Headlines from Debka
Turkey May reconsider
North Korea Prods Japan Into Buildup
Headlines from Debka March 17
“US officer” Joins Lebanese ex-President for Last-Ditch Mediation March 17
New Afghan Army Brigades Activated March 17
EU Prepares for Peacekeeping March 17
Debka Says War To Start in 48 Hours March 16
Pakistan to get $305m aid under one-time waiver March 16
S draws up Iraq list for war crimes prosecution March 16
Three Al-Qaida Operatives Arrested in Pakistan March 16
U.S. Renews N. Korea Flights March 15
10 U.S. ships leave Turkey for Gulf March 15
Blair unruffled by resignation threats March 15
Saddam digging in for the siege of Baghdad March 14
Iraq Army Plays Large Role in post-Saddam Reconstruction March 14
US, Britain Massing Colossal Firepower March 14
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar March 13
Is the war good for the Jews? March 13
British SAS in Iraq War March 12
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda March 12
1
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
Pentagon official to VOA: US forces poised to start offensive any moment are prepared for Baghdad’s possible retaliation with chemical or biological weapons
Turkey and United States close deal permitting US troops to transit Turkish bases for invasion of North Iraq and opening airspace to US and allied warplanes. Accord does not cover participation of Turkish troops in northern front action.
Iraq rejects US ultimatum for Saddam Hussein to go into exile or face war.
US President’s address to nation at 0300 IST will be broadcast by all networks. He is expected to announce diplomatic window for disarming Iraq is closed and Saddam must leave country.
DEBKAfile's Washington sources: Offer may be extended to 48 hours grace for Saddam to depart with small family group if US-British forces assured peaceful entry into Iraq without resistance [Editor: This was the case when President Bush delivered his 2000 Hours Eastern US Time.]
Israel declares partial mobilization of reserves Monday night, especially air force and air defense units. Population is ordered to prepare to seal rooms and await instructions in coming hours. Israeli sources expect war outbreak in matter of hours.
Earlier, US, UK, Spain withdrew joint “second resolution” on Iraq submitted to UN Security Council, holding Baghdad in material breach of Resolution 1441.
UN Secretary Annan orders all UN personnel to leave Iraq.
British parliament votes on military action against Iraq Tuesday morning. Monday, Commons leader Robin Cook resigned senior cabinet post to protest offensive against Iraq without Security Council second resolution.
Turkey's parliament might reconsider letting U.S. troops use its territory if war with Iraq breaks out, according to Turkish media reports.
Turkish officials, including the president, prime minister, foreign minister and armed forces chief, met Monday to discuss the possible war with Iraq.
After the meeting, a government spokesman said, "Turkey must fulfill its obligations to its allies," setting off a flood of speculation that parliament would vote on allowing U.S. troops to use Turkish bases.
Parliament has a regular session scheduled for Tuesday, but it was not known whether the troops issue would be on the agenda.
Ankara had been under intense pressure to allow U.S. forces to use its territory to open a northern front against Iraq.
Parliament rejected a measure this month that would have let the United States base 62,000 troops in the country.
N. Korea prods Japan into buildup
Extracts from an article by Paul Wiseman USA Today
TOKYO — Japan is preparing to launch spy satellites, speeding up development of missile defenses, building its commando forces and expanding the range of its air force in response to what it sees as a growing threat from North Korea.
In addition, a few right-wing politicians here are suggesting that Japan build nuclear weapons to counter North Korea's aggressive moves. That idea has almost no public support in the only country ever to have been struck with nuclear weapons. But the topic is no longer taboo.
North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il seems intent on assembling a nuclear arsenal just 400 to 500 miles from Japan. Since October, North Korea has admitted pursuing nuclear weapons, reactivated a nuclear complex mothballed in 1994 and issued warnings about an impending war in an apparent attempt to jolt the United States into signing a non-aggression pact.
Japan's neighbors, mindful of its aggression during World War II, are warily watching its responses to North Korea's actions. China, which has nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, has spoken out against any effort by Japan to develop missile defenses. It says such a program threatens regional stability and could trigger an arms race.
Many leaders here say this country has no choice but to boost its military capabilities. "Japan ought to act like Rambo," says Shingo Nishimura, a right-wing member of Japan's parliament. Japan is:
· Speeding up development of a missile-defense system. Since North Korea fired a missile over Japan in 1998, Japan has been conducting research with the United States. A test could take place soon.
· Readying spy satellites. Japan has long relied on U.S. satellites but complains that the Americans are stingy about sharing information. The first Japanese launch of a spy satellite is set for March 28.
· Beefing up defenses against commando attacks, a threat posed by North Korea's vast special forces. Last year, Japan created a special 660-man regiment dedicated to defending its 5,000 islands from amphibious assaults. This year, it will set up a 300-man special operations unit assigned to defend cities against guerrilla attacks.
· Working on in-flight refueling of military aircraft, which would allow its F-15 fighter jets to reach North Korea and come back home. Japan has ordered four Boeing 767s to be used as tankers.
Return To Top March 18, 2003 March 17, 2003
Headlines from Debka
“US officer” Joins Lebanese ex-President for Last-Ditch Mediation
New Afghan Army Brigades Activated
EU Prepares for Peacekeeping
Debka Says War To Start in 48 Hours March 16
Pakistan to get $305m aid under one-time waiver March 16
S draws up Iraq list for war crimes prosecution March 16
Three Al-Qaida Operatives Arrested in Pakistan March 16
U.S. Renews N. Korea Flights March 15
10 U.S. ships leave Turkey for Gulf March 15
Blair unruffled by resignation threats March 15
Saddam digging in for the siege of Baghdad March 14
Iraq Army Plays Large Role in post-Saddam Reconstruction March 14
US, Britain Massing Colossal Firepower March 14
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar March 13
Is the war good for the Jews? March 13
British SAS in Iraq War March 12
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda March 12
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
Debka Headlines Monday March 17th
Israeli hospitals told to complete sealing process of wards and facilities by Monday morning. Sunday noon, Israel’s First-Aid rescue service Magen David Adom moved command and communications centers to bomb-proof shelters
DEBKAfile’s Military Sources: Full-scale US-British offensive against Iraq is scheduled to begin Monday, 24 hours after Azores summit
First stage: Combined bomber-missile strikes against strategic targets, including government centers, military and civilian communications systems, radio and television broadcasting centers, transport hubs.
Preparations wind up Sunday night to fly and parachute ground troops into Iraq from launching bases in and outside Middle East. US 82nd Airborne Division will be flown in from Afghanistan
At Azores summit, Blair promised Bush British 1st armored division would take part in assault on Basra, vitally augmenting allied southern advance
World has another 24 hours to see if diplomacy will work – Bush at end of Azores summit Sunday with British and Spanish prime ministers. Three leaders declared Security Council Resolution 1441 provided last opportunity for Saddam Hussein to disarm or face serious consequences.
They issued final appeal to international community to issue last strong, unified ultimatum for Saddam’s immediate unconditional disarmament. Bush: He can avert war by leaving Iraq.
Blair pledges protection of Iraq’s territorial integrity. He declared natural resources will remain property of people of Iraq
Earlier Sunday, Chirac's proposal of 30-day deadline for arms inspections rejected instantly by US vice president Cheney: Further delay helps no-one but Saddam Hussein
DEBKAfile Exclusive from Iraqi underground sources: Attempt on life of Saddam’s elder son Uday was made on March 8 at al-Jadariya Boating Club on Tigris River. He is believed to have escaped with injuries from this second assassination attempt, but his three bodyguards were killed.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly reveals: Also on March 8, former Lebanese president Gemayel took US colonel to Saddam’s palace on secret mission to persuade him to leave and prevent war:
If you don’t leave, we’ll target you,” said US Colonel. Saddam replied:”I’ll send you home in a box” and “I’m not afraid to die.” Read resume of conversation and Gemayel mission below
Saddam puts Iraq on war footing day Bush meets British and Spanish premiers for emergency summit in Portuguese Azores. Takes personal command of air and surface-surface missile forces. Four military districts ordered to “destroy any foreign aggression”. Younger son Qusay in command of Baghdad
High terror alert prompts Israel’s closure of Palestinian areas Saturday midnight, 24 hours before Jewish Purim festival begins night of March 17
IDF investigate death of 23-year American activist Rachel Corrie in Gaza Strip town of Rafah whom Palestinian sources say was run over blocking a military bulldozer as it flattened Palestinian sniping positions. A group of peace protesters has been impeding Israel efforts to clear terrain of firing positions.
“US officer” Joins Lebanese ex-President for Last-Ditch Mediation
For full story click Debka.com
A secret Washington-sponsored mediation effort, in progress since early March, has just about run its course in the diplomatic twilight zone behind the emergency summit taking place at Praia Da Vitoria in the Azores Islands of Portugal Sunday, March 16, between US president George W. Bush and the two European prime ministers, Tony Blair of Britain and of Spain. As they three allies prepared to meet, their options were further reduced by a joint statement from France Russia and Germany that they were against submitting Saddam any ultimatum to disarm. Saddam, however, was not waiting. He set the scene for the Azores summit by putting his country on a war footing, taking command of the Iraqi air force and dividing the country into four military districts with orders to “destroy any foreign aggression”. His younger son Qusay was put in command of the key Baghdad district.
That move was the Iraqi ruler’s reply to a secret US mediator’s final effort to persuade him to remove himself in...
New Afghan Army brigades Activated
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay, extracts from an article by Catherine Davis of the BBC.
The first two brigades of the Afghan national army are ready for deployment after completing 10 weeks of training. At an official ceremony just outside Kabul, the Afghan leader, Hamid Karzai, urged the soldiers to make their contribution to the country's reconstruction.
The two brigades marched proudly past President Karzai and senior military officials, before standing to attention on a muddy plain flanked by snow-capped mountains.
The so-called activation of these two brigades has symbolic significance - one observer said it showed the national army was an established organisation within the government and that it had an authoritative presence in the country.
Around 2,000 soldiers are said to have been trained so far, while thousands of other Afghans carry arms, and local warlords remain powerful figures. Attempts to form a national force have been hampered by a lack of non-partisan volunteers, and divisions over how much representation different ethnic factions should have.
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
The European Union has signed an agreement with Nato to allow the exchange of confidential information between the two organisations. The accord was signed by the Greek foreign minister George Papandreou - whose country holds the rotating EU presidency - and Nato secretary general George Robertson at a meeting of EU defence ministers in Athens.
The agreement, which comes after months of negotiation, means the Europeans will be able to use Nato's logistical and planning facilities. It will also pave the way for the replacement of Nato peacekeepers by EU troops in Macedonia - in what will be the EU's first ever military operation.
The meeting is another step towards the EU goal of creating a common foreign and security policy.
Around 300 European peacekeeping troops are expected to be deployed in Macedonia later this month, which will be a critical moment in realising this goal.
According to the BBC's Richard Galpin in Athens, if enough progress is made in establishing the EU's military wing, it is possible it will also take over the much bigger Nato peacekeeping operation in Bosnia next year. But the concept of a common foreign and security policy has been thrown into disarray by the Iraq crisis. European member states are deeply divided on how to disarm Saddam Hussein's regime.
Return To Top March 17, 2003 March 16, 2003
Debka Says War To Start in 48 Hours
Pakistan to get $305m aid under one-time waiver
US draws up Iraq list for war crimes prosecution
Three Al-Qaida Operatives Arrested in Pakistan
U.S. Renews N. Korea Flights March 15
10 U.S. ships leave Turkey for Gulf March 15
Blair unruffled by resignation threats March 15
Saddam digging in for the siege of Baghdad March 14
Iraq Army Plays Large Role in post-Saddam Reconstruction March 14
US, Britain Massing Colossal Firepower March 14
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar March 13
Is the war good for the Jews? March 13
Headlines from Debka March 12
British SAS in Iraq War March 12
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda March 12
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion March 11
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
Debka Says War To Start in 48 hours
Debka, the Israeli newsletter, says that the Iraq war will begin in 48 hours. It notes that US and British aircraft are already flying up to 1000 sorties a day, and by any definition this is the start of the war. [What they are hitting is less clear. Editor] US, UK, and Jordanian special forces are already in western Iraq looking for SSMs and other systems capable of delivering CBW agents.
Meanwhile, ABC-TV reports that US commanders have at least been given a benchmark date for the start of war. Though it is a planning date and not an actual date, it is possibly the last step before the offensive.
ABC-TV also reports that Iraqi Kurds have started evacuating their villages, heading for Kurdish controlled territory, and that Iraqis are leaving the country. Shops are being shut down in Baghdad. With reference to the Kurds, the US has apparently told Turkey that all previous arrangements made on account of the Kurds are now off the table. The rumors in this respect have been so extensive, however, its hard to tell what the truth of the matter is. We cannot see, however, how Turkish forces can be allowed into Iraq for whatever reason, particularly since Turkey has opted out of the war.
Pakistan to get $305m aid under one-time waiver
For full story click Jang
NEW YORK: Before leaving for the Azores islands to hold summit with the prime ministers of UK, Spain and Portugal, President George W Bush signed a one-time waiver of the coup-related sanctions for Pakistan.
This waiver would release $305 million assistance allocated by the US Congress in the fiscal year 2003 budget. It will allow Pakistan to purchase some spare-parts or other military ware. "It is not lifting of the sanctions, it is one time waiver specifically for this allocated amount of $305 million," sources told The News.
The sanctions were enforced after General Pervez Musharraf took over by dismissing the Nawaz Sharif government on October 12, 1999 in a bloodless coup. Interestingly these US sanctions continue to be in effect despite the fact that an elected Jamali government is functioning and elections of the Senate and National Assembly are complete in Pakistan.
Bush ordered a waiver of the sanctions, saying it was "important to United States efforts to respond to, deter, or prevent acts of international terrorism."
US draws up Iraq list for war crimes prosecution
WASHINGTON: The Bush administration has drawn up a list of about a dozen senior Iraqi officials, including President Saddam Hussein's two sons, who could be tried for war crimes in postwar Iraq or by an international tribunal, a senior American official said on Saturday.
Top Iraqi military and security commanders are on the list. They include President Saddam Hussein's lieutenant, Ali Hassan al-Majid, known also as "Chemical Ali", who is blamed for a 1988 campaign against restive Kurds in northern Iraq that killed up to 100,000 people.
The most notorious incident of the campaign was a chemical attack on the Kurdish town of Halabja in which 5,000 Iraqi Kurds are said to have died from mustard and other poisonous gases, the State Department said.
Commanders who engineered the occupation of Kuwait in 1990, which was reversed in 1991 by a US-led invasion of Iraq, and those in Saddam's "small clique" who brutally extinguished a Shiite uprising in southern Iraq in 1991, also are on the list, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
They would be detained and could be tried either by Iraqi courts or internationally, or possibly both, the official said.
Saddam's two sons, Odai and Qusai, also are on the list.
Three al-Qaeda operatives held in Lahore
[No one can doubt the Pakistanis are at last starting to genuinely cooperate with the US in the matter of the Al Qaida. Without any intention of embarrassing our Pakistani friends, may we nonetheless ask why so many of these terrorists have sought refuge in Pakistan in the first place? Editor]
ISLAMABAD: Pakistani authorities said on Saturday they had arrested a leading al-Qaeda member, Moroccan national, Yasir al-Jaziri in Lahore. An intelligence source said the capture was made thanks to information received from another senior al-Qaeda figure, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, who was arrested in Rawalpindi two weeks ago and is now in US custody.
Khalid is often portrayed as number three in al-Qaeda, behind Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman Al Zawahiri, and is suspected of being a leading figure behind the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. "He (al-Jaziri) is less important than Khalid Sheikh Muhammad but he is quite an important person," Secretary Interior Ministry Tasneem Noorani told Reuters. Noorani said al-Jaziri had been picked up in Gulberg suburb of Lahore on Saturday evening.
Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed said al-Jaziri was perhaps one level down from Muhammad in the organisation. "This is the biggest catch since Khalid Sheikh," the intelligence source said, adding a second man, an Afghan called Gulzeb, alias Jaffar, had also been captured.
The intelligence source said a third man, a Pakistani who fought with the Taliban in Afghanistan, was also arrested in a second raid in the Gulberg area later on Saturday night. Al-Jaziri is thought to be involved in al-Qaeda's business operations, and the intelligence source described him as a US-educated "computer whiz". Intelligence sources said local experts were still trying to crack the security codes on two laptops and some CDs which were found at the one-room apartment. Another source said travellers cheques and maps of "various installations" around the country had also been seized.
There have been a series of bomb attacks, mainly on Western and Christian targets in Pakistan since September 11, 2001, and al Qaeda has been linked to several of those attacks. "We were chasing him for some three months and this raid was conducted along with American FBI," one source said. The FBI is helping Pakistan track down al-Qaeda members who may be hiding in the country, but Pakistani authorities deny FBI agents actually take part in raids.
The Senior Superintendent of Police in Lahore said his men had not taken part in the operation. "I didn't even know an arrest had been made, and I still don't know who has been arrested or why," Aftab Cheema told Reuters.
Return To Top March 16, 2003 March 15, 2003
U.S. Renews N. Korea Flights
10 U.S. ships leave Turkey for Gulf after appeal by Bush fails
Blair unruffled by resignation threats
Saddam digging in for the siege of Baghdad March 14
Iraq Army Plays Large Role in post-Saddam Reconstruction March 14
US, Britain Massing Colossal Firepower March 14
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar March 13
Is the war good for the Jews? March 13
Headlines from Debka March 12
British SAS in Iraq War March 12
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda March 12
Thirty Five ‘Terror Groups’ Active In India March 12
Last pieces in place March 11
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion March 11
1st ID sets up new base near Iraqi border March 11
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
For full story please click Associated Press
WASHINGTON - North Korea made no effort to interfere with a resumption of U.S. Air Force reconnaissance flights off its coast in international airspace, officials said Thursday.
Adm. Thomas Fargo, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the reconnaissance missions had resumed Wednesday, but he declined to discuss details of the flights or actions taken to enhance their safety.
Other officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the U.S. plane encountered no interference.
Japan Threats North Korea Sanctions
TOKYO: Japan threatened to impose economic sanctions on North Korea if it would test a ballistic missile, said sources Friday.
Possible sanctions would include a halt to cash transfers and exports to the North Korea, said the government sources quoted by Japanese media. North Korea tested two short-range missiles in recent weeks, prompting speculation it is preparing to launch a longer-range version similar to one it fired over Japan in 1998.
10 U.S. ships leave Turkey for Gulf after appeal by Bush fails
For full story, please click World Tribune
ANKARA — Turkey and the United States have agreed on rules of engagement in northern Iraq but have failed to agree on Washington's request to deploy 62,000 American troops in Turkey.
Ankara, despite a personal appeal by President George Bush, has also not agreed to a U.S. request for use of Turkey's air space. U.S. officials said that in response Washington has ordered that 10 naval ships leave the Turkish region and head for the Persian Gulf.
Turkish government sources said Ankara and Washington have agreed on the zones of operation by Turkish military forces as well as their mission.
Under the agreement, Turkey has pledged to keep its troops within 20 kilometers of the Iraqi border. Turkey now has more than 20,000 troops who operate within a 40 kilometer zone inside Iraq.
But The U.S.-Turkish accord includes a commitment by Ankara not to attack Kurdish or any other civilian targets in the area. The accord also calls on Turkey to provide help to refugees.
The sources said the United States has agreed that Turkey can use force for self-defense to protect the Turkmen community and prevent the occupation of oil regions in northern Iraq. Turkey is also allowed to use force to prevent the establishment of an independent Kurdish state.
Blair unruffled by resignation threats
Story by Rashmee Z. Ahmed, writing in the Times of India
LONDON: Tony Blair’s leadership remained paradoxically unchallenged on Friday even as he was told he could face a second Cabinet resignation if he goes to war against Iraq without a second United Nations resolution.
Late on Friday, Downing Street officials confirmed that Blair, President Bush and Spanish Prime Minister Aznar would be meeting in a neutral third country for a Sunday summit to thrash out the way ahead to disarming Saddam Hussein with or without a United Nations resolution.
Bush is expected to meet Blair and Aznar, sponsors of the disputed second United Nations resolution on Iraqi disarmament, in the Azores, the nine islands owned by Portugal in the north Atlantic. The Portuguese Prime Minister is to chair the summit.
On Thursday, Blair, pilloried in a gloating French press as the only likely pre-conflict "casualty" of George W. Bush's impending Gulf War II, was told that Robin Cook would resign along with Clare Short.
Cook, former foreign secretary and currently leader of the House of Commons, threatened to resign less than a week after his cabinet colleague, International Development Secretary Clare Short went public with her criticism of Blair’s "recklessness" in pushing a war agenda.
On Friday afternoon, Downing Street officials said "fluid and dynamic" diplomacy over Iraq was continuing, even as they revealed Blair had spoken to French president Jacque Chirac for the first time in days. Till then, Blair’s incandescent officials had accused the French of "poisoning" the diplomatic bloodstream by threatening to veto any future motion on Iraq.
The intense and fraught diplomatic choreography is expected to boost Blair’s position even as a significant section of his governing Labour Party expressed dissatisfaction with his hawkish attitude to war. But political observers said it was "remarkable" that criticism of Blair was still not credibly expected to boil up and destabilise the Labour Partys most successful two-term landslide prime minister in years.
On Friday, Blair’s biographer John Rentoul said Blair could even "emerge stronger" from a war, even though there was an outside chance of a leadership challenge in the autumn.
"There is more than a touch in this of what people said about Margaret Thatcher," said Rentoul, "You don't always agree with her, but at least you know where she stands."
In virtual reaffirmation, by the end of the working week, Blair’s most outspoken Cabinet minister, Clare Short, emerged from a meeting with the Prime Minister saying she was "still in government".
Return To Top March 15, 2003 March 14, 2003
Saddam digging in for the siege of Baghdad
Iraq Army Plays Large Role in post-Saddam Reconstruction
US, Britain Massing Colossal Firepower
The reality is war, and soon March 13
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar March 13
Is the war good for the Jews? March 13
Headlines from Debka March 12
British SAS in Iraq War March 12
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda March 12
Thirty Five ‘Terror Groups’ Active In India March 12
We are Hours Behind Osama: Pakistan ISI March 12
US, Indian marines to hold joint exercises March 12
Last pieces in place March 11
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion March 11
1st ID sets up new base near Iraqi border March 11
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
Saddam Digging In For Seige of Baghdad
From Times of London by Michael Evans
PRESIDENT Saddam Hussein wants to suck coalition troops into street warfare in Baghdad, Britain’s top military commander in the Gulf said yesterday.
“They’re going for a Stalingrad siege,” said Air Marshal Brian Burridge, referring to one of the bloodiest battles of the Second World War, when more than a million Russians and Germans died during six months of fighting in the streets of the Soviet City of Stalingrad.
Acording to intelligence reports, the Iraqi President has constructed two concentric defensive lines around Baghdad. They are manned by about five Republican Guard divisions of some 40,000 soldiers. Another defensive ring inside the city consists of about 20,000 Special Republican Guard troops dedicated to protecting Saddam and his regime.
Air Marshal Burridge was confident that the Iraqi leader’s strategy would fail. “They want to entice us into urban warfare. But that makes two assumptions: that there will be hand-to-hand fighting and that those ordered to do this will do so willingly. There have to be doubts.”
He said that such “static” defences did not pose a major obstacle to a coalition force equipped with the most advanced technology. “We know where every moving part is and technology allows us to go round it,” he said.
US commanders have talked of mounting focused attacks on the regime’s strongholds in the city, using heavy armour as well as airpower — strike aircraft using missiles guided by forces on the ground with laser target markers. The coalition’s battle plan did not envisage playing Saddam at his own game, said Air Marshal Burridge, a former Nimrod pilot who hunted Soviet submarines during the Cold War.
In his first interview since his appointment as head of the 45,000 British troops waiting to go to war, he also disclosed that his biggest fear was that Saddam would use chemical weapons against his own people to slow the invasion.
He predicted that liberated Iraqis would lead British and US troops to Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction. He said that British troops would play a significant role in the fighting and that several thousand US Marines would serve under a British commander.
