The desert invasion of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein, which spared nearly every congressional incumbent heat from the savings and loan debacle and the failure to reduce the budget deficit, also relegated to a political oasis the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee David Souter.

The country will suffer in the first case. Congress is ripe for change and the dual outrages of the S&Ls and the budget fiasco could have provided the catalyst for a spontaneous, electoral revolution against House and Senate incumbents. For these elected officials, Hussein arrived like the cavalry, bailing them out when they were utter failures at doing the same for the banking institutions and their own spending proposals.

In Souter’s case, the country will benefit. The nominee originally was to be served up to the Judiciary Committee in an atmosphere made hostile by the abortion debate. He was to be the main, pre-election course for liberal Democrats — prime meat for the pro-choice faction and a great way to play to the folks back home. Fortunately for the nation, posturing on the Judiciary has been totally upstaged by the Thief of Baghdad, his tanks, his oil and his obdurate challenge to the civilized world.

Forced out of the spotlight, and off center stage, the Judiciary Committee has conducted instead a responsible inquiry into Souter’s qualifications.

He has been questioned on abortion — the issue begged to be explored — but it did not become an inquisition. He has been asked his views on privacy and the death penalty. He has answered each question in a manner that was thoughtful, articulate and impressive. Souter’s credentials and his past have survived unprecedented public scrutiny. It is the one bright development at the conclusion of an otherwise bleak political summer.