democrats out. That would put us well over the top.”

Fitzwater, meanwhile, made it clear that the White House--while yielding no ground--is trying to avoid a public clash with Congress as the deadline approaches.

“We’ll work with the Congress on this debate,” he said. “The less divisive and drawn-out the debate, the better it is from the standpoint of convincing Saddam that the American people and the United States are firmly behind this U.N. resolution.”

On the question of the Moscow summit, scheduled for Feb. 11-13, Fitzwater said he expects it to take place as scheduled, “but you never know.”

“We are having some delays” in putting the final touches on a treaty that would cut the superpowers’ arsenals of long-range nuclear weapons by roughly one-third, Fitzwater said, although some stockpiles would be cut in half.

In addition, the United States and the Soviet Union have been unable to reach complete agreement on counting Soviet troops and weapons being redeployed from Europe under the terms of the conventional weapons pact signed in November.

In Moscow, Soviet officials said they see the failure of negotiators to finish the strategic weapons agreement as the only potential obstacle to a summit.

“The summit is supposed to take place to sign the strategic arms reduction treaty, and if the treaty is ready, we definitely want the summit to take place in Moscow as scheduled in mid-February,” said Sergei Grigoriev, a spokesman for President Mikhail S. Gorbachev.

“Other developments, whether around the world or inside the Soviet Union, would not warrant a postponement or cancellation, in our view. The only reason that we can envision is that the treaty would not be ready, and we believe it will be,” Grigoriev said.

U.S. Ambassador Jack F. Matlock Jr. met Monday with Eduard A. Shevardnadze, the Soviet foreign minister, to discuss unresolved issues in the negotiations and to deliver a message from Baker.

Although Shevardnadze has agreed to stay on as foreign minister specifically to see the strategic arms treaty through to its signing, his dramatic announcement of his resignation last month has complicated and slowed the final negotiations, according to knowledgeable Soviet sources.

Foreign policy specialists said preparations for the summit meeting are proceeding more slowly than usual, in part because U.S. officials have focused so heavily on the gulf crisis and in part as a result of the uncertainty in the Soviet Foreign Ministry over who will replace Shevardnadze and when that will occur.

“Shevardnadze and Baker would ordinarily be planning a meeting in late January to work out the final agreements and set out the agenda,” a Soviet official said. “But Baker has been too busy, and we don’t know whether it would be Shevardnadze who would go.”

Times staff writers Sara Fritz and Paul Houston in Washington and Michael Parks in Moscow contributed to this report.