Looking relaxed despite the prospect of imminent war, the 53-year-old UK National Contingent Commander was speaking in his sparse office inside his headquarters in Qatar at Camp as Sayliyah, a security zone protected by layers of armed guards and chicanes of concrete blocks where every approaching vehicle, save the Air Marshal’s Jeep, is rigorously searched.
“If there is a war and they fight, we’ll hit them hard,” he said. “I don’t want to create expectations (of a short war). We are innately cautious and conservative for a number of reasons, but I would like to think that we’re deft and professional and clever enough to do it quickly.” He promised that the campaign would not “lay waste” to Iraq. The aim was to disarm Saddam, not to destroy the country.
…Air Marshal Burridge acknowledged that the Iraqi leader was “a dangerous bastard” and there was a possibility that he had a surprise up his sleeve. His greatest fear was that Saddam might launch a chemical attack against his own people in order to divert advancing US and British divisions. Coalition troops could cope with a chemical or biological attack because they had the right clothing and equipment, but the Iraqi people had no way of protecting themselves.
However, after months of detailed planning alongside General Tommy Franks, the commander of US Central Command who will lead the coalition force, Air Marshal Burridge said that there would be a swift response at the first sign of Saddam resorting to chemical weapons against the Iraqi population. It would be ironic if he used the very weapons he was now denying he possessed, he added.
He played down the threat of Iraq burning its oil wells. “Setting fire to oil wells is not a military weapon, it’s an economic and environmental one. If Saddam’s boys want to torch their oilfields, I think the Iraqi people will have something to say about that.”
…He added: “Human intelligence (Iraqis) will be the key. The weapons of mass destruction are there and we will find them.” As soon as the coalition troops crossed the border and progressed towards Baghdad, the areas behind them would be in a “post-war” situation, he said, so that Iraqi people with knowledge of where some weapons might be hidden would be free to speak out.
He described the period immediately after an invasion as a “rolling miasma of change”, with people coming forward with information while coalition forces provided humanitarian aid. Iraqi troops who surrendered would be treated as prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention and would be well looked after, although he admitted that mass surrenders would be one of three obstacles to a rapid advance.
The other two were having to deal with displaced civilians and confronting the aftermath of a chemical attack on the Iraqi people.
Iraqi army plays large role in U.S. plans for a post-Saddam reconstruction
European Stars & Stripes by Lisa Burgess
ARLINGTON, Va. — Bush administration officials unveiled plans Tuesday for managing Iraq after a war, describing a scenario that would keep most of the country’s civilian officials in place, paying the Iraqi military to rebuild damaged infrastructure, and sending hundreds of “free Iraqi” expatriots to the provinces to act as liaisons with the U.S.-run “interim transitional civil administration.”
The reconstruction plans, which were described to reporters by two senior defense officials at a Pentagon briefing, were the first public glimpse of just how the U.S. government intends to manage Iraq after any war that eliminates Saddam Hussein.
The entire rebuilding effort, which is dubbed the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, is in the hands of the Pentagon, which was directed Jan. 20 by President Bush to set up an office for postwar planning.
The office, headed by retired Army Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, “started very slowly,” but there are now about 200 people from a variety of military and civilian agencies on its staff, a one of the officials told reporters.
The office’s goal is “to stay as long as necessary to be able to stand up a government of Iraq, and get out as fast as we can,” the official said.
Some of the office’s personnel are already in the Persian Gulf, preparing for an immediate entry into Iraq when the fighting stops, even though Bush has not declared war.
The group’s plans call for a single civil administrator deputy — Garner — to report to Gen. Tommy Franks, commander of U.S. Central Command.
Beneath Garner are three different U.S. coordinators, whose names a Pentagon spokesman said it would be “premature” to announce.
The trio includes a civil administration coordinator, who will deal principally with public health, law enforcement, commerce, foreign affairs, justice, education, agriculture, banking, and economic development; a humanitarian operations coordinator, who will deal with emergency relief, refugees, and civil affairs; and a reconstruction coordinator, who will be in charge of issues such as energy, power, roads and waterways.
Iraqi soldiers, who will be placed on the U.S. payroll, the official said, will do the actual rebuilding of Iraq.
“Our goal is to have a good portion of the Iraq regular army — not the Republican Guard — rebuild their own country,” the official said. “This also allows us not to demobilize immediately and put a lot of poor people on the street.”
A separate triad of U.S. coordinators will be in charge of the north, south, and central regions of Iraq, respectively, assisted by “over 100 free Iraqis” who now live in the United States, Great Britain, and elsewhere, the official said.
The expatriot Iraqis will be sent to 17 Iraqi provinces and to Baghdad to coordinate with local officials on the best way to rebuild and manage the regions, the official said.
The reconstruction office will also place “two or three free Iraqis with the right skill sets [and who] understand the democratic process” in each of Iraq’s existing government ministries, the officials said.
The free Iraqis will act as advisers and “facilitate” the ministry’s operation. But the ministries will continue to be run by indigenous Iraqis, he said.
Asked why Iraqis would ever accept a new government run by the same people who operate the ministries under Saddam Hussein, the official said, “There will be a vetting process” of ministry officials, “but we anticipate that the really bad people won’t be there when we get there.”
Recruiting and hiring the free Iraqis is going very slowly, the official said. “It’ll happen, but it’s not happening as fast as I had hoped,” he said.
And none of the free Iraqis hired so far come from the Iraqi National Congress, which is one of the most vocal opposition groups, the official said.
The Bush administration initially had high hopes that the INC would provide the core of a new Iraq government, but has grown frustrated with the group’s infighting, conflicts with other opposition groups, and refusal to voice unqualified support for U.S. plans for postwar Iraq.
The official declined to estimate how much the initial reconstruction will cost, but said Iraqi oil revenue might cover some of the tab.
US, Britain Massing Colossal Firepower
By Matt Kelley, reproduced from Globalsecurity.org
WASHINGTON - The battle in Iraq would pit 21st century weaponry against Cold War firepower. The U.S. and British forces massed on Iraq's borders are armed with missiles and bombs guided by satellites and lasers, while Iraqi defenders depend on bazookas, machine guns and far less sophisticated missiles.
The biggest unknown in the aging Iraqi arsenal: chemical and biological weapons.
An invading coalition force would have more than enough firepower to overwhelm Saddam Hussein's deteriorating military, Pentagon officials and private analysts say.
Hundreds of warplanes are ready to rain satellite- and laser-guided bombs onto Iraqi targets, as well as perhaps as many as 1,000 Tomahawk cruise missiles and even some 21,000-pound behemoths that could wipe out hundreds of troops in one blast.
The United States has more than 1,000 M1 Abrams tanks and scores of AH-64 Apache helicopters which can destroy Iraq's aging, Soviet-built tanks from beyond the horizon. Some 270,000 U.S. and British troops are in the region to face an Iraqi army that's fewer than 400,000 soldiers and widely reported to be demoralized, poorly trained and inadequately equipped.
"It's somewhere under 50 percent of what its capability was in 1991 during the Gulf War in terms of conventional capability," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said last month.
Iraq's only military advance since a U.S.-led coalition ejected Saddam's forces from Kuwait a dozen years ago has been in its chemical and biological weapons, Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials say. Many analysts agree.
"There's a higher risk of Saddam using chemical or biological weapons. That's different from the last war," said Anthony Cordesman, an expert on Iraq's military at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
That's one reason behind the massive military buildup around Iraq: convincing Saddam's military that their defeat is so certain that using chemical or biological weapons would not be an advantage. Through news conferences, leaflets, broadcasts and other psychological warfare, the Pentagon is sending Iraqi units the message that anyone involved in the use of weapons of mass destruction would be treated harshly, as a war criminal, after an American victory.
Pentagon officials say they plan a ferocious attack if President Bush orders a war: thousands of bombs and missiles hitting Iraq each day, coupled with a swift drive toward Baghdad by armored ground units protected by air power. It's a strategy designed to produce "shock and awe" in the enemy, military officers say, persuading them to give up.
"The ability to drop such a high concentration of precision weapons on such a large scale certainly will induce an effect the likes of which I don't think has ever been seen in modern warfare," said former Army officer Andrew Krepinevich, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
That precision air power includes the Joint Direct Attack Munition or JDAM, a satellite-guided bomb that was developed after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The military plans to use thousands of JDAMs over Iraq - helping to make 80 percent or more of the munitions dropped there precision-guided, versus fewer than one in five during the previous war with Iraq.
The advances in precision-guided weapons also mean that fewer warplanes can hit more targets. And Pentagon planners say the precision will help avoid civilian casualties, as well.
Much of the coalition firepower on the ground is aimed at Baghdad, where officials and analysts say Saddam and his Republican Guard may try to make a last stand with bloody, urban combat. Although the narrow streets and tall buildings of a city lessen some American battle advantages, U.S. military officials say they expect to prevail in a battle for Baghdad.
"The Third Mechanized Division would be driving into Baghdad with Abrams tanks against a Republican Guard armed with bazookas and machine guns," said military analyst John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org. "The difference is, the last Gulf War it was an army against an army. This time, it's an army against a secret police force."
Still, even a small force can create big problems for the U.S. military with tactics like using weapons of mass destruction or sabotaging crucial infrastructure - a tactic Rumsfeld and other Pentagon officials have repeatedly accused Saddam of planning.
"You don't need large forces to sabotage dams. You don't need large forces to sabotage oil fields," Krepinevich said. "They can be remotely detonated, and it cost us about $10 billion to clean up the oil fields in Kuwait."
Return To Top March 14, 2003 March 13, 2003
The reality is war, and soon
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar
Is the war good for the Jews?
Headlines from Debka March 12
British SAS in Iraq War March 12
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda March 12
Thirty Five ‘Terror Groups’ Active In India March 12
We are Hours Behind Osama: Pakistan ISI March 12
US, Indian marines to hold joint exercises March 12
Last pieces in place March 11
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion March 11
1st ID sets up new base near Iraqi border March 11
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
Khalid newest inmate at infamous Bagram prison March 10
By Richard M. Bennett of RBMedia
It would seem that unless there is a dramatic last minute diplomatic breakthrough in the next few days, the United States will go to war on or about the 18th March. It has been suggested that the final decision was taken by President Bush last weekend and at a time when his British ally, Tony Blair was squirming on a hook of increasing public hostility to war and growing opposition from within his own party.
The Pentagon on Monday apparently placed all US combat units on a heightened state of alert and with direct orders to prepare for operations to begin next Tuesday. It is unlikely that even a complete climbdown by Saddam Hussein can now save Iraq from invasion and the statement made by Donald Rumsfeld that the United States was ultimately prepared to launch a pre-emptive and largely un-provoked attack even without Britain's involvement should not be taken as a slip of the tongue nor less an incautious comment. Rumsfeld was merely playing 'real-politics' and reminding America's opponents, and friends, that this is a game with high stakes. Everyone, even Washington's closest allies, is expendable. President Bush expects to be able to bask in the limelight of military success by the end of March and that would also take the immediate pressure off Tony Blair.
However, as with Vietnam and Afghanistan short term military success provided by modern technology and a fortunate lack of serious opposition, is soon overtaken by the realities of occupation, continuing conflict, political in-fighting, economic consequences and in this case, the growing hostility of a humiliated Islamic world.
While regime change in Baghdad features high on the list of priorities, control of vital resources and gaining a dominant military position in the region are both of undoubtedly far greater significance. The risks involved to United States interests would be unacceptable if ridding the region of just one more dictator and his small stock of weapons of mass destruction were the only items on the agenda. The enormous changes in the political structure of the world and the startling growth in military technology particularly in the last decade has provided the United States with a window of opportunity to seize the geo-strategic highground.
In the real world of power politics and the projection of military might for national, rather than international interests, the painfully and costly lessons of Korea and Vietnam have been fully taken on board. It is doubtful whether pre-emptive military action on a grand scale has been constrained by any moral repugnance or a pricking of conscience over the deaths of civilians or even civilians in uniform, reluctant conscripted young soldiers. It has only been the lack of the means to win a war quickly and at minimum cost that has done so. A huge leap forward in technology, a massive reassessment of battlefield tactics and the development of new strategies has multiplied the United States international reach, speed of reaction and near total dominance in warfighting techniques.
Iraq is to be just the first pawn in a deadly new chess game to achieve control of the worlds vital natural resources, international waterways and to establish military dominance of key strategic regions. Traditional enemies such as Russia are now weak and divided, while the burgeoning power of China is still some way from becoming a serious threat. Washington no longer needs NATO or Europe and with the possible exception of keeping Britain onside, now feels it has the economic and military rationale for taking decisive action with or without the sanction of the United Nations.
These comments should not be seen as a direct criticism of US policy, but more as an acceptance of the newly changed realities of the world in the first decade of the 21st Century. Greece, Rome, Turkey, China, Spain, France, Britain, Germany and the Soviet Union have all at one or another over the last three thousand years seen an opportunity to take centre stage, whether to create a new empire or simply to be the dominant military power. The United States is the only nation capable or with the will, to take such a leading role right now. Whether it will prove any more adept than previous world powers at dealing with the long term consequences of this 'assumption of the purple' remains to be seen.
Italian commandos hunt for Osama, Mulla Omar, Hekmatyar
An article by Aslam Khan writing in the Jang
ISLAMABAD: An all-out hunt for Osama bin Laden, Mulla Muhammad Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border has been launched by a team of crack commandos from Italy, well-placed sources revealed on Wednesday.
The Italian Alpine commandos have been operating in south-east Afghanistan near Balochistan border regions for about a week in an increasingly volatile area. "The commandos have been specially selected for their features that match the Pashtuns of the area and have familiarised themselves to the terrain and native milieu," a well-placed source told The News, requesting that his identity not be revealed. "They have launched a systematic hunt to capture Bin Laden, Omar and Hekmatyar dead or alive," he said claiming that American FBI and military officials have been combing the area literally for each person for the wanted men. He added the Americans are convinced that Osama and others are changing places almost daily moving along the border and there is a strong chance that one of them may be captured dead or alive in the next few days.
The source said Alpine commandos were in action along the border with Pakistan since December 2002. They appear as Pashtuns, wear shalwar qameez and sometimes even turbans and local shawls. The hunt is based on American plans. The commandos study roads and mountain passes, inspect caves and tunnels and mix up with villagers. With their computer, via satellite they transmit reports to the US Air Force base in Bagram. "We may hear some news soon," the source added.
Agencies add: The US and its allies intensified search for Osama bin Laden fearing they may respond to war against Iraq with attacks. Pakistani officials denied an Iran Radio report, which quoted a Pakistani leader Agha Murtaza Poya saying in a telephone interview to AP: "Bin Laden is in custody and announcement of his arrest will be made between March 17 and 18th."
Secretary Pakistan Interior Ministry Iftikhar Ahmad told AP: "Poya is wrong." Pakistan's intelligence co-ordinator in the war on terror Brig Javed Iqbal Cheema said: "It is not correct. This is just not true."
Pakistan Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed also denied the report. He said: "Osama is not in Pakistan. We have no information about Osama and if someone has this information he should tell us." The CIA spokesman Bill Harlow said in Washington: "We have absolutely no information to substantiate that."
Similarly, US military spokesman Army Master Sgt Richard Breach said at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan: "We have no information that Osama has been captured." Pakistani forces are, however, concentrating in Balochistan between Quetta and the Iranian border and also near Balikot and Chitral in the NWFP.
By Gideon Samet writing in Israel’s Haaretz
The question of what is good for the Jews was always slightly flawed. It assumed that even if something were bad for the rest of the world but good for the Jews, that would be just fine. After all, while we were suffering, the world always remained silent. The imminent war in Iraq - a military event that has had more promos than any other in history - has already conceived a new Elders of Zion text: the Jews are promoting the war from behind the global curtain because it is good for Israel. Aside from the rest of this libel's ugly shortcomings, the entire thesis is rather flimsy. Bush's war on Iraq is not good for Israel, either.
It may benefit current Israeli policy. Iraq does not pose a risk to Israel's security, but the apocalypse that America will rain down on its satanic rival will reshuffle the deck and enable the Sharon government to engage in its favorite pastime: buying time and disrupting any chance of negotiations with the Palestinians. No matter what happens, that will be the end result. If America succeeds, an arrogant White House will flash a V-sign with a big "We told you so."
At that point, everything will play out according to the American scenario. Indeed, even without the Zionist conspiracy theory, the influence wielded by conservative and right-wing Jews - occupying strong positions in Washington's decision-making echelons and pushing against a compromise on the territories - will grow substantially. And Bush, not an enthusiastic supporter of pressuring Israel, will mainly be interested in being reelected by a more convincing majority than in the November 2000 election fiasco.
If the war is unsuccessful, the beaten Bush would have neither momentum nor appetite to face another regional mess that would entail, among other things, pressuring the Palestinians and enraging the Jews, because of simultaneous pressure on Israel.
Yet, the American president is not expected to come out of the war in good shape regardless of its result. A simple, clean victory is not possible. If Bush chooses a "surgical" air blitz, the slaughter of civilians will make it very difficult for him to bask in his victory, and most certainly so if Saddam is not vaporized in his Muqata. We are, then, at a historic crossroads, not only because of developments of far-reaching significance between the United States and Europe and other opponents of the war ("With France like these," wrote one American newspaper this week, "Washington doesn't need enemies").
It is an important crossroads also with regard to the question of what's good - or bad - for the Jews.
One of the main lessons that the right-wing Israeli government can borrow from the miserable chain of events leading to this war is the necessity, justified by Western leaders, of liquidating the leadership of the Axis of Evil. The litany of Bush's justifications for a war is growing thinner and thinner as the justifications themselves change. The reasons have recently been reduced to only two: the fact (if that's what it is) that Saddam is endangering the security of America and the West, and that America has the right to defend itself by force without the international community's consent. For Sharon, there is no better spin than this. An American president going to a war of choice is a strange reflection of Arik's portrait, and may very well prove helpful to Sharon.
On Monday, the prime minister enlisted the six million of the Holocaust and the West's appeasement of Hitler to justify the liquidation of Saddam. The equation was drawn not only between the Nazi and the Iraqi dictators, but also, with obvious association, it returned to that well-known parallel drawn by Menachem Begin between the leader of the Palestinians and Adolf Hitler.
Even though Saddam is now the only matter of international interest to the White House, the American media has been commenting recently on the shift of nuance and content in Bush's Middle East pronouncements.
He clearly indicated that there would be a postponement in the handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He has grown more flexible in his attitude toward settlements, so much so that Martin Indyk, the former U.S. ambassador in Tel Aviv, declared that the Sharon government "can breathe a sign of relief." When the current leadership is able to breathe a sign of relief about the conflict, that will not be good for the Jews. Behind the facade of liquidating the evil man on the banks of the Tigris and the Euphrates, Israelis will be called upon to continue paying the price of the local war, in our neighboring West Bank.
Return To Top March 13, 2003
March 12, 2003
Headlines from Debka
British SAS in Iraq War
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda
Thirty Five ‘Terror Groups’ Active In India
We are Hours Behind Osama: Pakistan ISI
US, Indian marines to hold joint exercises
Last pieces in place March 11
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion March 11
1st ID sets up new base near Iraqi border March 11
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days March 11
Korea March 11
Collaboration Par Excellence and Pakistan's Strategic Dilemma March 10
Khalid newest inmate at infamous Bagram prison March 10
Debka Says Turkey Agrees to US Troops, Equipment Being Unloaded March 10
Baghdad Targets Picked If Hussein Holes Up There February 8
US Air Force carries out first test of new super-bomb, 21,000lb MOAB, the largest non-nuclear bomb in existence, in Florida Tuesday MOAB, which is high precision, dwarfs 15,000lb “Daisy Cutter” dropped on Taliban in Afghan War
Rumsfeld, in Pentagon briefing Tuesday, says US may have to fight Iraq war without British participation although question is being reviewed on a daily basis.
Also: We have privately contacted anti-Saddam elements in Iraqi military on their role in war and integration in post-war administration
US military chief Myers: Northern option will go into effect with or without Turkey. He warned Iraqi army personnel using biological, chemical or nuclear/radiological weapons they will be tried for war crimes.
After war, US dollar will not be legal tender, but frozen Iraqi funds drawn upon to run country
Iraqi fighter jets threatening US surveillance flights Tuesday forced two U-2 reconnaissance planes to return to base
US rejects postponement of Security Council vote on March 17 deadline ultimatum for Saddam beyond this week. Vote expected by Friday. France and Russian promise to exercise veto. White House spokesman calls “non-starter” proposal by Council waverers to extend deadline to 45 days
War preparations gain momentum. American warships in Middle East regional waters were ordered to go on battle readiness from midday Tuesday. A US defense official reported Iraqis seen moving explosives into Iraq’s northern and southern oil fields.
Extracts from an article in Military.com
With the exception of Delta Force, however, very few special forces are expected to operate inside Baghdad, partly because of lessons learned from Somalia in 1993. Baghdad, a city of some 4 million people into which Saddam reportedly plans to lure allied troops and destroy them, is not the kind of place where troops of any kind intend to fight house to house as Saddam appears to be preparing for. "I doubt we will even go to Baghdad. There are plenty of other places to go," said the senior SAS source.
No. 22 Regiment SAS, totaling no more than 150 troops in their three Saber squadrons, with another 150 or more in immediate support, is currently at the SAS forward mounting base in Cyprus, from where the troops can be flown north across Turkey for operations in northern Iraq, or south across Israel and Jordan into western Iraq.
SAS forward operating bases are believed to be in Kuwait, ready to move into Jordan for operations into western Iraq, or are already in Jordan. They are being backed up by close air support from seven RAF Harrier GR7 jump jets, now in Kuwait. They are earmarked to move into directly to the sprawling H3 airfield in western Iraq, once it is seized early in the war.
The British Special Boat Squadron, about 120 strong, is believed to be in Bahrain and Kuwait, where specialist divers are preparing to tackle the underwater mines and obstacles expected to have been placed by Iraqis in an effort to stop an amphibious assault into the Basra area.
Other SBS units are preparing to be flown by helicopter deep inland to keep a close eye on enemy activity that could affect air and sea landings, and to sabotage key Iraqi defenses.
British special forces have abandoned the sexy little 'dune buggy' vehicles they once used because they had suspension problems, and are back to using desertized Land Rovers equipped with .50 cal machine guns. The Land Rovers can be transported in C-130 Hercules transports and CH-47 Chinook helicopters.
U.S. and British planners intend to create a number of forward air refueling points, or FARPs, first around the edges of Iraq, and then deeper into Kuwait. This will allow a huge number of helicopters to take troops deep into Iraq and Apache attack helicopters to take on Iraqi tanks before allied tanks can reach them.
Over the last few days the Americans have tipped their hand on some of their plans by moving troops into Tabuk airfield in northern western Saudi Arabia -- at 250 miles the closest point to Baghdad from outside Iraq to the south, and to a previously used helicopter base near Ar'Ar. Both are expected to be developed as FARPs.
In Gulf War I the most fabled SAS exploit was that of the eight-man Bravo Two Zero patrol, whose mission to track down Scud missiles in the western Iraq desert was compromised when the British team was discovered by a shepherd boy who raised the alarm. In a story told and retold many times over the years -- and which has made several of the survivors rich and famous -- the patrol fought a running battle with Iraqi troops, killing scores and boosting the image of SAS soldiers as the 'toughest in the world,' even though three of the patrol died. The patrol's main failure was its inadequate high frequency radios, which left it isolated and unable to be rescued. This time, according to a senior SAS source, British special forces will all use encrypted satellite communications and other 'network centric' systems that have dramatically improved the capabilities of both special and regular forces.
How the net is closing on al-Qaeda
For full story, click The Age of Australia
While hiding out in the remote badlands of Pakistan, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was known to communicate with subordinates in the al-Qaeda network by sending couriers on donkeys.
But, in mid-February, the operational commander of the September 11 attacks on Washington and New York came down from the hills. He was drawn back to the city of Rawalpindi not just because of his well-documented taste for high living, but, more importantly, his need to use the modern tools of the information age: emails, laptops, mobile phones. This return visit to the 21st century would prove his undoing.
Part of al-Qaeda's reputation as the world's most formidable terrorist force has been built on its adaptation of computer technology, such as encrypted emails, to provide a clandestine information flow across a diffuse global network of semi-autonomous cells. Mohammed, a qualified engineer known as "The Brain", became a pivot in this structure.
