-Caveat Lector- >From http://chicagotribune.com/version1/article/0,1575,ART- 28723,00.html A lovely view, but a lousy venue for a ground war By Liz Sly Tribune Foreign Correspondent May 18, 1999 CONTINUING COVERAGE Read updated coverage on the bombings in Yugoslavia. MESSAGE BOARD What do you think about the war in the Balkans? KUKES, Albania -- With their soaring grandeur, snow-capped peaks and breathtaking views, the mountains of northern Albania could make a great tourist destination one day, if that sort of development ever arrives. But they would make for a lousy war. Amid renewed talk of a ground offensive to halt the Serbian expulsion of ethnic Albanians from Kosovo, the realities of waging war in the bleakly inhospitable terrain bordering Kosovo are frightening to contemplate, military experts and diplomatic analysts say. "It's going to be bloody -- bloody and brutal," said Doran Vienneau, a military observer with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe based in the northern town of Kukes. "The terrain is not conducive to a conventional war. Whoever's in the defensive obviously has the upper hand." A Yugoslav army commander pointedly reminded NATO on Monday of how difficult an invasion across the mountainous border would be. "The first people who will experience this at firsthand are those who try to enter our territory -- they will know they have entered a hell on Earth," said Gen. Nebojsa Pavkovic, commander of the 3rd Yugoslav Army. The dramatic precipices and sheer cliffs of the North Albanian Alps form a natural barrier between Albania and Yugoslavia. Not for nothing do locals refer to the range as the Accursed Mountains. Along the entire 150-mile border with Kosovo, there are only three natural passes through the mountains, and only one of those is navigable by vehicles. That is the pass at Morina, through which an estimated several hundred thousand refugees have surged into Albania since the NATO airstrikes began in March. The pass is reached along a twisting, narrow road that winds its way treacherously above steep precipices, well within range of Serbian artillery and snipers and clearly visible from the other side of the border. "The idea of moving ground troops through this terrain is absolutely out of the question. Everything between here and Kosovo is mountain," said a Western diplomat in the Albanian capital, Tirana. "I don't see how a ground war could come from here. It would have to come from someplace else." But if NATO decides to augment its air war with a ground assault, there may not be much choice. There is only one alternative route into Kosovo, and that lies through Macedonia, which has so far indicated it is unwilling to allow NATO troops to launch an invasion from its territory. If the goal were to take on all of Yugoslavia and dislodge Milosevic from Belgrade, it would make more sense to invade from the north, from Hungary or Croatia, military experts say. But if the war's aims were limited to driving Serbian forces from Kosovo, as seems more likely, there would be no land-offensive alternative but to launch it from Albania. As NATO's most enthusiastic and willing ally in the region, Albania is openly rooting for a ground campaign that will rid its border of the troublesome Serbs and allow it to send home the Kosovo refugees who have swarmed in. The Albanian government has handed over control of its airspace and all its military facilities to NATO forces in the undisguised hope that such an offensive will occur. With no political concerns to worry about, an invasion of Kosovo from Albania is doable, some military experts believe. But it would not be easy or quick, and there would be casualties. The speed and mobility afforded by the open deserts of Kuwait that assured allied forces a swift victory over Iraq's entrenched, million- man army in the Persian Gulf war would simply not be available in a strike from Albania. Because it would be difficult to move mechanized armor through the mountainous terrain, any invasion would probably have to come from airborne forces backed by attack helicopters, followed by hand-to- hand combat. "It's going to be tough, dirty, slug-it-out infantry fighting," said another Western diplomatic source. "This isn't the Arabian Gulf. It's going to be like fighting in Vietnam, only with different kinds of trees." It would be a war fought slowly and deliberately, with the attack helicopters clearing the way for troops to be landed by helicopter. "You'll clear one patch of ground, secure it, then move on to the next patch of ground," said the diplomat. "The fighting would go very slowly." Conventional military wisdom holds that an invading force needs to outnumber defenders 3-1. To counter a Serbian force estimated between 30,000 and 50,000 men, that would mean building up a force of 90,000 to 150,000. An airborne invasion, supported by the lethal firepower of the Apache helicopter, which was designed to counter numerical advantage, might make it possible to attack with a smaller force, experts say. The morale and resistance of Serbian forces is another unknown. It is entirely possible that, like the Iraqi army in 1991, they would not stand and fight. "Until now, their mission has been to kill civilians, rape women and burn houses, and they're very good at that. When they face a professional army for the first time, there's a real possibility they'll buckle and run," said the diplomatic source. "Equally, there's the possibility they'll stand and fight, and we'd have to plan for a worst-case scenario." But any kind of military buildup will also have to confront the logistical nightmare of Albania's poorly developed infrastructure. Roads