It did not take long for the new U.S. administration to face its first foreign-policy test. The foe was familiar: Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. The response, airstrikes, was expected, as was the result: international criticism of the action, few signs of its effectiveness and mounting concern over the failure of policy to counter the Iraqi dictator. The status quo is unsustainable; new approaches are needed. Unfortunately, there is agreement only that the United Nations-imposed sanctions regime must be changed, not on how.

According to Britain and the United States, Iraqi attacks on aircraft patrolling the "no-fly" zones have increased substantially in recent weeks. Reportedly, there was more antiaircraft fire in January than in all of last year. Fears that air-defense systems were being upgraded drove the two countries to act.

Unfortunately, the strikes were less than successful. U.S. officials concede that they were mediocre, with detectable damage on only about 40 percent of the radars. Worse, they were a diplomatic disaster. Although candidate George W. Bush criticized President Bill Clinton for acting unilaterally in foreign policy, the attacks open him to the same criticism. They have been condemned by France and Spain, ostensible allies, as well as by friendly governments in the region such as Jordan, Turkey and Egypt.