It is believed he made a decision a fortnight ago to emerge from a desolate rural refuge near the Afghan border regions, and set up a new hide-out in the twin city to Pakistan's capital, Islamabad. Here, taking cover in the home of a mid-level Islamic politician, and within a few blocks of the official residence of Pakistan's President, General Pervez Musharraf, Mohammed buried himself discreetly amid Pakistan's officer class in Rawalpindi's upper-crust neighbourhoods of colonial bungalows and tree-lined streets inherited from the glory days of the British Raj. It was the biggest gamble of his career in terror. That he chose also to re-enter cyberspace, logging into al-Qaeda's elaborate computer networks, doubled the risk.
For months, Mohammed had been the predominant focus of the co-ordinated international campaign, led by Washington, to hunt down the ringleaders.
However, The Age has been told by reliable sources that the laying of this trap went far beyond conventional computer investigations. According to these sources, so sophisticated was the strategy to pinpoint Mohammed's whereabouts that it included orders for a government-controlled internet service provider in Islamabad to be blacked out for several hours late last week.
Unable to reply to urgent email messages, it is believed either Mohammed or one of the two cohorts captured alongside him may have dialled out on a mobile phone. The awesome electronic eavesdropping capacity of US satellite technology did the rest and, early on Saturday morning, Mohammed was roused from his slumber when about 25 heavily-armed tactical assault specialists from the Pakistani police force burst into his comfortable suburban hideaway. Also captured was Mustafa Ahmed al-Hawsawi, the paymaster for the September 11 attacks on America.
Thirty Five ‘Terror Groups’ Active In India
For full article: Islam-on-Line.
[Everyone knows the respect in which your Editor holds his government, but alas, the Minister making the statement cannot count. There are a great many more terror groups in India.]
An Indian minister speaking in Parliament here said there are 35 terrorist groups active on the Indian soil. These include outfits of all kinds, Maoist, communist, ethnic, regionalist as well as religion-based. The minister made the surprising claim that even Al-Qaeda is active in India. Last year India had claimed that Al-Qaeda is active in its part of Kashmir but it withdrew the claim quickly lest it gave the U.S. a handle to dabble there. This was published by the Asian Age newspaper based on minister of state for home in the BJP-led Indian federal government Hari Pathak's statement in the parliament.
We are hours behind Osama: ISI
Full story in the Jang of Pakistan
ISLAMABAD: The net is closing around terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden, Pakistani intelligence officials said on Monday, confirming the No 3 al-Qaeda man captured one week ago met Osama in December. Information from Khalid Shaikh Muhammad, the suspected mastermind of the Sept 11 attacks, "is bringing us significantly closer to Osama", said one intelligence official who could not be identified according to the rules of a press conference by Pakistan's spy agency.
"We appear to be just hours behind him (bin Laden)," the official said, citing evidence gathered from Khalid and other suspected al-Qaeda operatives. "One suspect met with Osama in September, and Khalid Shaikh said he met with him in December. We were months behind, then weeks and now hours behind him."
The press conference was the first-ever held at the Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, headquarters in Islamabad, according Gen Rashid Qureshi, spokesman for Pakistan's president Pervez Musharraf. US forces pressing the search for bin Laden are operating in Afghanistan's southern Helmand province, Muhiddin Khan, a director at the provincial Governor's House, told The Associated Press.
Other operations are reportedly being carried out in Afghanistan's southern Nimroz and along the rugged mountainous border regions between Pakistan and Afghanistan.
US, Indian marines to hold joint exercises
Times of India by Rajat Pandit.
NEW DELHI: Top-notch Indian and American special forces will train their lethal MP-5 sub-machine guns and crossbows with cyanide-tipped arrows at each other soon. No, they won't kill each other. Instead, they will match their "unconventional" and "clandestine" warfare skills in a joint exercise to be held in India.
Defence sources say an exercise between US Navy SEALS and Indian Navy Marine Commando Force (Marcos) is now at an advanced stage of planning. "The Americans are keen it takes place on the west coast. So, Goa and Mangalore are being considered for the exercise, which is slated for October-November after the Iraq situation stabilises," said a source.
Incidentally, in an another first, India and US will hold a joint air combat exercise with frontline fighter jets around that time. Though Pakistan has objected to such manoeuvres, India and US are pressing ahead by increasing the scope and content of the joint exercises.
[Editor’s Note: this is not quite correct. In 1963-64, if your editor remembers rightly, the USAF and RAF stationed combat aircraft in India for an extensive series of exercises with the Indian Air Force in the wake of the China War. We welcome any letter or article that can recount some of the details.]
The SEALS, who take their name from the elements (sea-air-land), go through what is touted to be the toughest military training in the world. Specialising in counter-terrorism operations, hydrographic reconnaissance and underwater demolitions in both "blue and brown water environments", the SEALS have operated in different parts of the globe.
"The Marcos are no less. Only 15 to 25 per cent of the applicants pass the extremely rigorous training. They are proficient deep-sea divers and parachutists," said a senior officer.
Modelled on the SEALS, the Marine Commando Force was raised to fulfil India's need for an elite force for special maritime operations. It has seen action in Operation Pawan in Sri Lanka and Operation Cactus in Maldives in 1987-1988.
Then, of course, the Marcos continue to play an important role in the counter-insurgency operations in Jammu and Kashmir. They are tasked to check infiltration of terrorists from Pakistan through the Jhelum river and the Wullar lake.
"The Marcos and SEALS will learn each others' operating procedures, training techniques, weapons and equipment in the exercise. This will help them to work together in the future if the need arises," said an officer.
Return To Top March 12, 2003
March 11, 2003
Last pieces in place
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion
1st ID sets up new base near Iraqi border
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days
Korea
Collaboration Par Excellence and Pakistan's Strategic Dilemma March 10
Khalid newest inmate at infamous Bagram prison March 10
Debka Says Turkey Agrees to US Troops, Equipment Being Unloaded March 10
U.N. evacuates [civilian] personnel from Iraq-Kuwait border March 9
UN catches Marines on 'neutral zone' foray March 9
Russian Military Holds Beauty Contests March 9
Baghdad Targets Picked If Hussein Holes Up There February 8
Last pieces in place
From
The Washington Post By Rick Atkinson
KUWAIT CITY - The wind died, the skies faired and just before dawn Saturday morning the weather-delayed USNS Dahl berthed with the last critical U.S. Army weapons needed to attack Iraq.
By noon, the first of 72 helicopters belonging to the 101st Airborne Division had been hoisted from the hold and moved to a dockside parking lot. Army mechanics in white hard hats swarmed over the initial Apache attack helicopter, stripping away shrink-wrap protective plastic and reattaching rotor blades that were removed two weeks ago before the voyage from Jacksonville, Fla.
The helicopters will fly from the port to camps in the Kuwaiti outback over the next two days, to be joined by 96 others from the USNS Bob Hope, which is expected early Monday. With the majority of its helicopters ready to launch deep strikes hundreds of miles into Iraqi territory, the 101st will be ready for war, according to senior officers. The division is the final major component of a U.S. ground attack force that includes the 3rd Infantry Division and the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, complemented by Special Forces, an enormous air armada, British troops and other units. The 101st is the Army's only "air assault" division, with a capacity to move a brigade of roughly 4,500 combat soldiers 100 miles by helicopter in six hours - even as the Apaches strike deeper yet.
"If we do what we think we're going to do, there will never have been a military campaign that has moved that far, that fast," one senior Army officer said Saturday.
The division's Apaches, equivalent to nearly half of the Army's attack helicopters in Kuwait, are considered vital to any ground attack. The new Longbow model has a fire-control radar system capable of detecting in less than a second more than 1,000 potential targets spread over several miles, sorting them into categories such as wheeled or tracked vehicles, and prioritizing them instantly for purposes of destruction by the helicopter's 16 Hellfire missiles. "If you don't do a 'human interrupt,' the Longbow will automatically kill those targets in order of priority," said Brig. Gen. Edward Sinclair, an Apache pilot and assistant division commander of the 101st. Target data can also be e-mailed from one Longbow to another.
Saturday, however, the task at hand involved simply getting the division kit off the Dahl, which had been delayed a day when high seas prevented Kuwaiti tugs from escorting the 950-foot ship to berths 18 and 19. No sooner had the great slab of the stern ramp been lowered than 1,859 tons of cargo began pouring from the holds. Two huge yellow gantry cranes lifted ammunition crates onto the docks - everything from Hellfires and rockets to rifle rounds - while Humvees and fuel trucks, hospital generators and radio equipment rolled down the ramp in a sort of military Noah's ark procession.
"We can do one aircraft about every 12 minutes, from the time we hook them up (to a crane) to the time we lower them to the ground," said Lt. Col. Joe Dunaway, commander of the division's aviation maintenance battalion. "If you're living right, it all works."
[Orbat.com note: The USNS Bob Hope will dock on the 11th of March. The final airlift of 101st troops should also be arriving in Camp Udairi in northern Kuwait that day according to AP wires. One of the blessing of Kuwait’s diminutive size is that the drive from the dock to forming up areas is considerably shorter than those experienced by Coalition Forces in 1990.]
British troops prepare for Iraq invasion
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Thousands of British troops sent to Kuwait are making their final preparations for war.
The BBC reports there have been complaints from the troops about their equipment, but senior officers insist they are ready to fight.
In the Kuwaiti desert the buildup of troops and military hardware is relentless and many of the huge convoys snaking north carry the British flag, moving towards units now in place along the Iraqi border.
The 7th armoured brigade, the desert rats, with some soldiers still grumbling about equipment and provisions, are positioned at just 40 kilometres from Iraq.
But as their much needed supplies head to the northern deserts, UN personnel being evacuated from the border area passed them heading south.
It is a part of a growing tension here. Special German military units are now on the streets, monitoring for potential chemical attack in a country that is readying itself for possible war.
1st ID sets up new base near Iraqi border
From Stars & Stripes by Jon R Anderson
MARDIN, Turkey — A 1st Infantry Division-led logistics task force has pushed deep into eastern Turkey to establish a new forward operating base just 100 miles from the Iraqi border.
On the outskirts of the ancient mountaintop city of Mardin, the new outpost is near a small civilian airport and sits just off the main road leading to Turkey’s frontier with Iraq.
The compound once served as a grain refinery and warehouse complex, according to local residents.
Rain-soaked soldiers worked into the pre-dawn hours Friday, unloading dozens of Humvees, trucks, fuel haulers and other hardware after a grueling 15-hour convoy from southern Turkey’s port city of Iskenderun.
Officials say the new base will serve as a logistics hub for tens of thousands of U.S. combat troops, if Turkish leaders approve an American invasion force.
“It’s a command and control node for the flow of site preparation equipment and other potential forces,” said Navy Cmdr. Ike Skelton, spokesman for the U.S. buildup in Turkey.
Among the units setting up the outpost are 1st ID’s 701st Main Support Battalion — the division’s heavy lifter when it comes to trucks and fuel — as well as the 601st Support Battalion, a unit dedicated to supplying and maintaining the division’s helicopter units.
Soldiers wearing the Army’s medical command patch and the Germany-based 21st Theater Support Command patch could also be seen working around the compound.
Establishment of the new base comes amid continuing uncertainty over U.S. plans to use Turkey as a springboard for an invasion into northern Iraq.
While Turkish lawmakers approved 3,500 U.S. troops to begin laying the groundwork for that more than month ago, the parliament failed to pass a motion last week to give the green light a 62,000-stong invasion force.
Urged on by the top general of the Turkish military on Wednesday, government leaders have hinted they may push for another vote soon.
Key elections are slated for Sunday, which will likely see a new prime minister installed, so it’s uncertain when that vote may happen. Some reports predict days, other reports say weeks.
Troops have waited for more than two weeks to move out of staging areas, while military gear has piled up along Iskenderun’s docks.
Instead of grinding to a halt, however, the cogs of site preparation have quickened in recent days.
Within hours of the 1st ID convoy pushing east out of Iskenderun to set up the new outpost, a fourth cargo ship brimming with more logistics gear began unloading along the port’s freshly cleared marshalling areas.
[Orbat.com note: Despite the slightly misleading title it is the 4th Infantry Division that will be the first maneuver formation to utilise these facilities. The possibility of employing the 4ID from Turkey has more than any other military planning factor continued to push D-Day forward.]
The daring plan to seize Baghdad's airport and end a war within days
From The Daily Telegraph By Sean Rayment
If successful, it will go down in history as one of the most audacious battle plans ever devised and will end a war with Iraq in just 72 hours.
In a daring and risky attempt to defeat Iraq's vast army, Allied commanders are planning to seize Saddam International Airport and use it as a base to bring the regime to its knees.
Once the airport is in Allied hands, British and American forces will be able to use it as a bridgehead from which to launch attacks into Baghdad. Supplies and additional personnel can also be brought more easily into the area.
Building a large force early in the campaign adds to the momentum against Saddam.
A senior military officer, said: "Airborne operations are very risky. The last time British paras jumped into battle was during the Suez Crisis in 1956.
"It is a shock tactic which, if used correctly, can have a huge impact on the shape of a battle. This is a bold operation that is not without risk, but with a bit of luck and good intelligence, it should be successful."
Shock troops from America's 101st Airborne Division - known as the Screaming Eagles - the United States 82nd Airborne Division and Britain's 16 Air Assault Brigade have been earmarked for the task.
Once the airport, a few miles from the centre of Baghdad, has been seized, an enormous US and British armoured force will charge towards the city to link up with the airborne troops. The force will be composed of either the 3rd or 1st US Infantry Division, whose armoured units are equipped with the virtually unstoppable Abrams main battle tank, supported by the British 7th Armoured Brigade, equipped with the Challenger 2 tank. The capture of the airport would be part of a "blitzkrieg" attack that is being planned by Allied commanders once the order to start the war is given. The assault on the airport is likely to come very soon after the invasion of Iraq begins.
Hundreds of cruise missiles will target radar stations and command and control centres.
Stealth bombers, followed by US and British ground attack aircraft from bases in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and from carriers in the Gulf will begin destroying air and army bases and surface-to-air missile sites.
Simultaneously, the British 3 Commando Brigade and troops from the US Marine Corps will seize the city of Basra, which is just 19 miles from the Kuwaiti border. Those troops will also thwart any aggressive moves made by Iranian troops on the other side of the Shatt Arab waterway, where the Iranian and Iraqi borders meet.
In the ensuing confusion, the airborne assault on the airport will be launched. The first phase will see military barracks, tanks and surface-to-air missile sites in and around the airport destroyed by aerial bombardments.
Then, the assault on the airport itself will begin. Both the 101st Airborne Division and 16 Air Assault Brigade specialise in seizing enemy airports and would already have spent days, and possibly weeks, planning and preparing the operation.
The British paras are likely to be the first to assault the airport along with US paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division. The dropping zones will be marked either by the SAS or the Pathfinders, the brigade's specialist reconnaissance unit. To avoid confusion, British and American units will be given different targets to attack. This will be the most vulnerable stage of the operation.
A single Iraqi soldier armed with a hand-held surface-to-air missile could shoot down a C130 Hercules aircraft or one of the troop-carrying helicopters.
The ground troops will, however, be supported by at least one of the three Apache attack helicopter battalions which form part of the American division.
Once the airport is secured, which could take several hours depending on the strength of Iraqi resistance, the next phase of the operation will commence.
Transport aircraft will reinforce the lightly equipped force with more troops, armoured vehicles and artillery batteries. At the same time casualties will be evacuated back to field hospitals inside Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
The orders for the troops occupying the airport will be simple: to hold their ground until the armoured force arrives.
Even if they meet little resistance, the force will take at least 72 hours to reach the advance troops at the airport. If, however, the Allied armoured columns run into determined opposition from Iraqi armoured units, or if Saddam uses his chemical and biological weapons, the arrival of the force could be considerably delayed.
In either case, the Allies will still have a significant advantage: complete control of the skies. This means that commanders will be able to call for air strikes against any enemy armour or troop concentrations that are likely to pose a threat either to the troops at the airfield, or to those attempting to relieve them.
[Orbat.com note: We don’t need to explain all of the dangers inherent to the armoured force’s lines of communications in the link up of the nature described, given the ratio of forces, the distances and terrain involved and time available. Iraq has been conventionally weakened, but it is not Panama. Coalition military commanders and political authorities while committed to speedy resolution are far from reckless with the lives of their men. While we are probably to see airmobile operation records broken, it is unlikely that CENTCOM is going to take all of the risks implied in this article.]
An article in Time Asia, reproduced in Globalsecurity.org, says the US military feels that counter-battery fire and other weapons can neutralize NKPA artillery north of the DMZ in an hour, and that civilian losses in Seoul will be far less than the million dead being bandied about.
We at orbat.com would like to know, then, who has been putting out the one million dead on the first day figures and why.
Globalsecurity.org reports that reinforcing US strategic bombers have arrived at Anderson AFB, Guam. One tank battalion of the 1st Infantry Division, based in the United States, is in South Korea for scheduled exercises. Most intriguing, apparently units of the California Guard’s 40th Infantry Division [Mechanized] are being mobilized for deployment to Korea. [As far as we can tell, elements of one armor battalion and one artillery battalion have been activated. This gets more and more intriguing, and we ask our readers to let us know if they pick up any details of what is going on with reference to Korea.
Return To Top March 11, 2003
March 10, 2003
Collaboration Par Excellence and Pakistan's Startegic Dilemma
Khalid newest inmate at infamous Bagram prison
Debka Says Turkey Agrees to US Troops, Equipment Being Unloaded
U.N. evacuates [civilian] personnel from Iraq-Kuwait border March 9
UN catches Marines on 'neutral zone' foray March 9
Russian Military Holds Beauty Contests March 9
Baghdad Targets Picked If Hussein Holes Up There February 8
Musharraf Facing Decision in the Security Council Soon February 8
Osama’s Two Son’s Captured? Maybe, Maybe Not February 8
China hikes defence budget by nearly 10 pc
February 8
Collaboration Par Excellence and Pakistan's Strategic Dilemma
Major A.H Amin regularly writes opinion columns for Analysis.
Although the Indo Pak Muslim Elite was notorious in collaborating with the British and after partition with the Americans,the Musharraf regime is dangerously close to jeopardizing Pakistan's sovereignty as an independent state in the course of appeasing the USA.
The Muslim elite became loyalist after 1857 and Sir Sayyad Ahmad Khan was the father of Loyalism. However the Sayyad was a deep man and his loyalism was based on a rationale. He was a selfless man and his aim was collective good rather than personal benefits.
The vast bulk of Muslim elite was however angling for personal gains and the trend became extreme after 1947.Mr Jinnah looked upon the USA as a safeguard against India. The post 1947 Pakistani elite feudal and commercial in outlook saw little hope except in aligning with USA. It was a question of class interest rather than religion.
The only leader of Pakistan who defied USA was Mr Z.A Bhutto who as a consequence was removed by a US inspired military coup.The usurper Zia was a US lackey but in his last phase of power tried to exhibit self respect and was consequently dispatched swiftly in a Lockheed machine to Hell or Paradise !
Benazir , in contrast with her father was a collaborator par excellence and appeased USA. The same was the case with Nawaz Sharif. Musharraf in his attempt to survive however pushed collaboration further. The after effects of 9/11 made his position unfortunate.
In the light of the above premise one may arrive at following conclusions :--
1-The KARGIL debacle of 1999 convinced the Indians that limited war in Kashmir was possible without approaching the Nuclear threshold. The Pakistani military and political leadership's loss of nerve in 1999 at the height of Kargil Crisis convinced the US that Pakistan's leadership both civilian and military could be arm-twisted into accepting any US sponsored solution.
2-Musharraf's collaboration with USA following one phone call from Bush convinced the USA that Pakistan was just another Banana Republic. It further proved to the USA that in future more phone calls can force Pakistan's leadership to agree to tougher demands like Kashmir issue, Nuclear Programme etc.
3-The handing over of Khalid the supposedly key Al Qaida adviser by Pakistan to USA is another strategic turning point in the whole affair. By handing over the man and nabbing him in the first place Musharaf has actually made Pakistan's future more precarious. The fact that a supposedly key Al Qaida man was in Pakistan's political and military heartland provides US with greater motives to settle the Pakistan question in the future. After all if they state that Pakistan is a safe haven for Terrorists they have a point, regardless of the fact that Pakistan handed over the man.
4-In the post Iraq scenario it appears that following scenarios may develop:--
a. USA forces Pakistan to abnadon its Nuclear arsenal with a carrot about autonomy
in Kashmir like the Dayton Bosnian Accord or a Palestinian Authority type solution.
b. Mysterious removal of Pakistan's military elite in a classic elimination operation
in case the military elite resists demands of USA to surrender Pakistan's Nuclear
capability.
c. Limited Indian attack in Kashmir with US blessings in order to destroy Pakistan
military's capability.
The cardinal geopolitical developments in the region may be :--
a. A diminished Pakistan without a Nuclear capability unable to support any low
intensity adventures in KASHMIR etc.
b. A Somalia type Pakistan in case the Pakistani regime resists US threats to surrender
its Nuclear Arsenal.
c. A Pakistan led by collaborator Lotah type Muslim League (Q) politicians in a post
Musharraf Pakistan, with Pakistan like a Bhutan as compared to India and with semi
autonomous provinces.
The cycle of collaboration initiated by Pakistan's military and political leaders may reach its final logical phase in 2003-5. What began as limited collaboration would finally lead to the demise of a state created in the name of ideology.
The elite will enjoy in their castle like homes collaborating with the Americans and even Indians and the common man would be buggered as he was in 1947, 1971 and since time immemorial.
Pakistan's situation requires a resolute man. Collaboration shall not pay. Within an year or two Pakistan may be a Somalia or Bhutan in case this shameless collaboration goes on.
Pakistan needs a leader who has the courage to foresee, the resolution to do battle with the heavens if need be.
Khalid newest inmate at infamous Bagram prison
An article by Rahimullah Yusufzai in the Jang.
[Whenever your editor readers articles such as these, mentioning the inhumane treatment of POWs in American custody, he asks the question: perhaps the POWs would prefer to be prisoners in their own countries? Death by blunt force trauma would be a blessing. Further, would Mr. Yusufzai please tell us what happens to Pakistani prisoners, civil or military, when the authorities need to extract information quickly? Your editor is sure it is no different from India. Last, perhaps Mr. Yufuzai would like to visit some of the infamous American prisons like Angola? He will come away with a new perspective on the treatment meted to POWs in US custody.]
PESHAWAR: Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, allegedly a top al-Qaeda military planner, is the latest in a long list of suspected anti-US operatives to have been shifted to the secret, CIA-run prison at the Bagram airbase north of Kabul.
Former Taliban foreign minister Mulla Wakil Ahmad Mutawwakil is the most well known prisoner at Bagram. Abdul Salam Zaef, who served as the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, was held at Bagram before being shifted to the US military base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Omar al-Farooq, described by the US government and media as the al-Qaeda chief for Southeast Asia, is still being held at the infamous prison. Other prominent prisoners at Bagram include Afghan warlord Qari Roohullah, who as a member of the Loya Jirga voted for President Hamid Karzai last June, and his deputy Sabar Lal. Roohullah and Lal supported the US military campaign that ousted the Taliban from power and rose to positions of power in their native Kunar province. The Americans nabbed them following allegations that they helped al-Qaeda's Arab fighters to escape. Nationals of a number of countries have spent time in the detention centre in Bagram before being sent to the Guantanamo Bay or the British-owned Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. Some were lucky to gain freedom but only a few gathered the courage to talk about their inhumane treatment at the CIA interrogation centre.
The majority of its inmates continue to be Arabs and Afghans. Each one of its inmates is accused of links with al-Qaeda or Taliban. None has been tried in any court todate. The US military authorities never disclose the number and identity of the Bagram prisoners. Colonel Roger King, the US military's chief spokesman at Bagram, recently said no more than 100 detainees were held at the prison at any time and only for short periods. The Bagram prison, protected by barbed wire, is made up of shipping containers. The small cells with bare floor offer little comfort in the bitter cold of the Shomali plains. The place is shrouded in mystery and has become controversial following an article in the Washington Post last December that alleged US agents and their allies extracted information from detainees through "stress and duress" techniques.
