HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------


NYT. 28 April 2002. U.S. Blueprint to Topple Hussein Envisions Big
Invasion Next Year. Excerpts.

WASHINGTON --The Bush administration, in developing a potential approach
for toppling President Saddam Hussein of Iraq, is concentrating its
attention on a major air campaign and ground invasion, with initial
estimates contemplating the use of 70,000 to 250,000 troops.

The administration is turning to that approach after concluding that a
coup in Iraq would be unlikely to succeed and that a proxy battle using
local forces there would be insufficient to bring a change in power.

But senior officials now acknowledge that any offensive would probably
be delayed until early next year, allowing time to create the right
military, economic and diplomatic conditions. These include avoiding
summer combat in bulky chemical suits, preparing for a global oil price
shock, and waiting until there is progress toward ending the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Until recently, the administration had contemplated a possible
confrontation with Mr. Hussein this fall, after building a case at the
United Nations that the Iraqi leader is unwilling to allow the kind of
highly intrusive inspections needed to prove that he has no weapons of
mass destruction.

Now that schedule seems less realistic. Conflict in the Middle East has
widened a rift within the administration over whether military action
can be undertaken without inflaming Arab states and prompting
anti-American violence throughout the region.

In his public speeches, President Bush still sounds as intent as ever
about ousting Mr. Hussein, making it clear that he will not let the
Middle East crisis obscure his goal. But he has not issued any order for
the Pentagon to mobilize its forces, and today there is no official "war
plan."

Instead, policy makers and operational commanders are trying to sketch
out the broad outlines of the confrontation they expect.

Among the many questions they must address is where to base air and
ground forces in the region.

Even before Mr. Bush's tense meeting with Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi
Arabia on Thursday, the Pentagon was working on the assumption that it
might have to carry out any military action without the use of bases in
the kingdom.

The planning now anticipates the possible extensive use of bases for
American forces in Turkey and Kuwait, with Qatar as the replacement for
the sophisticated air operations center in Saudi Arabia, and with Oman
and Bahrain playing important roles.

As to any war plan itself, the military expects to be asked for a more
traditional approach than the unconventional campaign in Afghanistan.

Such an approach would resemble the Persian Gulf war in style if not in
size and would be fought with even more modern weapons and more dynamic
tactics.

"The president has not made any decisions," a senior Defense Department
official said. "But any efforts against Iraq will not look like what we
did in Afghanistan."

In terms of diplomatic reaction from the region, Vice President Dick
Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and their senior aides
contend that Arab leaders would publicly protest but secretly celebrate
Mr. Hussein's downfall -- as long as the operation were decisive -- and
that ousting him would actually ease the job of calming violence between
Israel and the Palestinians.

"It has been the consistent drumbeat from our friends in the region that
if we are serious, they will be with us," said one administration
official in this camp.

Senior administration, Pentagon and military officials say that
consensus has emerged that there is little chance for a military coup to
unseat Mr. Hussein from within, even with the United States exerting
economic and military pressure and providing covert assistance.

Officials said the nascent plans for a heavy air campaign and land
assault already included rough numbers of troops, ranging from a minimum
of about 70,000 to 100,000 -- one Army corps or a reinforced corps -- to
a top of 250,000 troops, which still would be only half the number used
in the gulf war.

Other than troops from Britain, no significant contribution of allied
forces is anticipated.

The military requirements for changing the government in Baghdad would
be vastly different than the gulf war mission, which was to drive an
entrenched enemy from a large occupied area, senior military officers
said.

"We would not need to hold territory and protect our flanks to the same
extent," one officer said. "You would see a higher level of maneuver and
airborne assault, dropping in vertically and enveloping targets -- less
slogging mile by mile through the desert."

Even so, officers said, moving tens of thousands of troops to a region
with access more limited than in the gulf war could be a logistical
challenge.

The modern American military has never fought the kind of dangerous and
complicated urban battles that might be needed to oust the Hussein
government.

While the Pentagon has focused on how to remove Mr. Hussein, the White
House is also mindful of the effects of a war on oil supplies -- either
because the fighting itself would disrupt the flow of oil, or because
Saudi Arabia and other Arab producers would feel obliged because of
political pressure at home to cut back on exports to the United States.

R. Glenn Hubbard, chairman of the White House's Council of Economic
Advisers, said the administration had examined the possible effects of a
spike in oil prices caused by spreading unrest in the Middle East or an
invasion of Iraq.

He said a surge in oil prices would probably not by itself have a large
effect on the American economy.


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Barry Stoller
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProletarianNews

---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================

Reply via email to