are few and far between, and less than half of them are paved. Those that are paved are narrow and heavily cratered from years of disrepair. Though the capital, Tirana, is only about 120 miles from the Kosovo border, the journey takes eight hours along twisting, potholed roads. There is only one fully functioning port and one functioning airport, both just outside Tirana. It took three weeks for the U.S. Army to deploy 23 Apache attack helicopters and 3,000 support troops intended to augment the air campaign, far longer than the 7 to 10 days originally projected. "There's only so many planes, so many boats you can bring into Albania on any given day, and a lot of them are carrying relief supplies," one source said. Military officials have insisted the Apaches are in Albania only to support the air war, though it is clear they would play a crucial role in any ground war. Most observers hope it doesn't come to that. "Any kind of ground war here is a scary thought," said Vienneau. >From www.worldmag.com/world/issue/05-08-99/international_1.asp INTERNATIONAL <Picture> Knee deep in the big muddy "If I were president of the United States and I wanted to start World War III, I would do exactly as this president has done [in Yugoslavia]." That is the stark assessment of Sen. James Inhofe (R- Okla.), one of the few elected officials to oppose the NATO war. Sen. Inhofe, just back from a trip to visit American troops, says the debate over ground forces is over. The question is no longer whether, he says, but when. By Mindy Belz >From the beginning, Western leaders have framed the war in Yugoslavia in Nintendo-like, air-war-only terms; they have downplayed the prospect of committing ground troops in the conflict over Kosovo. But last week ground-war gossip reached a fever pitch during the NATO summit in Washington. Behind closed doors, frustrated that Yugoslav leaders were still not blinking after a relentless month of air attacks, NATO leaders were discussing ways to "update strategy." As British Prime Minister Tony Blair put it, "We must assess all options." By the end of the meeting, all the options seemed to come down to one: ground troops. Alliance members also agreed to enforce an oil embargo on Mr. Milosevic with a naval blockade, if necessary. When Russian officials, who boycotted the NATO ceremonies, replied that they would continue to ship oil to Yugoslavia, the prospect of a confrontation on the high seas with Russia emerged. "For all practical purposes, the debate about ground troops is over," said Sen. James Inhofe, an opponent of the NATO deployment. The Oklahoma Republican, just after returning from a trip to Albania to visit American soldiers, told WORLD that his predictions about a long war in Yugoslavia seem to be coming true. Given the escalation by NATO forces since this campaign began, the signs of imminent ground-force deployment are everywhere: � When the White House first agreed to provide Apache helicopter units to the NATO war effort, the number of troops accompanying them was to be just over 2,000, still far more than normally accompanies an attack helicopter battalion. When the last of the 24 Apaches arrived in Albania in late April, U.S. troops attached to that operation numbered 5,300. � Two weeks ago, President Clinton called for $6 billion in emergency appropriations to cover U.S. costs in the operation. By the time the bill came up for consideration last week, lawmakers and the White House had kicked the appropriation up to $12.9 billion. � Reserves are being readied. The president put into motion last month an order that could activate up to 33,000 National Guard and other reservists. Pentagon officials, who began calling up reservists last week, acknowledged last week also that Special Forces units-dedicated to search and rescue and surveillance-are already in place in the region. � In a little-noticed executive order last month, President Clinton declared Albania and other areas surrounding Kosovo an official "combat zone" for pay purposes. The designation means that any U.S. service member deployed in the region receives "imminent danger pay" of $150 per month above usual compensation, along with combat-zone tax exclusions. The designation includes land, sea, and air forces. � The forces attached to the U.S. Army combat units of Apache helicopters include land-based Bradley fighting vehicles, multiple launch rocket systems, Chinook and Black Hawk helicopters, and the support troops. An Apache crash in Albania on April 26 highlighted the risks of the new deployment. The crash occurred during a training mission near Tirana, the capital, and two pilots were evacuated to a mobile army hospital. Despite the risks, if ground forces are the only way to successfully conclude the operation, why not use them? That is the argument of many hawks, including Sen. John McCain (R- Ariz.), who wants Congress specifically to authorize widening the war. Mr. McCain, who spent five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, says the restricted air campaign and repeated declarations by Mr. Clinton that NATO would not deploy ground troops show "willful ignorance of every lesson we learned in Vietnam." Not all with hawkish tendencies agree with a key McCain presupposition: "The war against Serbia is necessary, and winning the war against Serbia is necessary as well." Mr. Inhofe, who chairs a Senate subcommittee on military readiness, unambiguously disagrees. "I have come to the conclusion that the strategic interests of our country are not there," he told WORLD. "We have no more strategic interest there than Europeans have in Haiti." He also believes the broadening war in the