It prompted the New York-based Human Rights Watch to write a protest letter to the US government. Two Afghan prisoners, aged 28 and 35, died last December at the prison after suffering "blunt force injuries," apparently due to torture. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has been unable to gain access to all detainees at Bagram. But its representatives were able to meet some of the prisoners at the prison.
A Kabul-based ICRC information delegate Simon Schorno said recently that his organization worked confidentially with the US authorities. Through the ICRC, most prisoners are able to write and receive letters. Mutawwakil not only wrote letters to his Quetta-based family but was also allowed during the recent Eidul Azha to make a few phone calls. However, some of the Taliban who served as his staff as foreign minister told The News that he wasn't allowed to meet any other prisoner at Bagram.
"A few freed Afghan prisoners said they saw Mutawwakil while walking past their cells at Bagram," informed one of his former staffers. The US military authorities also ran a prison at the Kandahar airbase. Apparently, it still exists even though most of the accused are now kept at the Bagram detention centre.
The few men freed from the Kandahar and Bagram prisons have narrated how they were maltreated both by the American and Afghan captors. In particular, they accused the Afghan intelligence officials hired by the US of inflicting torture on prisoners to extract information. In comparison, the three Afghans and a Pakistani who were freed from the US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay didn't experience as much humiliation and torture as the prisoners who were held at Kandahar and Bagram.
Debka Says Turkey Agrees to US Troops, Equipment Being Unloaded
Turkey Is Both Feet Back in Northern Front
Since Wednesday night, March 5, according to DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military sources, US supplies management teams of the US 1st Cavalry Division have been posted at four Turkish sea harbors, taking delivery of the equipment of the US 4th Infantry Division discharged after a long wait at sea.
For weeks, twenty-six US cargo ships carrying the division’s tanks and heavy equipment have been sitting over the horizon off Turkish shores. Now, they are unloading their cargoes directly onto railcars heading out to the Turkish-Iraqi frontier. Tens of thousands of 4th division troops are still aboard the freighters, except for the units flown in by air. According to a US war command estimate, those troops will need three days to reach the Iraqi frontier from the moment the signal to land is flashed by the Ankara government. That signal may come soon in the light of a certain impending turnabout in...
Return To Top March 10, 2003
March 9, 2003
U.N. evacuates [civilian] personnel from Iraq-Kuwait border
UN catches Marines on 'neutral zone' foray
Russian Military Holds Beauty Contests
Baghdad Targets Picked If Hussein Holes Up There February 8
Musharraf Facing Decision in the Security Council Soon February 8
Osama’s Two Son’s Captured? Maybe, Maybe Not February 8
China hikes defence budget by nearly 10 pc
February 8
Time may have finally run out for Iraq February 8
U.N. evacuates [civilian] personnel from Iraq-Kuwait border
CNN report.
KUWAIT CITY, Kuwait (CNN) -- The U.N. observer force in the demilitarized zone between Iraq and Kuwait has ordered the evacuation of most of its civilian staff to Kuwait City in the latest indication of rising tensions along the 200-mile strip.
The personnel being withdrawn are part of an observer force that has maintained a 10-mile-wide demilitarized zone along the border since the end of the Persian Gulf War in 1991.
The U.N. Iraq-Kuwait Observer Mission [UNIKOM] has also ratcheted up its alert status to "red." The nearly 200 observers and their 775 Bangladeshi military support units will remain. The upgrade to red alert, however, means the groups will be confined to their bases and stop conducting routine patrols of the DMZ.
UNIKOM sources confirm that some of the 230 civilian U.N. staff have already left their residential quarters in the demilitarized zone, with more scheduled to leave Sunday. However, some civilians will remain.
The move comes the day after the United Nations said Kuwaiti workers have cut holes in the border fence between Iraq and Kuwait big enough to drive military vehicles through. The workers apparently cut areas marked by U.S. Marines who have been working inside the demilitarized zone for days, according to the United Nations, in likely breach of the regulations covering the border area.
UN catches Marines on 'neutral zone' foray
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay, an article written by Daniel McGrory in Kuwait City.
[Note from the editor. The tone of this article is quite odd. US and Kuwaiti troops are cutting the wire to prepare for the invasion of Iraq. Why the US would be embarrassed at being “caught”, and why US commanders are blaming their men for following their orders is unclear. It’s also odd why US Marines are claiming to be Indian and Nepali workers.
THE United Nations accused US Marines yesterday of “the most flagrant and dangerous border incident in the past decade” after they attempted to force their way across the Kuwaiti border into Iraq. The Marines were caught by a UN patrol in what is supposed to be a demilitarised zone using bolt-cutters to make holes in the electrified fence that separates Kuwait from Iraq. US commanders in Kuwait were outraged when they were informed and have demanded a full investigation into the so-called “bolt hole” incident.
A senior military source in Kuwait said that the incursion had not been sanctioned by US Land Force commanders and described the attempt to cross the border as “unbelievably stupid and provocative”.
UN officers on patrol along the border late on Tuesday afternoon came across 12 men, dressed in casual clothes, cutting a 27-yard gap in a barbed wire fence. The men were said to have claimed that they were civilian contractors working for the Kuwaiti Government, but they had no escorts, no paperwork and no identity documents.
One was said to have claimed that the group had taken a wrong turning, although since there is only one road heading north and the border area is clearly marked with checkpoints and watch-towers, that was hardly plausible. According to an internal document of Unikom, the
UN observer force in Kuwait, the men said that they had been hired to cut 35 gaps by March 15. “The workers identified themselves to Unikom as Indian and Nepalese nationals,” the document says. “A commercial contractor from South Africa interviewed by Unikom investigators at the site of one of the gaps claimed that he was working under a contract issued by the Kuwaiti Ministry of Interior and the contract was to create 35 gaps in the electric fence before 15 March 2003.”
Further checks showed that the men had already cut seven large gaps in the 135-mile fence wide enough for a tank. They had also tampered with the electrified fence.
Daljeet Bagga, a UN spokesman at the zone, said yesterday: “This was not the only incursion by the Americans. Last month we found US Marines patrolling in a Humvee, dressed in their full battle uniforms and carrying M16 rifles.
“All of this is in complete contravention of the UN regulations. We registered our complaint with New York, who are still waiting for an explanation for that incident, and now we have men with bolt-cutters making holes in the fence.
“The Iraqis could well have retaliated if these men had forced their way across into their territory. We have also found the Americans putting communications equipment in the zone.” The zone is a nine-mile strip of land split by the electrified fence running down the barbed-wire divides. Only UN officials are permitted to go into the zone, which stretches for six miles into Iraq and three miles into Kuwait.
The incursion was being seen as a signal that the American military is preparing to move its armoured columns through the dividing fence. UN officials say that they also have evidence that the men were planning to cut similar gaps in the fence further south along the border.
The men were apparently trying to create more “gateways” into Iraq to avoid the need for army bulldozers to tear down the entire fence, which was completed in 1996.
What will embarrass the Americans is that UN officials in Kuwait report that Iraq is behaving “impeccably” in respecting the zone.
Return To Top March 9, 2003
Russian Military Holds Beauty Contests
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay, extracts from an article by Clem Cecil writing in the London Times. [Note from the editor. Indians may be forgiven for sometimes believing their nation must be just about the most bizarre on earth. Articles like the one below are reassuring in that even an Indian can say “we may be strange, but we are definitely not as strange as that…”]
Wearing full make-up and dressed to kill, two soldiers in the Russian Army demonstrate their shooting skills in what must be the world’s most unusual beauty pageant. The glamorous pair are among 16 women who have been picked from battalions all over Russia and brought to Moscow to take part in Beauty in Epaulettes 2003.
During the competition, which began on Thursday, the troops will be judged on their target skills and cooking abilities as well as ballroom dancing and, of course, their looks.
One contestant, Irina Savitskaya, 23, has become a military pin-up overnight after her picture was splashed on the cover of the Izvestia newspaper. She hopes that by taking part she will help to raise the profile of women in Spetsnaz, Russia’s equivalent of the SAS and the division in which she serves. “When I first joined Spetsnaz the men laughed at me. As soon as they found out what I was capable of, they gave me some respect,” she said.
The contest, which is timed to coincide with International Women’s Day today, is redolent of the combination of reverence and condescension towards women to be found in every sphere of Russian life. Indeed, as the shooting competition got underway, male officers smiled patronisingly as the women scrambled over tanks wielding Makarov pistols to fire at a target from 25 metres while taking care not to smudge heavy eye make-up.
At the climax of the competition, the contestants were to sashay on to the stage of the Theatre of the Soviet Army in central Moscow in full regalia: high heels, diminutive skirts and huge hairdos. The eventual winner was be declared Miss Epaulettes 2003.
Eight per cent of the Russian Army is female, a figure topped only in the United States and Israel, but most of the women are nurses or administrators. Of the 1.1 million-strong army, it is claimed that 100,000 are women and more than 3,500 of those are officers, including more than 150 colonels and 800 majors.
Return To Top March 9, 2003
March 8, 2003
Baghdad Targets Picked If Hussein Holes Up There
Musharraf Facing Decision in the Security Council Soon
Osama’s Two Son’s Captured? Maybe, Maybe Not
China hikes defence budget by nearly 10 pc
Time may have finally run out for Iraq
Terrorists May Grab Pakistan Nukes: US Expert March 7
Fire On Russian Submarine March 7
As UN Split Hardens, War Nears March 7
Snippets February 6
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s Capture in Perspective March 5
Editorial: North Korea - Stating the Obvious and Asking Some Questions March 5
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - terrorist mastermind or playboy has-been? March 5
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
Baghdad Targets Picked If Hussein Holes Up There
Extracts from an article by MICHAEL R. GORDON writing in the New York Times
CAMP VIRGINIA, Kuwait, March 6 — If in the event of war Saddam Hussein decides to make a final stand in Baghdad, the American military plans to send troops into the heart of the city in a coordinated ground and air campaign against centers of government power, the commander of the Army's forces in Kuwait said. The aim is to avoid bloody house-to-house fighting that could claim large numbers of American and civilian lives, he said. The plan would also avoid a prolonged siege, which could leave the Iraqi leader in control of his capital and in a position to exploit world concern about the fate of his citizens.
In an interview at his desert headquarters in northwest Kuwait, Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace outlined a deliberate strategy that calls for patient reconnaissance, focused airstrikes by Air Force planes and Army attack helicopters and penetrations into the heart of Baghdad by armored formations, light infantry and combat engineers.
"I am talking about attacking those things from which the regime draws its power but being very careful about it so that we don't get large bodies of young Americans caught up in a house-to-house Berlin, World War II-type scenario," he said.
As commander of V Corps, General Wallace is in charge of the Army force that is poised to invade Iraq. His comments represented the most extensive account by the American military of how it plans, if there is war, to take Baghdad. The remarks appeared intended to signal to Mr. Hussein that the American military would not shrink from urban warfare while reassuring Americans and the world that efforts would be made to keep casualties to a minimum.
The American military is hoping that the Iraqi government rapidly collapses under a punishing air attack and the psychological pressure of advancing American forces, relieving G.I.'s of the need to fight in Baghdad. But Army officials are not counting on that happening. They say that Mr. Hussein's strategy is to use regular Iraqi troops in southern Iraq to delay the American advance and inflict casualties while keeping divisions of the Republican Guard, Mr. Hussein's elite forces, near Baghdad for the major battle.
The Iraqis have established two defensive rings around Baghdad, according to American intelligence. The outer ring is intended to defend against American attackers and the inner ring will help maintain internal security, intelligence officials say. The first step in any battle of Baghdad would be locating the remaining centers of power, General Wallace said. "If you look at Baghdad itself, there's presidential palaces and the seats of government within the city which seem to be the places from which he controls the country. Whether that will be the case when we get there, we'll just have to see. Knowing exactly where he is pulling the strings from and how he is pulling those strings will be very important."
Musharraf Facing Decision in the Security Council Soon
Extracts from an article forwarded by Ram Narayanan; Erik Eckholm writing in the New York Times
During the next week the government of President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan may face an unwelcome moment of truth on the United Nations Security Council. Should Pakistan, a rotating member of the Council, support a resolution, unpopular at home, that would back an American-led attack on fellow Muslims in Iraq? Or should it risk the wrath of the United States, General Musharraf's vital but possibly fickle ally?
In a country tattered by religious and political conflict, the choice is excruciating, with possible effects on Pakistan's social stability, its paramount foreign policy goals in Kashmir and its broader strategic position — not to mention General Musharraf's own standing.
Most Pakistanis have little love for Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi leader, who has never offered strong support against India over the disputed territory of Kashmir — an emotional core issue in Pakistan's foreign policy. But most people are also deeply suspicious of American goals in the Middle East and strongly oppose an attack on Iraq. General Musharraf faces agitation from emboldened, hard-line Islamic groups.
Washington's aggressive policy on Iraq has become a rallying cry among the conservative Islamic parties that speak for a vociferous minority of Pakistanis. The religious parties are organizing large street demonstrations. More than 200,000, by some estimates, turned out last Sunday in Karachi, and another rally is scheduled in Rawalpindi this weekend. The mullahs have accused General Musharraf of selling out to what they call the evil, anti-Muslim American empire. But General Musharraf's sense of Pakistan's strategic and economic needs argues against the popular sensibility, diplomats and political experts say, just as it did after Sept. 11, when, to avert catastrophe, he severed ties with the Taliban and joined the war against terrorism.
Osama’s Two Son’s Captured? Maybe, Maybe Not
Interior minister denies bin Laden's sons captured
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan's Interior Minister Faisal Saleh Hayat Friday denied reports cited by a provincial minister that two sons of Osama bin Laden had been arrested in a joint operation by Pakistani, Afghan and US forces in southeast Afghanistan near the Pakistani and Iranian borders. Two sons of Osama, others arrested in Afghanistan operation
KARACHI: Two sons of Osma bin Laden and some other people were arrested Friday in an operation in Afghanistan near Pakistan border, a Balochistan minister told Geo TV on Friday. He said that the sons of Osama have been arrested in an injured condition and added there were more causalities there. He said that the arrests were made during operation for the arrest of Osama bin Laden.
China hikes defence budget by nearly 10 pc
From the Times of India
BEIJING: China on Thursday hiked its defence budget for 2003 by 9.6 per cent, the 14th increase in as many years, to modernise the 2.5-million-strong military with high-tech weaponry to deter Taiwan from seceding and safeguard national sovereignty.
"Expenditures for national defence in the central budget for 2003 amount to 185.3 billion yuan ($22.43 billion), an increase of 9.6 per cent," China's Finance Minister Xiang Huaicheng said, presenting China's national budget for the current year on the second day of the National People's Congress (NPC), China's parliament.
Defending the near-double digit hike, Xiang said China's military has to adapt to "changes in the international situation, safeguarding national security and sovereignty and territorial integrity and raising the combat effectiveness of the armed forces in fighting wars to defend the country with the use of high-technology."
The 9.6 per cent hike is more than the around seven per cent GDP growth the outgoing Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji has set for this year.
Commenting on the 9.6 per cent hike, defence analysts here said that it was more or less on expected lines since the world's largest standing army, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), was in the process of modernising with the induction of more high-tech weaponry from countries like Russia and Israel.
At the same time, he pointed out that the real budget for the military could be between three and four times the published figure.
Unpublished budget items include certain research and development programmes and some special weapons purchases, a western diplomat said, adding that China's ambitious manned space programme could also be part of the military spending.
Analysts say that the PLA is worried over continued US supply of arms to Taiwan, which China views as a rebel province that must be reunified with the mainland, even by force.
Time may have finally run out for Iraq
By Richard M. Bennett.
The air war may well begin within days and a full scale ground invasion by the middle of March. That would appear to be the most likely scenario according to many observers following the press conference given by President Bush on Thursday evening and the likelihood that the latest statement by Hans Blix on Friday will be another fudge, offering some encouragement for both those intent on war and those who argue that the UN inspections should be given more time. It would hardly be surprising if The Whitehouse was to confirm that the one thing they really dreaded was that Saddam Hussein would finally decide on full co-operation and seriously disarm, that indeed would not have fitted in with US planning at all. However the Iraqi dictator has once again played into American hands as many of the Bush administrations analysts confidently predicted.
The one somewhat unexpected problem arose with the significant opposition to US policy on Iraq by a triumvirate of 'old' European states; France, Germany and Russia. This has cast something of a gloom over US and British actions and soured relationships with long standing allies to a degree that will undoubtedly effect the long term chances of survival of both NATO and the broader Atlantic alliance. It also and perhaps even more importantly means the possible sidelining of the United Nations as Britain and America go to war unilaterally and without the legitimization of genuine and widespread international support The United States, long seen as a key supporter and controlling influence on the United Nations risks become isolated and indeed seen, rightly or wrongly, as an aggressive, neo-imperialistic nation intent of gaining control of the worlds most important natural resources and utterly intolerant of opposition.
Of particular concern is the obvious inability, at least so far, of the Bush administration to sell US policy on the need for a veritable orgy of regime changes in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and very probably North Korea and Venezuela as well. Nor has a convincing case been made for the belief that the military campaigns will be surgical in their swiftness and with the sureness of a quick disengagement afterwards.
History has taught us that military planning usually starts to come unstuck with the first arrow, bullet or cruise missile fired in anger and that the aftermath of victory rarely allows for a clean escape from becoming the long term occupying power. If the Bush administration sincerely believes in an sharp 'in and out' conflict with any of the target nations then it is probably in for a very rude awakening. For with the ultimate power to change regimes comes the ultimate responsibility for the consequences. The United States will almost certainly find itself trapped in a state of endless low-level conflicts, interspersed with violent revolts and small wars and with the ever present threat of terrorism for a minimum of twenty five years and very probably most of the rest of the 21st Century.
The US risks becoming a new colonial superpower
This is a prospect that would undoubtedly appall the majority of ordinary Americans, even though it presents a bright future of opportunity to the construction and arms industries and of course endless promotion for an ambitious military deprived of the fifty years of cold war confrontation with the Soviet Union. Present US policy is unlikely to achieve anything more than regime change and short term economic advantage, while the unpalatable price the American and to a lesser extent the British people will be probably forced to pay will be to become the leading members of a new Colonial alliance with hundreds of thousands of its servicemen and women constantly deployed in dangerous operations around the world. Worse still they may not have the approval of the United Nations and perhaps anything other than the open hostility of once staunch allies.
What can be virtually guaranteed however is the outright hatred of many of the conquered or threatened nations and the bitter determination of the Islamic terrorist groups in particular, to kill and maim American and British tourists, businessmen and women, sports stars, celebrities and leading politicians as well as military personnel, anywhere in the world.
The United States has gained the right to remove regimes it dislikes because it alone has the power to do so. However the military sabre can cut both ways and the ability to quickly invade and overthrow the Government of a foreign country does not necessarily guarantee an effective exit strategy. The short term economic and defence gains that the United States will probably make, and the political benefits that the Bush administration undoubtedly anticipate appear to be as far as The Whitehouse has seriously taken its planning unless you take the conspiratorial view that this is all part of the imposition of a New World Order.
The suspicion is that the overall geo-strategic perception of the 'Hawks' in the Government, Congress and the Pentagon is extremely limited and in the aftermath of 9-11, events that so traumatized America, but neatly dovetailed with existing plans for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, US policy has been steamrollered down a path that has already lead to serious divisions with and among former allies, and now risks plunging the world back into the fractured, ethnic and religious warfare of the 12th and 13th centuries. Sadly it would appear that short terms political gains for the Bush administration may only bring long term pain for the American people as a whole.
Return To Top March 8, 2003
March 7, 2003
Terrorists May Grab Pakistan Nukes: US Expert
Fire On Russian Submarine
As UN Split Hardens, War Nears
World Abuzz With Possible Osama Capture
Thousands of 1st Armd Div troops get orders to join in Gulf buildup February 6
US Guard and Reserve Mobilized As Of March 5, 2003 February 6
Turkish general backs US February 6
February 6
Snippets February 6
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s Capture in Perspective March 5
Editorial: North Korea - Stating the Obvious and Asking Some Questions March 5
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - terrorist mastermind or playboy has-been? March 5
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
Terrorists May Grab Pakistani Nukes: US Expert
Forwarded by Ram Nayarayan, from the Economic Times [A Times of India newspaper].
NEW DELHI: Pakistan has been moving its nuclear arsenal frequently in recent times. It could lead to a danger of these weapons falling into the hands of terrorists, a leading US nuclear expert said today.
Ever since the September 11 terror attacks in US, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf has been moving his nuclear weapons frequently for fear of US or Indian strikes, visiting US expert Scot D Sagan said.
He said such frequent movements of nuclear weapons, particularly in a country like Pakistan, where Al Qaeda supporters were still inside and outside the Pakistan army made these warheads more vulnerable to terrorists snatch.
Advocating that India and Pakistan should move away from nuclear brinkmanship, he and another leading US nuclear expert Ashley Tellis termed New Delhi's pronouncement of use of nuclear option in case of being attacked by chemical and biological weapons as a "significant switch" from the no first use doctrine.
Saying that the pronouncement almost amounted to first use policy under certain conditions, Mr Sagan said the real threat to India's security would be if these weapons fell into the hands of terrorists.
Claiming the pronouncements made early this year would now make Indian and US nuclear doctrine almost aligned, the experts speaking at a seminar on ‘Nuclear Weapons in South Asia' as part of an ongoing wider Indo-US dialogue on nuclear and missile technology said such shifts in nuclear policy would strengthen India's nuclear commitment.
Fire damages Russian nuclear submarine
MOSCOW: A fire broke out at a ship repair facility in northwestern Russia on Wednesday, damaging a nuclear submarine that was standing in a dock, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported. There was no radiation leak, the report said.
The fire broke out at a Northern Fleet facility in Roslyakovo, near the Arctic port of Murmansk, ITAR-Tass reported, citing fleet officials. It spread to scaffolding and singed part of a rubber covering on the nuclear submarine Pskov, the report said. It took several fire crews 90 minutes to extinguish the blaze, ITAR-Tass reported. Navy and Northern Fleet officials could not be reached for comment.
Roslyakovo is where the wreck of the nuclear submarine Kursk was towed in October 2001, a year after it was destroyed by explosions, killing all 188 seamen aboard. The damaged hull spent months in Roslyakovo before being towed to another facility last April for dismantling.
As UN split hardens, war nears
For full story by Brad Knickerbocker, read the Christian Science Monitor
With France, Russia, and Germany balking at any resolution on war, an invasion may be only days away.
WASHINGTON - The window on war with Iraq is suddenly narrowing as diplomatic options fade and the United States settles its full force of troops into place.
The decision by France, Russia, and Germany Wednesday to oppose any UN resolution that would authorize the use of force has sharply diminished the political solutions that remain in the standoff over Iraq.
As a result, experts - to the extent there are experts on such issues - now think a war could begin in a matter of days, probably no longer than two weeks. "US military action in Iraq is imminent...," says Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute, a public-policy think tank in Arlington, Va.
Some analysts, such as John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org in Alexandria, Va., predicts the war will begin "after March 7 but possibly before March 14."
World buzzing with Osama catch
For full story, read the Jang
Nine al-Qaeda men held near Afghan border; officials claim Osama or his son among arrested
QUETTA: A major operation was reported to have been conducted in Noshki near Chaghai in Balochistan on Thursday to apprehend the top al-Qaeda terrorists hiding there. According to Online News Agency nine al-Qaeda suspects were reported to have been arrested in the raid. But there was no confirmation of this from any source.
Return To Top March 7, 2003
March 6, 2003
Thousands of 1st Armd Div troops get orders to join in Gulf buildup
US Guard and Reserve Mobilized As Of March 5, 2003
Turkish general backs US
US General foresees war unlike that of 1991
Snippets
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s Capture in Perspective March 5
Editorial: North Korea - Stating the Obvious and Asking Some Questions March 5
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - terrorist mastermind or playboy has-been? March 5
North Korea steps up confrontation - in anticipation of a US air strike? March 5
Britain’s Sun Says: War In 10 Days March 4
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
Thousands of 1st Armored Div. troops get orders to join in Gulf buildup
From European Stars & Stripes
About 13,000 1st Armored Division soldiers received word Tuesday that they were joining the growing number of U.S. troops based in the Persian Gulf.
The orders were among those issued over the weekend for 60,000 more U.S. soldiers to prepare for hostilities with Iraq.
With more than 200,000 troops already deployed to the Persian Gulf, the Army’s only armor division was among the last of the major combat commands to prepare for pending hostilities in the U.S. Army Central Command’s area of responsibility.
However, members of the division, headquartered in Wiesbaden, Germany, continued to train while awaiting the call, a unit leader said.
“We’re more ready than we’ve ever been in the past two years — extremely ready,” said Col. Michael Tucker, commander of the division’s Friedberg-based 1st Brigade.
For the past two months, Tucker’s “Ready First” brigade conducted both gunnery and maneuver training at the Army training center at Grafenwöhr. The exercise culminated in a live-fire exercise that combined the brigade’s tanks and infantry with artillery and engineers. They trained to standard doctrine for a brigade combat team, with a task force twist — armor and infantry companies combined…
…This week, soldiers are cleaning and repairing their equipment from the field while brigade staff continues to train for the deployment, Tucker said. The brigade is awaiting further guidance on when to move out, he said.
The division’s 2nd Brigade troops at Baumholder are also confident, said Col. John D. Johnson, the brigade commander.
“We could not be better prepared right now. We’ve been doing some of the best training I’ve ever seen,” he said.
Johnson attributed the sharpness to increased focus by soldiers to the possibility of war.
“We’d be kidding ourselves if we didn’t say that soldiers have more sense of purpose when they can see their mission,” he said.
He said the brigade faced a major organizational puzzle ahead, with the need to “take all this equipment and 3,500 soldiers plus, pick it all up and put it someplace else,” Johnson said.
But he said his unit has one advantage over others: all the 2nd Brigade pieces can train together regularly thanks to Baumholder’s maneuver and live-fire training areas.
The 4th Brigade’s attack helicopters, under the command of Col. David Lawrence, are based in Hanau, Germany.
Last week, soldiers from the division’s 3rd Brigade, based in Fort Riley, Kan., received deployment orders.
[Orbat.com note: Breakdown of the latest deployment order for our reader’s reference; 26,000 troops from the 1st Armored Division, 24,000 troops from the 1st Cavalry Division and 10,000 from the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment.]
US Guard and Reserve Mobilized As Of March 5, 2003
US Dept. of Defence
This week the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps each announce an increase of reservists on active duty in support of the partial mobilization. The net collective result is 8,470 more reservists than last week.
The total number of reserve personnel currently on active duty in support of the partial mobilization for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve is 127,487; Naval Reserve, 8,004; Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve, 23,109; Marine Corps Reserve, 15,022; and the Coast Guard Reserve, 2,931. This brings the total Reserve and National Guard on active duty to 176,553 including both units and individual augmentees.
At any given time, services may mobilize some units and individuals while demobilizing others, making it possible for these figures to either increase or decrease.
A cumulative roster of all National Guard and Reserve who are currently on active duty can be found at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2003/d20030305ngr.pdf.
From Times of London
TURKEY’S powerful military intervened yesterday to break the deadlock over Washington’s request to open a northern front on Iraq through Turkish soil, lending its support to a possible new parliamentary vote allowing US troop deployment.
It remains to be seen, however, whether a rare public statement by General Hilmi Ozkok, the Chief of General Staff, which also included a veiled warning against Iraqi Kurdish independence, is too late for an impatient US keen to begin an assault on President Saddam Hussein.
“The Turkish Armed Forces’ view is the same as the Government’s and is reflected in the motion our Government sent to parliament. With a northern front, the war will be short. The pain will be less,” General Ozkok said.
“If we don’t take part, we will suffer the same damage, but it won’t be possible to get compensation for the losses we suffer . . . or for us to have a say afterwards.”
The military’s views could sway MPs. General Ozkok’s statement was welcomed by Abdullah Gul, the Prime Minister, whose Government failed by three votes on Saturday to secure parliamentary approval for a deployment of up to 62,000 US troops.
The military had failed to give explicit backing before that vote and General Ozkok’s statement strengthens the likelihood of the Government introducing and passing a new motion on Sunday.
The general also told Iraqi Kurds that Turkey would intervene to stop any breakaway.
General foresees war unlike that of 1991
From New York Times via International Herald Tribune
Washington - The U.S. war plan for Iraq entails shocking the Iraqi leadership into submission quickly with an attack "much, much, much different" from the 43-day Gulf War in 1991, according to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The chairman, General Richard Myers, declined to give details, but other military officials have said the plan calls for unleashing 3,000 precision-guided bombs and missiles in the first 48 hours of a short air campaign, to be followed quickly by ground operations.
Myers warned that the U.S. attack would result in Iraqi civilian casualties despite the military's best efforts to prevent them.
"If asked to go into conflict in Iraq, what you'd like to do is have it be a short conflict," Myers said Tuesday. "The best way to do that would be to have such a shock on the system that the Iraqi regime would have to assume early on the end was inevitable."
Myers also said that disarming Iraq, not capturing or killing President Saddam Hussein, would define victory.
The general said U.S. forces would open a second front from the north against Iraq, with or without Turkey's help.
"It'll be tougher without Turkey, but nevertheless it'll happen," he said.
In addition to the heavy use of precision-guided bombs and missiles, the war planning includes missions by allied special operations forces in and around Baghdad, attacking leadership, command and control and storage sites for weapons of mass destruction.
"If your template is Desert Storm, you have to imagine something much, much, much different," Myers said, warning journalists who planned to cover any war from Baghdad. "I would just be very, very careful about how you do your business."
In 1991, allied aircraft conducted a 39-day bombing campaign before ground troops moved into Kuwait. Rather than a sequential attack, commanders this time plan a nearly simultaneous attack by land, air and sea.
With 200,000 American military troops in the Gulf and 60,000 more on their way, Myers declined to give a timetable for war other than to say that the military was ready to attack on President George W. Bush's order.
But many diplomatic and military issues remained unresolved.
With the northern-front question unsettled and one leading alternative - deploying the 101st Airborne Division from Kuwait - still one to two weeks from being in place, some military officials said any attack could be delayed until late March.
That could fit with emerging diplomatic and military timetables. A vote late next week in the Security Council would roughly coincide with the arrival in Kuwait of many of the 101st Airborne's helicopters.
Other units in Kuwait could deploy north faster, if needed.
[Orbat.com note: One other difference; the number of US military personnel, especially combat troops in this war will be significantly less than the number committed to Desert Storm, particularly if the total 1991 Allied coalition is counted.]
Return To Top March 6, 2003
Snippets
The London Sun the snitch in the Khalid Sheikh Mohammad case is the son of Abdul Rachman Ahmed, now serving a life sentence in the US for the first WTC bombing. He will get $25 million and plans to settle in the UK. The Sun.
The US the dispatch of 24 B-52 and B-1 bombers to Guam was decided on before the interception of a US surveillance aircraft. The US routinely reinforces trouble spots before conduction major operations, so we may assume this is correct. The Washington Post reports today that the US is resigned to a nuclear North Korea. We may be wrong, but this looks like the US putting some not-so-subtle pressure on Moscow, Beijing, Seoul, and Tokyo to get on the US side on this issue. Meanwhile, the US is said to be of two minds regarding provision of fighter escorts to surveillance aircraft. The US position is these are routine, non-threatening activities carried out far from a country’s borders; fighter escorts would undermine this position.
An interview with the commandant of the Indian National Defense Academy, an officer training school, raises issues concerning the deteriorating standards of physical fitness of youngsters accepted to this elite institution and obliquely addresses the growing inability of the Indian armed forces to attract officer candidates of the quality needed. Rediff.com.
Israel is preparing to retaliate for the latest bombing: 50 tanks are reported moving toward a refugee camp Gaza which has already been attacked by missile firing helicopter gunships. Haaretz.com. The Palestinian attack is the first in two months, during which period, according to ABC-TV, 150 Palestinians have been killed, including civilians.
Return To Top March 6, 2003
March 5, 2003
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s Capture in Perspective
Editorial: North Korea - Stating the Obvious and Asking Some Questions
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - terrorist mastermind or playboy has-been?
North Korea steps up confrontation - in anticipation of a US air strike?
Britain’s Sun Says: War In 10 Days March 4
Libya to Recall Ambassador in Row With Saudi March 4
Mid East-Gulf Region Braces for War and Terror March 4
Opinion: Turkey and the US
Sadly, Al Qa'ida will survive the arrest of 9-11 plannerMarch 3
Iraq policy not to remodel Mideast, says Powell March 3
157 tonnes of anthrax, VX nerve gas found: Iraq March 3
Khalid Sheikh Arrested in Rawalpindi March 2
Iraq: US Buildup February 28
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed’s Capture in Perspective
Johann Price, Editor, Analysis at Orbat.com
There is absolutely nothing trivial about the capture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (who will be referred to as KSM for the sake of convenience in the rest of this article) in Rawalpindi day before yesterday. It is the culmination of six months of painstaking monitoring and many close misses by US federal agencies in conjunction with Pakistani authorities. Some typically overenthusiastic news reports have described KSM as al-Qaeda’s ‘number three man’ while others habitually given to interpretations that diminish or denigrate the achievements of the Coalition have already begun a revisionist campaign to brand KSM as ‘over the hill’ or a sacrificial pawn by the ISI or al-Qaeda to keep American pressure in check.
In order to make sense of these claims we must understand (a) the goals of the Bush Administration in the war on terror and (b) KSM’s history and role in al-Qaeda<
The Bush administration for it’s part has done a very poor job of articulating
its priorities and the thinking behind them in the seventeen months since the
terrorist atrocities of 11 September. From all the accounts this author has
encountered he must conclude that this has been because the Administration
itself struggled mightily to place the attacks and their implications in
context, even as it has consistently remained unwilling to allow such
difficulties to become an excuse for a weak or non-existent response.
Some of the initial statements including the infamous ‘dead or alive’
declaration made by President George W. Bush, have continued to shaped our
understanding of American strategy long after US Government thinking has evolved
past it. Part of the problem has been that most of us have so enjoyed
caricaturizing Bush that it has generally been unable to see beyond the purely
superficial. Careful examination suggests that while he is far more impetuous in
his statements than in the formation and execution of policy. The other half of
course is the character of the Bush team. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc are all
highly opinionated individuals who see domestic and international disagreement
as inevitable obstacles that can best be negotiated by forcing acceptance in the
aftermath rather than permission beforehand.
On an intellectual and emotional level Rumsfeld (and through him Bush and the
cabinet) has been greatly affected by Roberta Wohlsetter’s masterful analysis of
the intelligence and policy failures that led to surprise at Pearl Harbor.
Thomas Schelling’s quote from the introduction to his book Pearl Harbor:
Warning and Decision sums it up:
“There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the
improbable…The danger is in a poverty of expectations, a routine obsession with
a few dangers that may be familiar rather than likely”
The Bush administration has consistently refused to formally accept any such judgment, but many key figures have in their own ways admitted that it was exactly such a failure that allowed 9-11 to happen, and the knowledge must weigh heavily on them.
The most important determination after 9-11 starting with President Bush was not to catch Osama bin Laden dead or alive, but to ensure that the American government never again failed to protect its citizens from catastrophic attack because of the poverty of expectations.
The only threat that rated above ‘conventional’ terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda on September 10 was the threat from Weapons of Mass Destruction. Given how wrong the American government was about al-Qaeda, it is understandable why Bush may feel that no cost is too high in reducing American exposure to ‘rogue’ states with access to such technologies and a grudge against the United States. The assistance provided by Iraqi intelligence to al-Qaeda on chemical and biological weapons while basic is a very clear illustration that such risks are not merely within the realm of bad fiction. Many of the al-Qaeda figures responsible for training the terrorists are also under Saddam Hussein’s protection in Iraq. The ‘academic’ advice provided by two former Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission scientists to bin Laden in 2001 on radiological bombs and Chemical and Biological Weapon (CBW) dispersal also highlights transfer risks.
So where did the capture of Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaeda apical figures stand among the emerging Coalition priorities after 9-11? This author would say it has been number three in the last eleven to twelve months, well after mitigating the WMD threat, and disrupting further al-Qaeda attacks on Coalition targets at home and abroad. To put it cynically it would be far, far more politically disastrous for Bush or Blair to have their citizens die by the hundreds in further ‘conventional’ or other attacks than to have bin Laden alive and free in some madrassa on Pakistani tribal land.
Within the United States in the early days after 9-11 Attorney General John Ashcroft under instructions from Bush shifted the FBI’s counter-terrorism priorities from criminal conviction to prevention through surveillance, analysis and detention.
US intelligence community priorities outside North America changed once the high intensity phase of Operation Enduring Freedom wound down in April of 2002. Al Qaeda for its part successfully conducted eight terrorist attacks between May and November of 2002, killing an estimated 253 people, 202 of them in the horrific bombing of a nightclub in Bali last October. A number of other attacks in Europe and elsewhere, including the use of chemical weapons were foiled through the cooperation of law enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world.
In short it became quickly clear that al-Qaeda’s capacity to mount exceedingly lethal attacks had not yet been attrited to the point that it was safe to concentrate on decapitation, especially given the complexities involved in getting full cooperation from the Pakistan Army and the ISI. In the last few months a broad effort has resulted in the capture of a number of senior operational figures in the last six months including Omar Al-Farouq, the Kuwaiti chief of operations in Southeast Asia, Abd’al Rahim al-NashirI the chief of Gulf operations and naval terrorism expert. Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi the Yemen operations chief was killed by a UAV airstrike. In addition dozens of their closest aides and assistants, the men who could best replace them have also been captured, or in some cases eliminated. Al-Qaeda’s terrorist networks were well developed but the numbers of operatives capable of planning and mounting attacks in third countries is limited, and thanks to the loss of secure facilities in Afghanistan they can no longer be quickly and easily replaced.
This is especially true of KSM, who had been involved with the world of international jihad for 17 years, at least 11 of them directly involved with al-Qaeda’s terrorism from its failures to its most dramatic success. Along with nephew Ramzi Yousef he stood out in terms of his cultural capital, i.e. his ability to become either Gulf Arab or Pakistani as the situation demands, and a Western education that gave them a dangerous familiarity with our ways. This was a man who helped al-Qaeda forge and maintain the kinds of alliances with extremist groups (especially in South East Asia and South Asia) that gave al-Qaeda the long reach that defined them as global rather than a regional threat. These organizations depend on al-Qaeda for funds, expertise and in some cases targeting guidance and even the actual suicide attackers. KSM provided that vital link, coordinating timing, allocating funding and providing advice and seconding al-Qaeda personnel such as bomb-makers and suicide bombers. He has continued to actively perform these functions from within Pakistan as evinced by message traffic and interrogations.
His loss is a blow that al-Qaeda can fully recover from in two to five years, if we allow them the time. For now in conjunction with domestic vigilance Europe, North America and South East Asia should be considerably safer, although any attacks that are already close to ready will not be affected. Pakistan is also less likely to experience al-Qaeda suicide bomb attacks such as those seen in Karachi, though local extremist gunmen will probably attack American personnel in retaliation as seen in several instances through the 1990s. East Africa and the Middle East with a much more robust al-Qaeda presence will remain dangerous.
So what can the Coalition do with the time that it has won for itself so meritoriously? After the war in Iraq our decision-makers ideally should comprehensively review progress in the war on terror and re-examine priorities. It would be a terrible shame if the neutralization of al-Qaeda’s strategic leadership was neglected because of any over-dependence on either Musharraf’s promises or his skin. Dictators come and go, but opportunities to permanently cripple terror threats are much rarer; one Tora Bora was more than enough.
Longer term we must be willing to ask ourselves what can be done to mitigate Pakistan’s nurture of domestic Islamists, a magnet and a shield for those who are willing to kill in their war against the West. While the joint operations that resulted in the arrest of figures like Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi bin al Shibh and KSM indicate that there are people and institutions in Pakistan willing to assist in the fight against terrorism, it can not be forgotten that these figures and those still at large could not have remained free for this long without deep as well as wide support in powerful Pakistani circles.
Musharraf is an opportunistic survivor, not a friend or an ally we should hang all of our hopes on. Optimists would be mistaken in assuming that the ISI and Pakistan Army are now more willing than before to deliver bin Laden and those closest to him. Benazir Bhutto’s unpopular rendering of Ramzi Yousef in 1995 and Nawaz Sharief’s extradition of Mir Aimal Kansi in 1997 did little on their own to end the Pakistani establishment’s willingness to support or host terrorist movements bent on attacking the west. In fact the record shows that in the last decade every American victory against terrorism in Pakistan has been followed by vicious and fatal attacks by Pakistani terrorists on Americans. Attacks that are rarely ever solved by Pakistani authorities. Attacks that seem to kill a disproportionate number of American intelligence personnel. A rather curious coincidence.
Editorial: North Korea - Stating the Obvious and Asking Some Questions
We are baffled by some of the discussion on North Korea. We are being told that should the US take preemptive action against North Korea’s nuclear program, the North could attack the South, raining 400,000 artillery shells and rockets on Seoul in the first hour alone with 13,000 guns and rocket launchers. A million casualties are possible in a second Korean War: presumably these are the military casualties alone. Lets ignore for a moment how realistic some of these calculations are.
How many of the commentators giving us such dire warnings take into account that the moment North Korea unleashes such a blitz, the US will react with tactical nuclear weapons? The US, and the US alone determines what the threshold for nuclear release is. Faced with the possibility of hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties in Seoul alone on the first day, and the worst case scenario of the US 2nd Infantry Division and several ROK divisions getting overrun, are we to believe the US will merely sit there and react conventionally? The US made clear any Soviet attack on West Europe, conventional or otherwise, would be met with nuclear weapons. Because the Soviets could retaliate with nuclear weapons, the US wanted the maximum possible flexibility before going to nuclear release, so it spoke of a conventional warfighting capability. There is no retaliation possible for the North Koreans, correspondingly, for the US there is no bar to lowering the nuclear threshold as low as it likes.
As a deterrent to the US, it is said North Korea can fire chemical weapons or lob missiles at Japan. Mr. Kim will sign his country’s death warrant in either case. The issue is not if Kim Il Jong understands this. The military equation between the US and North Korea is so lopsided its matters little what Mr. Kim thinks.
We are constantly told how little America really understands other cultures, other places. Has anyone considered how little Mr. Kim understands America? Here he is, escalating his pressure tactics every day. Does he understand each time he escalates the American constituency for negotiation as a way of resolving the crisis erodes further? Does he really believe the anti-US sentiment in South Korea will stop Washington from doing what America feels necessary to assure America’s security? Does he really think the US is doing other with its pious proclamations of how difficult a problem North Korea is except buying time till it finishes with Iraq? Does he understand that the US does not believe in compromising with tinpot dictators? And does he understand that by his actions he is only ensuring his own untimely demise?
Mr. Kim was quiet till the momentum for war in the Gulf was irreversible. He figured the US would compromise rather than deal with two crises at one time. He was wrong. The US has not been intimidated into dealing with him. Rather, he has neatly given the Bush administration what it lacked till now, a causus belli to attack North Korea. Even as the clock ticks down, the canny Mr. Saddam Hussein has avoided giving the US such an excuse. Mr. Kim strikes us as a bit dim.
Meanwhile, we call for opinions. We are told a handful of American aircraft can stop an armored division in its tracks. The military balance between North and South Korea is well known. Can North Korea really come storming across the DMZ, and if so, how far will it get before it is stopped, assuming purely a conventional situation?
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - terrorist mastermind or playboy has-been?
By Richard Bennett and Marcus Cohen.
The delay of three days in handing Khalid Sheikh Mohammed over to the United States for transfer to the CIA Interrogation and terrorist holding centre at Bagram airbase in Afghanistan was occasioned by the Pakistan intelligence services noted lack of inhibitions in using extreme methods of torture to obtain quickly valuable information a suspect may have before the targeted extremist organization can react to limit any possible damage to its network, future operations or its most vulnerable members. The CIA will no doubt no play 'good cop' to the ISI or Inter-Service Intelligence agency's 'bad cop' and hope that medical treatment and the promise of future less-rigorous investigative methods will encourage full co-operation. The ultimate sanction of an early transfer to the harsh conditions of the Guantanamo Bay specialist prison facilities or the even more frightening alternative of being returned to the custody of the Pakistani interrogators may be more than sufficient to cause Mohammed to talk willingly.
The use of some form of drug-based interrogation technique as a 'check' against the natural propensity of a suspected terrorist to mislead their captors, remains a distinct possibility. Far from being a genuine 'truth drug' their use however in reducing the prisoners resistance to interrogation has been noted in US documents since the early 1960's.This however, still begs the question of actually how valuable this arrest will eventually prove to be. There are persistent reports coming from reputable sources in the Middle East and India that and assuming the Americans do indeed have the correct suspect in custody, the 'playboy terrorists' usefulness as an informant is strictly limited. Having been on the run for the best part of a year and half and indeed having only just escaped death or capture on a number of occasions his knowledge of the latest developments within the terrorist group and any planning of future Al Qa'ida operations may prove of much less value than his CIA interrogators have obviously been led to expect.
North Korea steps up confrontation - in anticipation of a US air strike?
By Richard Bennett and Marcus Cohen.
In an event reminiscent of the EP3A incident over the South China Sea in April 2001, a large United States Air Force RC-135 Electronic Warfare aircraft packed with the most sophisticated intelligence, surveillance, signals interception and long range photographic equipment was buzzed by four North Korean MiG fighters some 150miles (240km) off the coastline of the Communist state. The spy plane was closely tailed on Sunday 2nd March for some 22 minutes with one North Korean fighter moving in to within 50ft (15m) and this action will undoubtedly be labeled as 'provocative' when Washington lodges a formal protest with North Korea over the incident. North Korea considers that it has a right to protect both its territorial integrity and its military secrets from such overt intelligence gathering and particularly at a time of heightened crisis and just a few days before the US and South Korea were to begin 'Foal Eagle', a large-scale military exercises involving some 5,000 US personnel. An additional sign of how seriously the North Koreans take the regular United States surveillance flights can be seen in the 'locking on' of its missile fire control radar by one of the MiG's, a distinct warning which was certainly heeded by the American crew who sensibly wished to defuse a dangerous situation and broke of the mission to return to their home base of Kadena on the Japanese island of Okinawa.
Pyongyang is acutely aware of the rumours deliberately being leaked from Washington concerning advanced planning for a large scale surgical USAF air strike on North Korea's nuclear and missile facilities. While Pentagon officials say that so far these are no more than contingency plans, it seems likely that Washington is more than happy to discomfort the Communist regime with the prospect of significant damage being done to its advanced weapons program and perhaps even a limited nuclear strike on the hardened positions housing massed artillery and missiles that threaten the South Korean capital of Seoul. It has been calculated that the Northern army has at least 13,000 artillery pieces; many aimed at Seoul and could in theory fire some 400,000 shells in the first hour of any attack. Intelligence sources claim that many of these shells would carry Sarin nerve gas and biological weapons including a virulent weaponized strain of Anthrax.The targets are the 21 million civilians in the "kill box” as some in the US military describe the entire Seoul metropolitan area.
It would appear that all of this may not just be more 'sabre rattling' as there is a militaristic pressure group within the Bush administration that actively looks for a confrontation with North Korea. This same group will, it appears likely, have its own way over war with Iraq and the significant build up of US forces well beyond that required to simply defeat the Baghdad regime may indicate that Syria and Iran may soon be next. North Korea with a limited number of nuclear weapons, long-range missiles and an a well developed chemical and biological warfare program is a far greater military challenge. Despite its antiquated armaments, the massive North Korean armed forces are potentially a formidable opponent and the United States, once it has determined that regime change or at worst the neutralization of Pyongyang's military capability has become a pressing necessity, may well resort to a limited nuclear strike to avoid the inevitable large scale American casualties a conventional conflict with North Korea would undoubtedly bring.