Balkans threatens key military operations against our "real enemies"-primarily Iraq and North Korea-at a time when U.S. force strength is half its level at the outset of the Persian Gulf War. "When people realize how thin we are right now, and then we have a contingency where we have serious strategic interests and we are unable to respond, then it is too late. My job on the committee is to make sure we do not get to the position where it is too late." Under present circumstances, U.S. commanders in Germany tell Mr. Inhofe, support units remaining after a ground force was deployed to the Balkans could not mobilize for a ground assault in Iraq, nor could they protect the 36,000 American troops in South Korea. Unlike most members of Congress, Mr. Inhofe closed his Capitol Hill office during the NATO summit. Rather than toast NATO officials in Washington or Brussels, he visited the newly arrived Apache helicopter battalions in Albania. In doing so, the senator pointedly boycotted an official NATO trip for lawmakers, after learning it would include only visits to NATO headquarters and consultation with NATO heads, rather than an opportunity to see the widening war up close. Mr. Inhofe instead accompanied a C-17 cargo sortie from a U.S. base in Germany to the newly minted U.S. posts in Albania. There, he said, he found soldiers "up to their knees in mud" as the last of the armored vehicle units was unloaded. Mr. Inhofe told WORLD: "If the Serbs sent in one mortar in the middle of our troops in that tent city-which they have the capacity to do- there is nothing there to protect them, no infrastructure," he said. Of perhaps greater concern, according to Mr. Inhofe, are reports he received from military sources in Germany that targets in Yugoslavia are being chosen, in effect, "by committee," including officials in Brussels and at the White House, rather than following a traditional command structure, as in the Persian Gulf War. "If I were president of the United States and I wanted to start World War III, I would do exactly as this president has done," said Mr. Inhofe. "This is how WWI started-the powers of the day took sides in a civil war. We are pushing Russia.... And of course our natural enemies are out there too." Some Republican presidential candidates are raising questions. "Is it in America's vital national security interest to be involved in a civil war in Yugoslavia?" asked former Vice President Dan Quayle on CNN's Crossfire. "I would say the answer to that question is no." Sen. Robert Smith and Pat Buchanan also oppose the mission outright, while Rep. John Kasich says he wants to give diplomacy another chance. Steve Forbes is against sending ground troops, but he and Lamar Alexander say NATO should arm and train Kosovo's ethnic Albanians. The objections of the skeptics, however, have gained little traction so far. Dovish members of Congress, mostly Democrats who under other circumstances would oppose military intervention in a sovereign nation that had not attacked the United States, are strangely silent. "Democrats are not opposed because they will not oppose Bill Clinton," ventured Mr. Inhofe. They have also long campaigned to use military might for humanitarian purposes-a key to Mr. Clinton's long- term strategy in the Balkans. Character counts here, as elsewhere. "People are petrified of this president because he can lie with such incredible conviction," said Mr. Inhofe. Hawks are encouraging the NATO campaign because they see an aggressive dictator in Mr. Milosevic, one who ought to be met with force. Mr. Inhofe says most of his colleagues are wrong: "Hawks should be opposed to this because we have got to be able to fight a real war, if that happens. Hawks don't want to waste our forces on humanitarian missions." The debate has also begun about whether NATO's humanitarianism is the real deal. So far, NATO's war has made life worse for the Kosovars, and unless NATO forces are willing to fight all the way to Belgrade and then maintain forces in the Balkan tinderboxes for years to come, it seems unlikely that life for the Kosovars will improve much. While many of Mr. Inhofe's conservative colleagues want to press forward with pragmatic, face-saving measures that will lengthen U.S. presence in the Balkans, Mr. Inhofe favors an honest pulling out. He argues that the United States can help its European allies by "softening up" key targets with continued air strikes, but he then wants American attention to turn to larger, more strategic foes. He also favors having civilians rather than soldiers supervising refugee resettlement. "I am on the wrong side," Mr. Inhofe confessed. "I'm seen as totally stupid." But he is not dismayed by his minority status. "If not one member of the leadership, or not one other member of the United States Senate agreed with me, I would be just as adamant. I consider that maybe I am the only way to keep this country out of war at this time," he said. In floor speeches and press statements, Mr. Inhofe repeatedly acknowledges that he is likely to lose the debate (although the House voted April 28 to bar ground troops without congressional approval). He told WORLD he believes the McCain resolution authorizing greater troop commitment will pass Congress. His strategy then? "I will continue to oppose sending troops in until the president sends his troops in. Once that happens, the most important thing we can do militarily is support our troops." Search for more articles about: � 1996, 1997, 1998 WORLD Magazine. [EMAIL PROTECTED] A<>E<>R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller, German Writer (1759-1805) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