Return To Top March 5, 2003
March 4, 2003
Britain’s Sun Says: War In 10 Days
Libya to Recall Ambassador in Row With Saudi
Mid East-Gulf Region Braces for War and Terror
Opinion: Turkey and the US
Sadly, Al Qa'ida will survive the arrest of 9-11 plannerMarch 3
Iraq policy not to remodel Mideast, says Powell March 3
157 tonnes of anthrax, VX nerve gas found: Iraq March 3
Khalid Sheikh Arrested in Rawalpindi March 2
Headlines from Debka March 2
Prince Abdullah walks out after brawl with Qadhafi March 2
Indian Defense Budget: Up 14% or 0.4%? March 1
Iraq: US Buildup February 28
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
Britain’s Sun Says: War In 10 Days: It'll be soon, it'll be swift and it'll be short"
Reader Gerry Hol forwards an article from the British tabloid The Sun
The Sun says that hours after a crucial UN Security Council vote for war, likely on Wednesday March 12, US and UK forces will open their offensive against Iraq. This Friday Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix is expected toreport that Iraq has failed to comply with UN disarmament resolutions.
The Sun says that:
Libya To Recall Ambassador in Row With Saudi
From Pakistan’s Jang
Libya is to recall its ambassador to Riyadh for consultations following Saturday's Arab summit clash between Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi and Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, an official statement said Monday.
It also said the congress would review relations between Tripoli and Riyadh and Libya's membership of the Arab League, Television viewers across the Arab world saw Abdullah cursing Kadhafi at Saturday's Arab summit in the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. "Who exactly brought you to power?" the Saudi royal asked the Libyan leader, alluding to suggestions that his 1969 overthrow of the British-backed monarchy had US support.
"You are a liar and your grave awaits you," the crown prince said. Kadhafi had roundly criticised Saudi support for the United States at the summit that focused on US-led war threats against Iraq, alleging that King Fahd had been ready to "strike an alliance with the devil" to defend the kingdom after Iraq's 1990 invasion of neighbouring Kuwait.
The spat sparked demonstrations by thousands of Libyans near the Saudi embassy here, and on Monday Saudi daily newspaper Okaz said Kadhafi's regime posed more of a threat to the Arab world than foreign powers and should be toppled.
Mid East-Gulf Region Braces for War and Terror
Full story in Debka
Armed forces and counter-terror security forces across the Middle East are tightly tensed up in a high state of pre-war preparedness and anti-terror jitters – even amid the jubilation over the capture in Islamabad of al Qaeda mastermind Khalid Shaikh Muhammed and the car bomb killing of Abu Musab Zarqawi’s right hand lieutenant, Abu Mohammad al Masri, in south Lebanon.
Both coups occurred on the same day, Saturday, March 1. Some regional armed forces have also advanced to new positions to guard against Iraqi pre-emptive or punitive action, predatory terrorists – or both: Saudi Arabia faces a double crunch. The Saudi army is on the alert, its troops strung out along the borders of both Iraq and Kuwait.
An air incident last Thursday, February 27, demonstrated how close the flashpoint is. An Iraqi Mig-25 fighter interceptor, the fastest warplane in its service, sneaked into Saudi air space to probe the readiness of American radar systems in the oil kingdom. Revealing the incident...
Opinion: Turkey and the United States
By Shawn Dudley, regular Analysis.com reader.
The Turkish Rejection of the US is somewhat surprising, but not entirely so, and not unrecoverable. It was always dicey since the opposition party won the '02 elections that we'd be able to follow through on a second front, and the fact that the government couldn't keep their own party together really spells more instability in Turkey than meets the eye. Remember that the Turks (since Kemal Ataturk) have really kept a lock down on the Imams, and the current government ran on a campaign to "liberate" the mosques from government control (with EU endorsement for such a position). Put another way, the old Turkish government controlled the religion in a matter like the Soviet Union controlled the Orthodox Church during Communism. We're seeing the reverberations from that now.
The path is clear on two alternative avenues we can take.
#1 - The Kurds. It's safe to say the Turks were never that comfortable with our dealings with the Kurds. The Turks have a deep, almost irrational fear of the Kurds getting their own state, and have played almost every card they could to prevent such a occurance. But now that the Turkish parliament has sided with Iraq in effect, the US is finally free to deal with the Kurds openly, and has a host of offerings for their (more than willing) cooperation against Iraq, the leading one which is formal statehood, either as Kurdistan or as one of the major ruling parties in Iraq. As long as the Turks were players in the Iraq crisis, the US had to at least give the Turks deference on this issue. Now the Kurds can fill in the gap, and provide the US their full cooperation in forming a second front as well as support for the Post-War Iraq. Among all of the Iraq opposition groups, the Kurds are the most organized, the most well armed, and have the clearest objectives. It seems only natural they'll float to the top in the post-Hussein government. What else is bad for the Turks is that with the US military offering protection for Kurds, there's very little Turkey can do to stop the Kurds from gaining independence. Which is only right, as the Kurds are perhaps the world's largest ethnic group (35 million) without a nation of their own.
#2 - The Hashemites. The US still needs a major Muslim partner in order to give its wartime coalition legitimacy in the Middle East. The Gulf Emirates don't really count in this regard, but Jordan does. Unlike King Hussein, King Abdullah to his credit sees Iraq both for what it is, and what it could be. The Hashemites, of course, were the losers in the Post World War I Middle East shake-up, getting only two states (Transjordan, Iraq) under their control despite their strong ties to the British, while the American-supported Sauds ejected the Hashemites from Arabia proper. In order to create the proper stability in post-War Iraq, where the majority is either Shia or Kurd, but the ruling class is Sunni, the US may sponsor a Hashemite ruler in Baghdad. While no doubt Jordan would publically protest, providing the Hashemite clan with real oil power (and an even footing with their rivals the Saudis) would be a deal too good to give up. It's just this kind of Middle East shakeup that makes both Saudi Arabia and Turkey nervous.
Jordan has another good reason to eliminate Hussein - Hussien's radicalization of the Palestinians. Abdullah's greatest fear is that the some 3 million Palestinians currently residing in Jordan will eventually try to topple the government, then use Jordan as a springboard to destroy Israel. Eliminating Hussein pulls the rug out from under the PLO, and provides the groundwork for an independent Palestine that can't be a threat to either Israel or Jordan (and gives Jordan a chance to push some of its own Palestinian population over to the new state, thereby relieving pressure on the regime).
The price for these offerings is clear enough - tangible US support for the liberation of Iraq. In the case of the Kurds, they are almost too happy to assist, allowing the US to establish airfields, command centers, intelligence posts, and now with the Turks out, probably actual combat forces of some size. The Jordanians have already agreed publicly to serve as a spring board for a limited amount of US troops, which are mainly SpecOps types. The US has also deployed a Patriot battalion there, which could be preparation for a larger effort. Now with the loss of a Turkish front, the US may be looking to call in the deal with Jordan.
The potential military effects are:
A) We could see a major deployment of US combat troops in Kurdistan, beyond special forces units. This would have to be something light, like an Airborne force, and probably in strength around one-three brigades (the 82nd Airborne or 10th Mountain suit the role). Such a force can fly into a number of airfields in the region that can handle C-17s and C-130s. While not a large force, it would be enough to guarantee entry into the major city of Kirkuk in northern Iraq. It would also greatly dissuade the Turks from intervening to prevent the Kurds from seizing oil facilities.
B) The 4th Infantry Division, now unable to enter Iraq through Turkey, could dock it's ships in the Gulf of Aqaba and use Jordan as their launch point, to almost the same effect. While Jordan would be temporarily unpopular in the Arab world at large, the benefits would definitely outweigh the risks.
It's all very interesting to contemplate the above possibilities, which I admit really work out to educated guesses, but the main fact still remains clear. Barring something really dramatic (like the French Foreign Legion flying into Baghdad to serve as Saddam Hussein's lifeguard), the US is going to invade Iraq - it has to. Honor and reputation are on the line for the US, and the US is going to respect like states and peoples that can see our point, and be willing to stick their necks out enough to support it.
Return To Top March 4, 2003
March 3, 2003
Sadly, Al Qa'ida will survive the arrest of 9-11 planner
Iraq policy not to remodel Mideast, says Powell
157 tonnes of anthrax, VX nerve gas found: Iraq
Khalid Sheikh Arrested in Rawalpindi March 2
Headlines from Debka March 2
Prince Abdullah walks out after brawl with Qadhafi March 2
Indian Defense Budget: Up 14% or 0.4%? March 1
Pakistan receives $ 891m for playing role of front line state March 1
Germany Withdraws Elite Troops from Afghanistan March 1
FARC Warns US Against Hostage Rescue March 1
U.S. Told Pakistan To Stop Infiltration February 28
Iraq: US Buildup February 28
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
U.S. Gulf Commander Fine-Tunes War Plan February 27
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization February 26
Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It - Part II February 26
By Richard M Bennett. He can be reached at rbm@supanet.com
The capture by Pakistani and CIA officials of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed at around 4am on the 1st March and who is suspected of being one of the main planners behind 9-11 may not in the end turn out to be quite the coup it at first appears to be or in fact the devastating blow to Al Qa'ida predicted by some analysts. Mohammed had been on the run for some 18 months and in particular since his near arrest on September 14th 2002. It is rumoured that he had been increasingly isolated from the main command structure of Islamic Jihad where the 37-year-old Kuwaiti was treated with some suspicion by the new generation of post-Afghanistan terrorist leaders who are mainly of Algerian, Egyptian, Yemeni and Chechen origin. Mohammed, thought of by Western Intelligence as something of a 'Mr Fix-it' was in fact a rather garrulous, boastful playboy and his distinct lack of security mindedness is not believed to have endeared him to senior Al Qa'ida members including Osama Bin Laden.
Despite the suspicions that his arrest in Rawalpindi's well-to-do Westridge district and only a few minutes drive from the Army and Security headquarters suggested that he may still have been under the protection of dissident elements within Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence or ISI, so far unsubstantiated rumours have been circulated that Mohammed had become a 'disposable' asset of late. No longer considered to be in the forefront of terrorist planning within Al Qa'ida he may well have been offered to the Pakistan authorities to present to their US allies as proof of Islamabad's commitment to the War on Terrorism.
In one move Al Qa'ida has perhaps managed to rid itself of the growing liability of a man who had become so well known and hunted that the mere act of travel was a huge risk for his supporters and contact was becoming increasingly dangerous for those he wished to meet. It has given a Whitehouse under pressure something to crow about and indeed was hailed by White House press secretary Ari Fleischer as "a wonderful blow to inflict on Al Qa'ida". At the same time it has eased the situation of the Pakistan authorities with of course, potential benefits to Al Qa'ida operations within that country.
Mohammed has been described by Western intelligence officials and analysts as the principal planner of operations for Osama Bin Laden's international network and he is claimed to be the highest-ranking terrorist leader to be captured during the US-led campaign. Though it is understood that he might not be charged in connection with the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, evidence of his involvement in Al Qa'ida includes a radio interview conducted in December 2002 in which the ever boastful Mohammed said he was the mastermind of the attack. This is believed to have persuaded other members of the Al Qa'ida leadership that his continued value to the organization was now severely limited. Mohammed has also been mentioned in connection with the kidnapping and subsequent murder of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, a year ago. In addition, he has been under indictment since 1996 in connection with a plot to blow up a number of US commercial flights over the Philippines.
It must be considered highly doubtful whether his loss or the probably quite limited information he may have on future Al Qa'ida operations will seriously damage the terrorist group which is just one of some 12-14 such groups that make up the larger Islamic Jihad movement from which Mohammed is believed to have been largely excluded in recent months. Quite correctly however CIA and FBI Counter-Terrorist experts are eagerly anticipating a potential windfall of useful background and biographical information should Mohammed choose to co-operate, though in this case the United States may well be tempted to use less conventional methods of interrogation including the use of sophisticated drugs to extract much needed information quickly.
However, the Islamic terrorists are in this war for the long haul and they are only too aware that they will suffer many set-backs and lose some of their leaders. The loss or sacrifice of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will not in the long run severely threaten Al Qai'da and his arrest may indeed be more of a symptom of an internal feud within the terrorist organization that simply resulted in a bit of useful 'house-clearing'
Iraq policy not to remodel Mideast, says Powell
A Press Trust of India story, reported in the Times of India.
[Note to Secretary Powell from Ravi Rikhye: Sir, I realize you have to say what you have to say for public consumption, but please don’t make the US look like an idiot. The US offensive against Iraq makes sense only as Step 1 of a policy to remake the Mideast. We at Orbat.com have joined others in saying, for the past some months, that this is what the US intends. It is only recently that President Bush “let slip” that this was the objective. It is a good objective. I wish you would trust the American people to understand the real imperatives instead of coming up with fake explanations that are difficult to accept if one believes the US is acting rationally.]
Denying that the American strategy on Iraq is targeted towards "remodelling of the Middle East", US Secretary of State Colin Powell has said Washington only wants to put in place a new regime which will be "more responsible".
Asked by a correspondent about French Foreign Minister's statement that "the US strategy on Iraq is sliding from disarmament towards remodelling of the Middle East," Powell on Sunday said "I disagree categorically with my colleague Dominique de Villepin's comment."
"(The Security Council resolution) 1441, which we are trying to implement, had one goal, and that was to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. France voted for the resolution, as did the United States of America," Powell said.
He said if Iraq had disarmed itself over the past 12 years or the last several months since resolution 1441 was enacted, "we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us."
"I must say, however, that if we are unable to get Iraq to comply, and military action is necessary to remove this regime and to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction, it is quite clear to me that a new regime would be more responsive to the needs of its people, would live in peace with its neighbours, and perhaps that would assist the region in finding more peace."
"But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct, and I think Minister de Villepin is wrong," Powell asserted.
157 tonnes of anthrax, VX nerve gas found: Iraq
Story from the Jang
[Orbat.com note: we wonder if this headline should have read 157 tonnes of bombs.]
BAGHDAD: Ongoing excavations have led to the discovery of important quantities of anthrax and VX nerve agent, Iraqi presidential adviser Amer al-Saadi said on Sunday.
UN inspectors have been seeking clarification for years of the whereabouts of such deadly agents. Amer said excavations at the al-Aziziya air base, 104 kilometres south-west of Baghdad, had uncovered nearly all bomb fragments filled with tonnes of toxic agents which Iraq insists it destroyed unilaterally in 1991.
"So far we have reached a figure not quite 157 (tonnes of anthrax), but we are nearing it, there is work in progress," he told a news conference. "So far, more than eight (bombs) have been found which were intact, not perforated, which could be tested for the material inside," he said.
Amer also said there was "another question with the anthrax, which is the bulk material that was left over, that was unfilled and that was unilaterally destroyed also."
The material "is in a site called al-Hakam, and this is what the meeting this evening is all about" between newly arrived UN biological experts and Iraqi authorities. "The destruction site is known and it is still undisturbed and we could look for DNA signatures of those materials and perhaps we could quantify this material, not just qualitative tests, but quantitative tests to estimate how much was destroyed there," he said. "That, in addition to the 157 tonnes in al-Aziziya, will make the total," he said. Amer added the 1.5 tonnes of VX still to be accounted for "was unilaterally destroyed in a dumping site near al-Muthanna State Establishment, and we have made analyses which strongly indicate that the total material was destroyed there."
Also on Sunday, Iraq destroyed six more al-Samoud 2 missiles with UN weapons inspectors looking on, but warned it might suspend the destruction programme if the US indicated it would go to war anyway. In two days, Iraq has destroyed 10 of the banned weapons, about a tenth of its stock. It has also destroyed two casting chambers used to make engines for the al-Fatah missile. Iraq destroyed those chambers in the 1990s, only to rebuild them. "As you can see, there is pro-active cooperation from the Iraqi side," Amer said. "Practically all the areas of concern to UNMOVIC (the UN inspection team) and the subjects of remaining disarmament questions have been addressed," he said. "We hope that it will be to the satisfaction of UNMOVIC."
But he cautioned that if the US indicated it would go to war anyway, Iraq might stop destroying the missiles, which fly farther than the 150 kilometres allowed by the United Nations. "If it turns out at an early stage during this month that America is not going to a legal way, then why should we continue?" Amer asked.
The US, which is leading the push for war against Iraq, derided the beginning of the destruction on Saturday. A White House spokeswoman called Iraq's move "part of its game of deception". US Senator Joseph Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on 'Fox News Sunday' that "destroying all of the missiles is not enough for me". He said Iraq also needed to account for "all of the other weapons of mass destruction that we know have not been accounted for".
Iraq has agreed to destroy all unassembled pieces, software, launchers, fuel and equipment used to make the al-Samoud 2 in "a few days or a very short few weeks", according to Demetrius Perricos, the deputy of chief weapons inspector Hans Blix. Iraq said its cooperation is an attempt to avert an US-led war against it. "War is the worst thing, and we are trying to do whatever we can to avoid war so we are doing our utmost to cooperate," Iraq's UN ambassador, Mohammed al-Douri, said in New York.
Amer al-Saadi indicated it is not easy for Iraq to do that. He said Iraq wouldn't let anyone see photographs or video images of the missile destruction - despite the potential impact on world opinion - because it would be too bitter for the Iraqi people to watch. "It is too harsh. It is unacceptable," he said sombrely. "That's why we have released no pictures."
Inspectors returned on Sunday to al-Aziziya where Iraq says it destroyed R-400 bombs filled with biological weapons in 1991. Amer said 157 of the R-400 bombs contained anthrax, aflotoxin and botulin toxin. He said Iraq has been excavating them and so far has uncovered eight bombs intact. He argued for continued inspections. He said US claims that Iraq isn't disarming are lies - and said the only way to find out is with an independent arbiter.
However, the Pentagon was contemplating "Plan B" for its anticipated war after Turkey refused to allow US combat troops to launch invasion from its territory. A Defence Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that no "other decision" had been made regarding war plans in light of the Turkish vote, but US media has reported details of an alternative.
Return To Top March 3, 2003
March 2, 2003
Khalid Sheikh Arrested in Rawalpindi
Headlines from Debka
Prince Abdullah walks out after brawl with Qadhafi
Indian Defense Budget: Up 14% or 0.4%? March 1
Pakistan receives $ 891m for playing role of front line state March 1
Germany Withdraws Elite Troops from Afghanistan March 1
FARC Warns US Against Hostage Rescue March 1
U.S. Told Pakistan To Stop Infiltration February 28
Iraq: US Buildup February 28
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
U.S. Gulf Commander Fine-Tunes War Plan February 27
Rumsfeld, Reyes to Meet on Philippines' Abu Sayyaf Threat February 27
Karzai Seeks Funds for Provincial Irregulars February 27
Half Measures or Paradigm Shift? February 27
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization February 26
Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It - Part II February 26
Khalid Sheikh arrested in Rawalpindi
For full story, click Jang
ISLAMABAD: Government on Saturday said it arrested Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, suspected mastermind behind the September 11 attacks in the United States.
"We have finally apprehended Khalid Sheikh Muhammad," presidential spokesman Rashid Qureshi told Reuters. "It was the work of Pakistani intelligence agencies...It is a big achievement. He is the kingpin of al-Qaeda."
Khalid, who is on the American FBI's most wanted list, was among three people arrested in Rawalpindi, the official said on condition of anonymity. The US officials regard Khalid as a key al-Qaeda lieutenant and organiser of the September 11 attacks in the US.
Khalid, 37, has not been charged in the Sept 11 attacks, but he has been charged in a 1995 terror plot. He is one of the FBI's most wanted terror suspects, and the US government was offering up to $25 million for information leading to his capture.
Earlier, Interior Minister Faisal Saleh Hayat told Reuters that "we have detained three terror suspects this morning. One is a Pakistani and two are foreign nationals. The raid was carried out to find al-Qaeda suspects, but it is too early to say any more about it till the investigation is complete."
Failing an absolute majority, Turkish parliament rejects request by Ankara government to allow US forces bases for invasion of Iraq and deployment of Turkish troops abroad. This is major setback to US war command’s plan for northern front against Iraq, but alternatives were prepared for the contingency of Turkey balking at active participation in Iraq war.
US expects Pakistan to hand over for interrogation the most senior al Qaeda leader captured, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, nicknamed The Mukhtar who was detained near Islamabad Saturday. Believed mastermind of September 11 attack, operations in Far East and last year's attack on Israeli targets in Mombasa, Kuwait-born Mohammed is uncle of Ramzi Yousef, who is serving prison sentence for attempted bombing of New York’s Twin Towers in 1993.
Earlier Saturday, car bomb killed Abu Mohammad al-Masri, senior al Qaeda man in south Lebanon and Afghan war veteran, at Sidon’s Ein Hilweh camp Saturday. Masri’s attackers were described as driving a Beirut-registered, explosives car into the camp Friday night. It was timed to explode as he arrived at a mosque. DEBKAfile’s terror experts: al-Masri was operational right hand of al Qaeda commander Abu Musab Zarqawi and designated planner of bio-chemical terror attack against Israel. He lived in a Palestinian location for six years indicating close Palestinian-al Qaeda relationship. DEBKAfile revealed the roles of both The Mukhtar and al Masri in article published January 4, 2003
DEBKAfile Special Correspondent in Kuwait reports: Two Kuwaiti nationals detained Saturday in car loaded with Molotov cocktails outside US-British press center at Kuwait Hilton Resort Hotel. Many American soldiers also billeted in hotel. Further 11 “Kuwaiti Afghans” (al Qaeda) rounded up overnight in Kuwait City
Iran places armed forces on war alert, deploys troops along its border with Iraq. DEBKAfile military sources: Total tank force of 800 divided between Khorramshahr in south, Qasr e-Shirin in north
2,300 men of 26th Marine Expeditionary Force trained to counter biological and chemical attacks leave for Gulf Tuesday. Sixth aircraft carrier Nimitz on way to region, also B-2 stealth bombers
Britain to contribute to Gulf build-up another 100 fixed wing aircraft capable of delivering extremely precise weapons and 27 helicopters
Pentagon advises US media companies to evacuate their correspondents from Baghdad at once
US Patriot anti-missile batteries to be deployed in emergency formation in Central Israel early next week
FBI is using small Cessna 182 spy planes to monitor American universities with large foreign student bodies. Flights detected over Indiana University which has 3,300 foreign students
Prince Abdullah walks out after brawl with Qadhafi
Story from Jang
SHARM EL-SHEIKH, Egypt: An Arab summit on the Iraq crisis was marred by a televised row between Libyan leader Moamar Qadhafi and Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz, which ended in a brief walk-out by the Saudi delegation.
The two Arab leaders exchanged diatribes in the full glare of the cameras before Egyptian state television pulled the plug on its live feed from the conference hall in this Red Sea resort. The row erupted after Qadhafi criticised Saudi Arabia for hosting US forces. Qadhafi charged that Saudi Arabia's King Fahd had been ready to "strike an alliance with the devil" to defend the kingdom after Iraq's 1990 invasion of neighbouring Kuwait.
Crown Prince Abdullah then cut in and pointing a finger at Qadhafi said: "... the kingdom of Saudi Arabia is not an agent of imperialism like you and others are. Who brought you to power? ... You are a liar and your grave awaits you." Abdullah asked Qadhafi, pointing a finger at him angrily: "Don't speak or interfere in things, which you have no luck or chance in."
At that point the live coverage ended but delegates said the Libyan leader refused to drop his accusations, railing against the base facilities granted by Saudi Arabia to the United States.
Crown Prince Abdullah then walked out of the conference room, forcing the adjournment of the summit for more than half an hour, while other participants calmed down the Saudi and Libyan delegations. The presidents of Egypt, Syria and Lebanon followed Prince Abdullah and convinced him to return to the meeting, sources at the meeting told Reuters. When the summit eventually resumed, it did so without the live television feed which had spotlighted the huge divisions within the Arab world over the US military build-up in the Gulf. The TV coverage only resumed with the closing speech of Arab League Secretary-General Amr Mussa.
Return To Top March 2, 2003
March 1, 2003
Indian Defense Budget: Up 14% or 0.4%?
Pakistan receives $ 891m for playing role of front line state
Germany Withdraws Elite Troops from Afghanistan
FARC Warns US Against Hostage Rescue
U.S. Told Pakistan To Stop Infiltration February 28
Iraq: US Buildup February 28
US May Deploy Superbomb February 28
U.S. Gulf Commander Fine-Tunes War Plan February 27
Rumsfeld, Reyes to Meet on Philippines' Abu Sayyaf Threat February 27
Karzai Seeks Funds for Provincial Irregulars February 27
Half Measures or Paradigm Shift? February 27
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization February 26
Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It - Part II February 26
Indian Defense Budget: Up 14% or 0.4%?
The Times of India reports that the Indian defense budget is up by 14% and simultaneously by 0.4%. After having returned more than $1 billion to the treasury from the 2001-02 budget, the Indian MOD has this year has returned almost twice as much. So on 2002-03 actual expenditure of about $12 billion, the defense expenditure has gone up 14%. But on the planned 2002-03 expenditure of $13.5 billion, the increase is a nominal 0.4%, insufficient even to account for inflation.
The reason for the underspending? The MOD is refusing to place weapons contracts because in India no matter where a contract is awarded, allegations are made of bribery and corruption. If the defense bureaucrats don’t want to be exposed to these allegations, particularly with so much money allotted for equipment purchase after Kargil 1999, one can hardly blame them. India is a democracy, so everyone gets her or his say when a contract is awarded. But it is not yet a mature democracy, so those who raise newspaper campaigns and questions in parliament when a contract goes to A and not B, don’t understand they are misusing democracy to damage the country. Conversely, there is no transparency in the defense purchase process – another example of India not being a mature democracy. So often there is wrongdoing in the award of contracts, and the process is not seen to be honest, even when it is.
The following is part of the Times of India report:
Defence gets more firepower
…government has hiked the defence allocation even when the ministry failed to spend Rs 9,000 crore of its last year’s share. The defence allotment of Rs 65,300 crore marks only a notional increase of Rs 300 crore when compared to last year’s budgetary estimate of Rs 65,000 crore.
Against the revised estimate of Rs 56,000 crore for 2003, however, the current allocation represents a 14% hike.
The unspent Rs 9,000 crore, is put down to the inability to sew up major purchases including aircraft trainers for IAF, an aircraft carrier for the Navy and other equipment for the Army.
The capital outlay on defence services, set at Rs 20,952 crore this year, however, shows the government is going to press ahead with the long-awaited purchases, especially an aircraft carrier for the Navy and AJTs for the Air force. Rs 5,020 has been earmarked for naval purchases, as against last year’s spending of Rs 1,717 crore under the head.
Pakistan receives $ 891m for playing role of front line state
Islamabad, Feb 28, IRNA -- Pakistan National Assembly was informed on Friday, that the country has received over eight hundred and ninety-one million dollars from the United States, Britain, European Union, Japan and Saudi Arabia as compensation being front line state in the Afghan operation.
Advisor to the Prime Minister on Finance, Mr. Shaukat Aziz told the Lower House of the parliament that the country also got debt relief from bilateral and multilateral donors.
Pakistan joined the U.S-led coalition for attack on Afghanistan Taliban in late 2001 despite strong opposition from the country's Islamic groups.
Pakistan had changed its years of pro-Taliban policy after the September 11 attacks in the United States.
"This policy has reduced our debt liability by twenty-seven percent for thirty years. Our foreign exchange reserves are now equal to eleven months of imports and the rupee has been strengthened," Aziz said.
In addition Pakistan is expecting one billion dollars bilateral credit write off by the United States, he said.
Germany Withdraws Elite Troops from Afghanistan
Germany pulls out elite anti-terror troops from Afghanistan:daily
Germany has pulled out its elite KSK anti-terror forces from Afghanistan, the daily Bild cited German army circles as saying on Friday.
The 100 elite anti-terror soldiers were withdrawn from Afghanistan last week, according to the paper.
The KSK forces were already replaced by the German Airborne Brigade 31, based in the north German city of Oldenburg.
The German defense ministry refused to comment on the report.
The secretive elite KSK unit was deployed in Afghanistan in the winter of 2001 to assist American forces in hunting down alleged al-Qaeda terrorists.
FARC Warns US Against Hostage Rescue
For full story clickWashington Times
Colombia's largest Marxist insurgency warned yesterday against any attempt to rescue three American prisoners who were captured while surveying coca fields for a Maryland-based Pentagon contractor.
"The prisoners of war of the FARC do run the risk of dying as a consequence of a cross fire between members of our guerrilla organization and units of the state security forces, if they attempt to rescue the prisoners by force of arms," said Raul Reyes, a spokesman for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).
Mr. Reyes' comments were delivered in writing to Noticias Uno, a TV news station in Bogota.
Two of the plane's passengers, Colombian Sgt. Luis Alcides Cruz and American Thomas John Janis, 56, a former U.S. soldier who earned a Bronze Star, were executed by FARC guerrillas immediately after their plane crashed earlier this month.
FARC confirmed the capture of the other three passengers, all Americans, and are now holding them hostage in exchange for the release of guerrillas in Colombian jails.
"The three gringo prisoners of war in the power of our organization will be freed along with the Colombian prisoners of war once an exchange occurs in a large demilitarized zone," said a FARC statement posted on its Web site on Monday.
Return To Top March 1, 2003
February 28, 2003
U.S. Told Pakistan To Stop Infiltration
Iraq: US Buildup
US May Deploy Superbomb
U.S. Gulf Commander Fine-Tunes War Plan February 27
Rumsfeld, Reyes to Meet on Philippines' Abu Sayyaf Threat February 27
Karzai Seeks Funds for Provincial Irregulars February 27
Half Measures or Paradigm Shift? February 27
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization February 26
Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It - Part II February 26
Moscow Offers Plan to Prevent War and Rescue Saddam February 26
Editorial: A Modest Proposal on Iraq February 25
Washington's Growing Backyard War February 25
US plans total war against Kim February 24
US Told Pakistan To Stop Infiltration
By Khalid Hasan, writing in Pakistan's Daily Time
WASHINGTON: During the three-week visit of the Pakistan foreign minister here, US administration officials “down the line” minced no words as to how they felt about what they saw as Pakistan’s lack of commitment to ending cross-border activity in held Kashmir, its tolerance of home-grown terrorist groups and its links with North Korea.
This correspondent has gathered from reliable and informed sources that the unprecedented access provided to Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri by the Bush administration, including a “drop-by” visit by the president as the minister sat with the national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, was designed to pass a message to Pakistan that its verbal commitments needed to be translated into actual performance.
There were three points that were brought home to the foreign minister in meeting after meeting. First, Pakistan must stop, once for all, all cross-border military and material support to the Kashmir insurgency. The minister was told that Indian patience with Pakistan was wearing thin and while Washington had continued to restrain India, it could not do so indefinitely if the present Pakistani policy continued. He was also told that the repeated assurances extended by President Pervez Musharraf on this issue were viewed with a good deal of skepticism in Washington because of the gap between what was promised and what was delivered.
Secondly, it was made clear that the Pakistan government’s continuing “tolerance” for militant or jihadi outfits in the country was unacceptable. It was pointed out that militant organisations that the government had earlier banned had reappeared under different names and were operating openly and with impunity. It was emphasised that it was because of this Pakistani ambivalence towards terrorism that the country was now considered a base, if not the hub, for international terrorism. It was stressed that the US administration was finding it exceedingly difficult to remain reconciled to the situation. The third thing that was repeatedly stressed to the minister was Pakistan’s links with North Korea. It was pointed out that Congress was getting extremely uneasy with reports that the two countries had collaborated in the nuclear field and this collaboration had not been terminated. There were some on Capitol Hill who wanted hearings to be held on the issue. The administration had used its influence in favour of Pakistan, conveying to the legislators President Musharraf’s solemn assurances that there were no links as alleged. The US had taken the position publicly that it did not wish to dig up the past but would not look kindly on the continuation of exchanges between the two countries. However, disturbing reports had continued to filter in. The Pakistani envoy was told that this was “absolutely unacceptable”.
Not much notice was taken of the foreign minister’s “Five plus Three formula”.
The minister told a number of senior US officials that Pakistan, India and
Israel should be admitted as member of the five-member “nuclear club” which he
argued would be a positive step towards the establishment of a stable world
security order.
Return To Top February 28, 2003
- Agreement with Turkey has still not been reached – the parliamentary voted to give approval will now be on Saturday. - Iraq is redeploying Republic Guard troops from Tikrit to Baghdad. - For latest deployment details, check US Forces for Iraq Theatre - The US says satellite imagery shows Iraq is digging trenches next to civilian installations. - The Jang of Pakistan, quoting US sources, says: About 225,000 US forces are now massed against Iraq, including 111,000 in Kuwait, the main staging area for a possible US ground offensive, a US defense officials said on Thursday. The number of US forces in the Gulf region and the eastern Mediterranean are about 15,000 higher than a week ago, the official said.
The arrival of aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk and its battle group in the Gulf region boosted the numbers of sailors and marines aboard warships to 46,000, the official said. The figures also include 14,000 in Afghanistan and surrounding countries. US forces in Saudi Arabia rose to about 7,000 over the past week, the official said. US troops in Kuwait went from 98,000 last week to 111,000.
Return To Top February 28, 2003
Source Military.com
When and if the United States does go to war, military sources say the United States is preparing a monster new weapon to be used during the first nights.
It's called MOAB, short for "massive ordnance air burst" bomb. It is a modern, bigger version of the 15,000-pound "Daisy Cutter" used in Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War and Afghanistan.
Sources say MOAB -- still experimental -- is a 21,000-pound bomb that will be pushed out the back of a C-130 transport and guided by satellite. Because it is not dropped by parachute, as was the old Daisy Cutter, the aircraft can let it go from far higher altitudes, making it safer for U.S. pilots.
The MOAB's massive explosive punch, sources say, is similar to a small nuclear weapon. It is intended to obliterate a command center hidden in tunnels and bunkers or a concentration of Iraqi tanks.
Whatever the target, it must be far from cities where civilians might be hurt. But one important aspect of using this type of weapon, sources say, will be psychological impact on enemy troops. It is intended to terrorize Iraqi troops, drastically reducing their desire to continue the fight.
Return To Top February 28, 2003
February 27, 2003
U.S. Gulf Commander Fine-Tunes War Plan
Rumsfeld, Reyes to Meet on Philippines' Abu Sayyaf Threat
Karzai Seeks Funds for Provincial Irregulars
Half Measures or Paradigm Shift?
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization February 26
Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It - Part II February 26
Moscow Offers Plan to Prevent War and Rescue Saddam February 26
Editorial: A Modest Proposal on Iraq February 25
Washington's Growing Backyard War February 25
US plans total war against Kim February 24
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin February 22
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
February 27, 2003
U.S. Gulf Commander Fine-Tunes War Plan
From Associated Press By ROBERT BURNS
CAMP AS SAYLIYAH, Qatar (AP) -- The American general who would lead an Iraq invasion fine-tuned the battle plan Wednesday with his senior commanders.
The operation would be executed from a command post shielded by a chain-link fence hidden inside a warehouse on this remote desert base.
Army Gen. Tommy R. Franks met for several hours with the commanders of his naval, air, land and special operations forces, who normally report to him from their war-fighting posts in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.
Franks made no public appearance, but he indicated before the conference that he intended to review with his commanders their progress in preparing for the possibility that President Bush will order war to disarm Iraq.
If war comes, Franks would command the operation from Camp As Sayliyah, a 262-acre compound outside Doha, the Qatari capital, although he has the technological capability to direct it from either his permanent Central Command headquarters in Tampa, Fla., or a new airborne command post.
Although Franks' appearance at Camp As Sayliyah raised speculation in the Gulf that an Iraq war was imminent, aides said he intended to return to the United States this weekend for further consultations with Bush and others.
About 200,000 U.S. troops have gathered on Iraq's periphery, and more are en route from the United States and Europe. Britain is contributing 45,000 troops.
The bulk of the U.S. and British ground forces would invade from Kuwait, although the United States is hoping to complete a deal with Turkey that would permit 40,000 or more U.S. troops to open a northern front.
U.S. Air Force fighters would attack mainly from bases in Kuwait, Qatar and Turkey. Bombers would fly from Oman and the island of Diego Garcia. Support planes would operate from Saudi Arabia and several other countries.
The Navy has five aircraft carriers within range of Iraq - each with about 50 strike aircraft aboard. The Marines would operate as part of the Kuwait-based ground force as well as the air effort.
Franks also held talks Wednesday with British Defense Minister Geoff Hoon, who said afterward that Saddam still has time to avert war, although "it's certainly getting to a late hour in the day."
Hoon told a news conference the British government is confident the U.N. Security Council will pass a resolution authorizing war against Iraq and he predicted anti-war sentiment around the world would subside in the days ahead.
Hoon also echoed Franks' comments, in an Associated Press interview Tuesday, that U.S. and allied military commanders cannot guarantee the safety of civilians who would position themselves near potential bombing targets.
"It is not the case that we would necessarily take account of human shields, so called," Hoon told reporters at a cavernous international press center.
"I would want to emphasize to you the need for anyone contemplating such a course of action to return home rather than play into the hands of Saddam Hussein," he said.
Franks has declined to say publicly which command post he would use to run an Iraq war, although it was clear from a tour of the Joint Operations Center here that Camp As Sayliyah would be the primary nerve center.
The highly restricted operations center, run by about 50 military personnel, uses advanced computer and communications technology to coordinate movements and planning among the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps.
"I use computers to break down barriers" between services and functional commands, said Air Force Col. Steven Pennington, a senior manager of the operations center.
He and others said they have no doubt that U.S. forces are ready if Bush orders war.
"We're focused on being prepared for that," said Marine Corps Col. Tom Bright, director of the Joint Operations Center.
Return To Top February 27, 2003
Rumsfeld, Reyes to Meet on Philippines' Abu Sayyaf Threat
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Feb. 26, 2003 -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Philippine Defense Secretary Angelo Reyes will meet at the Pentagon Feb. 28 to hammer out details of U.S. participation in operations against the Abu Sayyaf terror group.
Current plans call for U.S. troops to support Philippine forces in operations in the Sulu Archipelago, said Pentagon spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Jeff Davis. About 350 U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force special operations personnel will work with Philippine soldiers. Another 750 Americans will provide logistics support from the headquarters in Zamboanga on Mindanao Island.
The Philippine government has asked the United States to follow up on last year's successful deployment to Basilan Island. U.S. troops supported Philippine soldiers in driving Abu Sayyaf from the island.
"We have agreed to that request and will deploy forces," Davis said. "The armed forces of the Philippines will lead the operation and U.S. forces will assist them."
The United States and the Philippines are treaty allies. U.S. service members will participate in a number of exercises and training missions all over the island nation. The two nations stand united against terrorism, said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. He said Abu Sayyaf intends "to wreak havoc on the people of the Philippines."
Return To Top February 27, 2003
Karzai Seeks Funds for Provincial Irregulars
From Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Afghan President Hamid Karzai asked U.S. senators on Wednesday to support a request that the United States subsidize his budget so that he can pay 100,000 irregular militiamen living in the provinces.
Karzai disputed the widespread impression that the 100,000 armed men are beyond the influence of his government, which only has full control in the capital Kabul because an international security forces provides security there.
He also turned down offers from senators that they lobby for an expansion of the international force, known as ISAF, saying he would prefer to expand the new national Afghan army, which now has about 3,000 trained troops.
Karzai, giving testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, painted a rosy picture of the state of Afghanistan one year after the United States overthrew the Taliban rulers and brought in Karzai's pro-American government.
But diplomats and other observers say the country is far from stable and a strong Afghan army capable of replacing the regional warlords who now impose law and order in the provinces is still a distant dream.
The irregular militiamen are mainly loyal to the provincial warlords, who have some autonomy from the Kabul government.
Karzai proposed improving security by building up the army and disbanding the irregular forces though the DDR (disarmament, demobilization and reintegration) program. In the meantime, paying the irregulars would help, he said.
WELL-BEHAVED MILITIAS
"We are going to ask the U.S. government to provide us support for those 100,000 troops while we are working on the DDR ... so that in the meantime those soldiers are not left without payment or without salaries so that they remain well-behaved," the Afghan president said.
Foreign donors could also help by paying the salaries of the 3,000 soldiers in the existing Afghan army, which cannot come out of the usual aid funds, he added.
The Afghan government has little revenue of its own because it cannot collect tax revenues from the provinces, he said.
In the early months of the new government, the size of the ISAF force was a bone of contention between the Bush administration, which did not want a large force, and those who argued that the United States should do everything it could to stabilize the troubled country.
Karzai said Afghans had given up asking ISAF to expand outside its Kabul enclave because the international community was not responsive to their initial entreaties.
"If there is a need to expand ISAF to the provinces, the Afghan government would not be against it, we would welcome it. However, we would prefer speeding up of the training of the national Afghan army," he said.
Karzai, who will see President Bush at the White House on Wednesday, avoided questions on a possible U.S. invasion of Iraq but said he hoped the Iraqi crisis would not distract attention from the needs of his own country.
[Orbat.com note: Decision-makers, and those with access to decision-makers should support Hamid Karzai’s request. Keeping the militias on a steady payroll from Kabul rather than ambitious and opportunistic local warlords is more important to Afghanistan’s stability than building schools or providing agricultural assistance. Though without a doubt establishing clinics, building roads and digging wells in eastern Afghanistan will consolidate such stability in the medium term, especially if credit for such activity is always given to Kabul.]
Return To Top February 27, 2003
Half Measures or Paradigm Shift?
From the Brookings Institute
Pakistan faces multiple challenges at home and abroad. There are indications that General Pervez Musharraf understands the risks. But is he prepared to bring his tactical moves in sync with his strategic perception? The answer to that question is likely to decide the future of Pakistan. At the moment, that answer is vague, writes Ejaz Haider.
Return To Top February 27, 2003
February 26, 2003
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization
Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It - Part II
Moscow Offers Plan to Prevent War and Rescue Saddam
Editorial: A Modest Proposal on Iraq February 25
Washington's Growing Backyard War February 25
US plans total war against Kim February 24
Iraq Hints at Destroying Al-Samoud 2 Missiles February 24
Terrorism a pretext to conquer world, says Malaysia's Mahathir February 24
US, Philippines Offer Different Versions of Bolstered US Troop Presence February 23
US offers India $2.5bn, oil to support war against Iraq February 23
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin February 22
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
Summary Analysis of the National Guard Mobilization in support of Enduring Freedom and other U.S. military actions
By Shawn Dudley
[Mr. Dudley is a regular reader of Orbat.com]
The source for most (but not all) of the below can be found at defenselink.mil, specifically Defenselink.mil/ And earlier postings (the DoD puts out a new list most every Wednesday).
Some key points can be made from studying the mobilization of the National Guard and Reserves concerning current US military operations:
* Brigade-sized elements of 5 out of 8 NG Divisions have been mobilized
* Units of 6 of the Enhanced NG Brigades have been mobilized, out of 15 brigades available. None of the Enhanced Brigades, however, are 100% mobilized.
An initial analysis of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve mobilization reveals:
1) a very heavy concentration in unconventional warfare. The highest proportion of units activated are Special Forces, PsyOps, Civil Affairs, and Military Intelligence. Nearly all of the available units are activated, and many have been since Afghanistan.
2) Call-ups for certain types of very specialized units. CH-47 Aviation companies are mostly activated (at least 3 NG and 2 AR). Also Transport and Bridge Engineer units for the upcoming Iraq campaign.
3) Force Protection is the next priority. Nearly all National Guard and Army Reserve Military Police units are in service (not to mention many of the Air National Guard Security Police squadrons). There are a total of five battalions of Guard Avengers providing air defense, some for homeland sites, and an increasing number of combat units are being called into service in some sort of security role.
There are other conclusions to be drawn, but perhaps the most obvious is the size of the mobilization. Following 9/11, the Army mobilized somewhere between 12 and 15 battalion sized task forces of armor or infantry, primarily for domestic security. Only a limited number (such as Task Force Santa Fe) were deployed overseas. In 2003, there are at least 20 such task forces, and possibly more to come, almost all of which are to see overseas deployments. Probably about 20% of the Guard's combat potential is currently on active duty.
Here are some of the combat unit deployments, and some notes on each.
For rest of the article, please Click here
Return To Top February 26, 2003 Senior Iraq Defector May Not Have Made It – II
Debka for full article.
All may not be well for Adib Shaaban, senior aide to Saddam’s powerful son Uday and Iraq’s highest-ranking would-be defector. His attempt to flee to the United States, first revealed exclusively in DEBKA-Net-Weekly 97 (February 14), may not have come off.
First a recap: Shaaban -- charged with Uday’s most sensitive missions -- traveled to Jeddah in early February, saying he needed to put through some gold transactions ahead of the war.
From Jeddah, he flew to Beirut and disappeared.
But he never really went to the Lebanese capital. Instead, he made his way undercover to Damascus Monday and was picked up by an unmarked plane that flew him out of the Middle East.
At least, that’s how Shaaban scripted his plan. But like so many things in the murky world of intelligence, the plan went awry – as is strongly indicated by the fresh information reaching DEBKA-Net-Weekly.
Our sources suggest that upon landing at Damascus on Saturday, February 8, he walked straight into the arms of waiting...
Return To Top February 26, 2003 Moscow Offers Plan to Prevent War and Rescue Saddam
Debka for full article.
German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder makes a lightening, unscheduled trip to Moscow Wednesday, February 26, heading back home the same evening. What urgent business takes Schroeder to the Russian capital?
According to DEBKAfile’s intelligence and Russian sources, Russian President Vladimir Putin has stepped into the bipolar crisis over Iraq between the US-led and French-led world blocs with a dramatic proposition for averting war. In this approach, he sees eye to eye with the French, German and Chinese rulers and is eager to consult with the Schroeder on his new plan.
But first, he tried selling it to Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein. For this mission, he fielded one of Moscow’s diplomatic heavyweights, Yevgeny Primakov. KGB chief Middle East resident in the 1970s, Soviet foreign minister and Russian prime minister under Yeltsin, Primakov is also a longtime close personal friend of the Iraqi dictator from the old days of the Soviet Union.
Primakov landed in Baghdad on Saturday, February...
Return To Top February 26, 2003
Editorial: A Modest Proposal on Iraq Editorial: A Modest proposal on Iraq
In this editorial Ravi Rikhye is speaking only for himself, not for any other person associated with Orbat.com.
Your editor has been watching the Iraq debate with some bemusement and sympathy for all viewpoints.
From the American viewpoint, Mr. Saddam Hussein has to go, and Iraq must be the first step in the American plan to remake the Middle East. Your editor’s home country, India, has suffered far more grievously than the United States from of terrorism fuelled by Islamic fundamentalists, particularly those from Saudi Arabia. Rooting out and destroying these fundamentalists is critical for India’s survival. This makes all the more disgusting the Indian elite’s opposition to Mr. Bush, and the Indian Government’s pathetic attempts to appease the ant-Bush lot while not antagonizing Washington. Mr. Hussein must go also because its long past time that the authoritarian regimes of the Mideast are replaced with democracies, and he is the easiest target – a good place to begin a hard job. Mr. Bush is going to war for America’s interests, but while America will gain, so will the oppressed of the Islamic world.
Conversely, your editor can understand the fear Mr. Bush’s preparation is creating in Western Europe. The Western Europeans have become accustomed to a comfortable life; all sorts of things could go wrong with Mr. Bush’s plans, and Western Europe will undoubtedly bear the brunt of the backlash. We may agree that appeasement is not the way to buy security, but on a human level it’s easy to appreciate why the West Europeans are frightened. Further, even your editor has to admit that Team Bush’s style would scare the daylights out of anyone who doesn’t understand that the style is also part of the plan to win with minimum losses – in the best case, perhaps even without war.
Yet – conversely again – Mr. Hussein has started to get serious about disarmament only because 200,000 American soldiers under an absolutely implacable Commander-in-Chief are about to give him a rather final Bad Hair Day. Your editor is sure the French and the Germans appreciate the irony of their insistence that inspections be given more time. If inspections are working, it’s only because the Mad Texan is about to stride into the saloon with his six-guns ablaze. Calm down the Texan, and the pressure is off Mr. Hussein.
What the French and Germans are not admitting publicly is that the US cannot indefinitely sit in the desert while diplomacy – which has failed for 12 years – gets a chance to work. There are other wars to be fought – see Mr. Bennett’s article below for one – and the American taxpayer is paying hundreds of millions of dollars a day to maintain the armed presence. Moreover – as India found to its embarrassment in the mobilization crises of 2002 – if you don’t use military force you lose it. Men and machines get worn out; the American military is very seriously overstretched. If Mr. Bush were to agree to another 4 months, what could he do if France and Germany ask for another 4, and another 4, at a time when even another 4 months will mean large fractions of the force will have to be stood down for rest? Ditto for the 42,000 British soldiers in the theatre. When is enough time enough time?
Here is your editor’s modest proposal to sort out this mess. France and Germany, as the two largest European militaries, should order a general mobilization, and for every American division that needs rest, two French and German divisions should go to replace. Many assets cannot be replaced, such as the carriers, but the French and Germans can make up for the air groups by sending land-based aircraft. This is not a perfect solution; still, it has the French and Germans doing their fair share in disarming Iraq and in seeing off Mr. Hussein.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world should get together, and according to each country’s means, money should be given to the United States and United Kingdom to offset their costs.
This way, the noose remains around Mr. Hussein’s neck for as long as is diplomatically necessary. If others do their share, Mr. Bush will listen. If, on the other hand, others simply seek to protect their interests at the expense of US interests, and have only moral lectures to offer, well then, war it will be, and if that is the end of NATO and the United Nations, then so be it. Humans grow old and useless; nature ensures they die so that young, strong, and vigorous humans can take their place. So it must be with institutions.
Return To Top February 25, 2003 Washington's growing backyard war - A special report by Richard M. Bennett
Mr. Bennett’s company is rbmedia.
Despite constant US denials that the three Americans being held by left wing Rebels deep in the Colombian jungles of the Caqueta province are CIA officers, it is more than likely that they and the American found murdered near where the aircraft crashed on February 13th not far from Florencia some 380kms (235miles) south of the capital Bogota, were indeed on an intelligence mission. They are in all probability contracted Intelligence personnel supplied by one of the large number of commercial 'front' organizations such as DynCorp that are regularly used by the United States in third world countries. The aircraft was believed to be the military U27A version of the Cessna-208 which carried a three-barrel Gatling gun and can be used to eradicate crops of illegal drugs. It also has the ability to accommodate either a rifle squad or 3835lbs of military stores and is therefore well-suited to covert military operations and small-unit infantry engagements. However this only serves to highlight the growing US involvement in Counter-Insurgency and Anti-Terrorist operations throughout Latin America. Colombian Army spokesmen have confirmed that fierce fighting is taking place between the Army's 'Lanceros' Special Forces and the seasoned veterans of the '14th and 15th Fronts' of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), who are holding the three American hostages. The US has sent a further 150 Special Forces and Intelligence Officers to join the substantial number of American military personnel already based in Colombia to help in the search operations. Washington has spent vast sums in recent years to help Colombia tackle its illegal drugs trade and has now authorized that this aid can be used for internal security operations and further deepening US military involvement in its own backyard.
As they did in Vietnam 40 years ago the United States is subtly increasing its military intervention in Colombia and although the exact level of forces deployed is still shrouded in secrecy it has been reliably estimated that between 1000 and 2000 US personnel are 'in-country' at any one time. Originally a largely anti-narcotic operation, since 9-11 in particular there has been a growing involvement in 'Direct action', co-ordinating, organizing and at times, commanding and implementing the war against the insurgents, indeed while many of the US troops are classified simply as being involved in 'intelligence' and 'security' projects, others are known to be running so-called 'black-ops' with the CIA Station in Bogotá. Known US deployments in Colombia include some 120 soldiers attached to a military intelligence battalion based at the Joint Intelligence Center (JIC) at the Tres Esquinas military base in the southern Colombian department of Putumayo, while at least four Special Forces teams from the 7th Special Forces Group are training Colombian Army counterinsurgency battalions in the southern departments of Putumayo and Caqueta. Three or four US Navy SEAL teams are training Colombian Marines and Navy riverine (river operations) personnel in various locations throughout Colombia and these are supported by an additional team of around 45 former US Navy SEALS conducting riverine training on contract for the US State Department in the Putumayo department although they are officially still based in the Peruvian city of Iquitos. Importantly, because of the nature of the difficult terrain encountered, at least four teams of pilots, gunners and engineers from the 6th USAF Special Operations Squadron are known to be training Colombian Army and Air Force pilots in use of the Bell UH1 Huey helicopters as well as in tactical operations and close-air support.
CIA, NSA and contracted Intelligence personnel are based at five separate communications monitoring and radar installations on the military bases at San Jose del Guaviare, Marandua, Leticia, Riohacha and San Andres Island, while others are also attached to mobile listening posts that move between various military bases in Colombia. These are protected by US Special Forces and four additional 50-man teams of Security personnel who also responsible for US facilities at the military bases in Miraflores, Mariquita, Santa Marta and Puerto Asis. The activities of US personnel are co-ordinated through the US Military Mission, CIA Station and Embassy in Bogota and importantly the 14 -15 former US military and intelligence officers employed by the US State Department who are based in the capital Bogota to advise the Colombian military high command. However Washington's growing direct involvement in the Civil War in Colombia is only part of a larger military commitment in Latin America that now includes US forces deployed at Hato International Airport on Curacao in the Netherlands Antilles; the Reina Beatrix Airport at Aruba in the Netherlands Antilles; the Comalpa International Airport in El Salvador; the Soto Cano Military Airfield in Honduras and the large base at Santa Lucia in Peru which is almost certainly used for classified missions 'in-country' and around the Colombian border area and US Special Forces, USAF, CIA and NSA personnel are believed to be based there. However the largest and most contentious bases in the region are undoubtedly those at Manta in Ecuador. The concession of an airbase at the Eloy Alfaro Airport and naval facilities to the United States in 1999 supposedly for use in its fight against the drug trade could markedly increase the impact of the Colombian conflict on Ecuador. The flow of Colombian refugees into Ecuador, caused by fighting between leftist FARC guerrillas, right-wing paramilitaries and the Colombian Army in areas near the border, has fuelled fears that the country is being drawn into its neighbours civil war and the alarm grew even more intense when unconfirmed rumours began to circulate that Colombian rebel forces were setting up camps inside Ecuadorian territory. The United States has also embarked upon a large scale retraining and re-equipment program aimed at turning the Ecuador Army's 9th Patria Special Forces Brigade at Latacunga into a major counter-insurgency unit. The four GFE Para Commando Battalions; 24th-25th-26th-27th, along with the 9th GEK Squadron, 6th Recon LRRP Battalion for long range reconnaissance and patrol behind 'enemy' lines and the Puma hostage rescue unit have now all received intensive training from US Green Berets, with selected officers being sent to the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg in North Carolina on specialist courses.
Risk of a wider South American guerrilla war
The fact that the facilities at Manta at now being used increasingly to support US military operations within Colombia has raised the fear that that the rebels may see the Manta base, only 20 minutes flying time from the border and which is currently receiving a $100 million upgrade, as a legitimate target. The base, known as a Forward Operating Location (FOL), houses E3 AWACS surveillance aircraft monitoring rebel arms smuggling and drug cartel flights, along with other smaller USAF spy planes and backed up by over 500 personnel. Manta has taken over the role once played by the former USAF Howard air base near Panama City and is now seen as a pivotal part of Plan Colombia, the $1.3 billion plus program aimed at undermining the FARC rebel - drugs cartel alliance in Colombia. Observers have commented recently that Ecuador is fast become the 'new Panama' and its position will allow US forces to be deployed not only in Colombia, but Venezuela, Peru and Bolivia if so wished. Manta, some 240kms (150 miles) west of the capital of Quito, has quickly become a vital part of the new network of US surveillance facilities in Latin America and the Caribbean said to cost a total of $116 million, with yearly maintenance estimated at $14 million, however no rent will be paid to the host Governments for any of them.
The War on Terrorism is now having an increasing influence on US activities in Latin America as Washington seeks to link FARC with the international terrorist movement, made considerably easier with the discovery that three members of the IRA were training them in bomb-making techniques. However the recent arrest at Gatwick airport of a suspected terrorist with both Islamic and Venezuelan connections and the US accusations that Islamic terrorists have been using the Venezuelan resort of Margarita Island in recent months raise the prospect that oil-rich Venezuela may now be about to follow Iraq onto the list of nations destined for regime change by direct intervention. The island is located about 37km (23 miles) off the northeast coast of Venezuela, CIA reports have claimed that terrorists are transiting the island enroute to the Tri-border region (or Triple Frontier) where the borders of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay converge and which has long be suspected of being an Al Qa'ida stronghold.. Margarita Island has been previously identified by Washington sources as a centre of terrorist financing along with Panama and the Cayman Islands. The CIA have developed a covert program for the removal of President Hugo Chavez and the restoration of US control over Venezuela's oil reserves, considered vital at a time of crisis in the Middle East. So far Washington's backing for strikes, civil unrest and a military coup have proved unsuccessful, however an attempt to link Venezuela with Islamic terrorism may be seen as an option to alienate Latin American support from the embattled Chavez and make his eventual overthrow rather more acceptable to other South American leaders.
While the world is distracted by the threat of conflict with Iraq and the growing crisis over the other nations in the so-called 'axis of evil', as well as the on-going war on terrorism, the United States is expanding its military involvement in Latin America to a dangerous and largely un-noticed degree. While Iraq could become America's Chechnya, it is far more likely that the intractable conflicts in the vast jungles of South America will become the new Vietnam and this time much closer to home, right in Washington's own backyard in fact.
Return To Top February 25, 2003
US plans total war against Kim US plans total war against Kim
By Ian Mather writing in Scotland on Sunday. For full story click Globalsecurity.org.
WHILE the White House continues its public war of words with North Korea, a battle plan is already being laid in secret by military strategists at the Pentagon.
Until now leader Kim Jong Il’s increasingly flamboyant and frightening game of international brinkmanship has only attracted condemnation from the Bush administration.
But behind the scenes, American strategists are now weighing up the option of a pre-emptive military strike against North Korea as the rogue Stalinist state forges ahead with its plans to build a nuclear arsenal - threatening not only a "domino effect" of nuclear proliferation in east Asia but also a strike against the very heart of America.
It is a terrifying scenario, with likely casualties running to one million during the first day of an attack on North Korea - most falling victim to the long-range artillery trained on its southern neighbour.
Last week, in its most defiant act yet, a North Korean fighter jet crossed the border and played cat-and-mouse with a South Korean aircraft. When the US condemned the incursion, North Korea declared that there could be nuclear war on the Korean peninsula "at any time".
The US responded by placing on alert its long-range bombers based on Guam and ordering the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson and its battle group to sail to waters off the Korean Peninsula, fuelling talk of a possible US pre-emptive strike against North Korea’s nuclear facilities.
Return To Top February 24, 2003 Iraq hints at destroying al-Samud 2 missiles
Jang for full story.
BAGHDAD: Iraq said on Sunday it was seriously studying a UN request to destroy its al-Samoud 2 missiles as it test-fired a rocket engine to show UN weapons inspectors it did not violate range limits.
"We are studying the letter of (chief weapons inspector) Mr Blix about destroying the missiles in depth and in a serious and comprehensive way," General Husam Mohammad Amin, head of Iraq's weapons monitoring, told a news conference. "We hope that this issue will be resolved through agreement and cooperation and without interference from the Americans and the British. I believe that we will be able to resolve this issue without any intervention by those with evil intentions," Amin added.
But he refused to answer direct questions on whether Iraq would destroy the missiles. "I can assert and I say that this missile only constitutes one aspect of our defence capabilities. Destroying these missiles will affect our defence capabilities but would not completely terminate them," he added.
The United States and Britain are, meanwhile, mounting a diplomatic effort to persuade UN Security Council members to back a new resolution paving the way for war if Iraq does not disarm peacefully. Sunday's test-firing of a rocket engine in front of the UN experts happened at the Falluja site 70 kms west of Baghdad. "This is the fifth time that the arms inspectors see such a test," Colonel Ali Jasim Hussein told Reuters Television.
Return To Top February 24, 2003 Terrorism a pretext to conquer world: Mahathir
Jang for full story.
NAM draft resolution rejects attack on Iraq, rebukes Bush 'axis of evil' description; calls for UN conference to draw distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters
KUALA LUMPUR: Western powers are using terrorism as a pretext to conquer the world and will target Iran and North Korea once they succeed in Iraq, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said on Sunday.
Leaders of the developed countries have become "like a people of the Stone Age where for them, the solution to a problem is by killing people," he told more than 100,000 Malaysians at a mass peace rally here.
"Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, they found the excuse to once again conquer the world," said Mahathir, who takes over the leadership of the 114-nation Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) at a summit opening here on Monday.
"I am confident that if they succeed in Iraq, they will shift their focus to Iran and after Iran, to North Korea. After North Korea, who will be their next victim? It is clear that the Western powers want to once again conquer the world," he said.
An impassioned Mahathir slammed rich nations for their "double standards," saying they criticised developing countries on human rights issues but ignored the growing worldwide protest against a war in Iraq. "Do as I tell you but don't do as I do. This is a blatant example of double standards by the west," he said.
Return To Top February 24, 2003
US, Philippines Offer Different Versions of Bolstered US Troop Presence US, Philippines Offer Different Versions of Bolstered US Troop Presence
Analysis at Orbat.com Editor Johann Price writes:
At the same time the second story from American Forces Press Service makes it clear that the detachment is not small (they are in fact backed up by an entire MEU/ARG), that they are intended to carry out combat operations, and that these operations are in fact open ended.
12 US Green Berets arrive from Okinawa
Inquirer News Service with Inquirer wires [Manila]
Inquirer
U.S., Philippines to Operate Against Abu Sayyaf Terrorists
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service US Defense Link
Johann Price continues:
Philippines qualifies for Combat Zone Tax Exclusion
U.S. Armed Services members who deployed to the Republic of the Philippines in conjunction with Operation Enduring Freedom since Jan. 9, 2002, are eligible for the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion under a declaration from the Department of Defense.
A combat zone is any area the President of the United States designates as an area U.S. Armed Forces are engaging or have engaged in combat. The provisions of the Executive Order allow the Defense Department to certify other regions and countries for the tax relief exclusion under certain criteria.
Afghanistan (and airspace above) was designated as a combat zone by Executive Order No. 13239. The Philippines was certified as meeting the requirements for service in direct support of a military operations in the Afghanistan combat zone in a memorandum from the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management Policy Charles S. Abell, dated Oct. 31, 2002.
A member of the Armed Services is entitled to tax exclusion for any month during any part the member served in the Philippines in support of Operation Enduring Freedom - Philippines. For enlisted personnel, base pay is not taxed. For commissioned officers, the tax exclusion is limited to the highest rate of enlisted base-pay (E-9).
Service member must have physically been in the Philippines and the mission directly related to OEF-P. Individuals who supported OEF-P from a supporting U.S. base or headquarters do not qualify. Service members, who are in the Philippines merely for their own convenience while on leave or liberty, are not entitled to the exclusion."
Source: Pacom.mil
Comment by Johann Price The Bush Administration and Rumsfeld's DoD have adopted a strategy of confronting the most active and threatening of al-Qaeda affiliated regional guerilla groups despite the strong fears of 'low intensity' conflict that have lingered since Vietnam. The standing with Combined Joint Task Force- Horn of Africa activated late last year (with its own dedicated special opertions forces contingent as well) and of course Combined Joint Task Force- Afghanistan are the others.
That American fear, along with regional sensitivities accounts for the remarkably low profile of such missions despite the fact that they can expect to find themselves in real combat. Just last week a U.S. B-52 bomber dropped a 2,000-pound JDAM and an AC-130 gunship fired about ten 105 mm cannon rounds at the caves in northern Helmand province where three hostiles evading Coalition Forces were taking cover. Yesterday an American soldier on a routine mounted patrol near Gardez lost his right foot when the vehicle he was in struck a mine.
Neither Afghanistan nor the Philippines should be feared because of the absence of quick solutions; it is difficult to counsel inaction against an enemy as quick and adaptable as al-Qaeda. Neither area of operations show the massive popular opposition that defeated the Soviets 1979-1989 or the Americans in Vietnam 1965-75. In both wars those who intervened lost their way when they forgot they were there to assist rather than direct, and worse still failed to address the fundamental weaknesses of the local allies. It is advisable that all of us strive to remain informed of just what Coalition forces around the world are doing in the war on terrorism and why.
Otherwise, there is be no guarantee that the cumulative signs of drift in these classic ‘small wars’ can be detected in time, obscured in between bureaucracies and media outfits concerned with bigger things.
Return To Top February 23, 2003 Gordon MacKinlay forwards this article [excerpts] Sgt. Valerie Dey-Bolejack from US DOD sources.
KABUL, Afghanistan (Army News Service, Feb. 20, 2003) - The 6th Battalion,
Afghan National Army finished basic training at the Kabul Military Training
Center Feb. 9, fielding almost 600 more troops for the central government.
The training of the 6th BANA, which lasted 10 weeks, was conducted by a
cadre from the French Army. The French and U.S. armies have alternated as
trainers for each class of Afghan recruits trained at KMTC since the first
battalion began training in April 2002. The training program includes combat
tactics, platoon level training and various other skills needed to
accomplish missions throughout the country.
At the graduation ceremony, the 6th BANA gathered in formation for a pass
and review for their commander and for presentation to the visiting
dignitaries gathered under a banner proclaiming, "We are Afghan, Afghanistan
is our country and we are proud of her."
Capt. Pachiauen Pascal, French Army, 7th Battalion Mountain, said the morale
of 6th BANA soldiers is good.
"They are all volunteers," he said. "They want to learn and are very proud
every time they accomplish a task."
Also at the ceremony, 6th BANA soldiers showed off their combat skills to
the crowd. The demonstration included soldiers rappelling down the side of a
building, gathering as a squad and simulating fighting off attackers with a
variety of weapons. They also showed the crowd a mortar and anti-tank rocket
firing position setup demonstration, a hand-to-hand combat drill and a first
aid casualty pickup demonstration.
The Afghan National Army band played as the soldiers passed in review.
The soldiers will be deployed throughout Afghanistan on various missions in
support of the central government, to provide stability and continue the
fight against terrorism, officials said.
Since inception, the KMTC has graduated six battalions of the Afghan
National Army, comprising more than 2,300 Afghan soldiers.
Return To Top February 23, 2003 Analysis by Richard M. Bennett.
Both the United States and British Governments remain convinced that Iraq does have illegal stocks of chemical and biological weapons and is still attempting to covertly pursue both nuclear weapons and long range missile programs in defiance of United Nations regulations. There is a long running, and some would argue, natural reluctance for the intelligence communities to allow more detailed evidence of Iraq's supposed capabilities to be made public. This can be explained by a wish to protect highly vulnerable sources, methods of surveillance and their overall effectiveness or equally to hide the lack of a convincing 'smoking gun'. Whatever may be the truth, it cannot be denied that Iraq both before the Gulf War and in the period 1991-1998 carried out a truly massive and international program to obtain weapons of mass destruction and their methods of delivery from the so-called 'Super Gun' to a strategic missile capability. The creation in 1996 of the Special Chemical Corps and the activities of the Al Amn al-Khas or Special Security Service were specifically designed to obstruct the arms inspectors and to create a program to hide future WMD development. Saddam Hussein does have a history of brutality and aggression, he also has a reputation for making costly mistakes that have caused his country endless and catastrophic problems. He is also without a shadow of a doubt a very lucky dictator having survived countless attempted assassinations and coups. That accepted, what are the arguments for international intervention and the evidence that he is a 'clear and present danger' other than to his own people?
Without a statement from the UN Inspectors that there is firm evidence of a nuclear program or discovery of genuine long range missile systems capable of hitting Israel or Europe then the present limited 'regional-strategic' military threat from Iraq is derisory. However, there are those analysts who claim that since the last round of UN inspections ended in 1998 that much of Iraq's clandestine advanced weapons program has been well hidden underground in secure tunnels built with North Korean assistance or moved out of the country altogether. This latter argument put forward by some intelligence sources in the USA, but mainly promoted by those in Israel has suggested that secret facilities on the Libyan-Egyptian border, or less likely in Iran or even perhaps Sudan and the Yemen now carry on the work on a much reduced scale. Similar sources have also put it to AFI Research that the discovery of an Al-Samoud Two missile with an illegally increased range of some 115-120 miles is merely the tip of an iceberg rather than an example of Iraq seeking to deliver a larger and more powerful warhead over the legally allowed range. Accusations of North Korean involvement in developing long range and far more accurate systems in Iraq is made more believable by a confirmed program carried out by Pyongyang's technicians in neighbouring Syria where a network of underground tunnels houses upto 1,000 improved SCUD missiles many of which are armed with chemical agent warheads. Unsubstantiated rumours persist that North Korea has managed to smuggle a significant number of long range missiles into Iraq and this has indeed been given a little extra credence by the recent discovery of North Korean SCUD type missiles on a merchant vessel sailing to the Yemen. Attempts by Iraq to bolster its crumbling air defences battered by twelve years of constant Allied air attacks is said to be aimed at protecting sites where weapons of mass destruction may be deployed, advanced radar from the Ukraine believed to be capable of detecting US Stealth aircraft is reported by some observers to have been installed with the help of Serbian experts and linked to a more secure command and control network built by the Communist Chinese. While much of this does seem to have been confirmed by intelligence sources, it remains a matter of conjecture whether it would materially affect a US air campaign.
It has been forcefully argued that Iraq may seek to retaliate against Western interests by non-conventional means and here the spectre of some form of linkage with terrorism and with Al Qa'ida in particular is regularly broached. Iraqi defectors have drawn attention to restricted areas of the former CBW facilities at Salman Pak where what would seem, from their reports and satellite surveillance images, to be a special forces training encampment has been constructed. The facilities which are under the direct control of the Da'irat al Mukharabarat al Amah or Department of General Intelligence, appear to include a large passenger aircraft fuselage, commercial vehicles, buildings and other structures normally associated with training in HRO or hostage rescue operations and anti-hijacking techniques. The detailed accusations however are that these same facilities have been used to train Islamic terrorist from Algeria, Yemen, Palestine and members of the former Abu Nidal group in active measures. No concrete evidence has been put forward of a genuine Al Qa'ida connection, though suggestions have been made of a link with the Algerian GSPC or Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat which has caused some considerable concern in both France and Spain and may be linked to the arrest of numerous suspects believed to be of Algerian origin in Britain in recent weeks and which were largely as a result of intelligence tip-offs from Madrid and Paris. Members of the GSPC are believed to have trained in Iraq and the group is understood to be connected to Al Qa'ida. The evidence is however tenuous and although of considerable interest, does not yet conclusively prove linkage between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden or his successors.
Of more direct concern is the allegation that Iraq may seek to directly attack the West with chemical, biological or perhaps so-called 'dirty' nuclear weapons delivered by its own special forces and intelligence officers operating throughout the USA and Europe under legitimate business, journalistic or diplomatic cover. The evidence that Saddam Hussein may have that capability rests largely upon the existence of organizations such as the Special Operations Group -999 of the Al-Istikhbarat Al-Askariyya or Military Intelligence. This unit believed to have its main headquarters at Salman Pak is organized into six battalions named for their target areas including the 1st Persian, 2nd Saudi Arabian, 3rd Palestine(Israel) and 4th Turkish. However it is the 5th Marine and 6th Opposition Battalions that are of most interest in this context. The so-called Marine unit is trained in SEAL-style warfare and while nowhere near the standards demanded of the US Marine Corps is by all accounts an effective and dangerous force.The 'Opposition' unit is probably the most significant of all, for it is this unit that would be called upon to operate within hostile nations such as the United States and Britain. It has recently been suggested by Israeli security sources that all of this latter units 500 or so personnel have already been dispersed to their allotted target areas. Without conformation, usually impossible to obtain short of significant arrests being made, this must still be considered in the context of Western 'Black Operations', disinformation designed to confuse or mislead.
AFI has compiled a comprehensive report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, its military capability, intelligence structure and its non-conventional warfare capability as well as its links to other countries and groups. This covers numerous 'Special' organizations and facilities sufficient to cause considerable concern in the West, but it must still remain open to the reader to decide whether it is sufficient to warrant military action and the risk of destabilizing an entire region and souring relations with the Muslim World for a generation or more. In the last remaining weeks of peace it must be right for the authorities in Washington and London to provide far more confirmation of the Iraqi threat. Even if only to justify military action for which, in the light of well presented evidence, it may become increasingly obvious that there is indeed no genuine long term alternative. Without a shadow of doubt the world urgently needs 'facts before bombs and evidence before war'.
To purchase a copy of Research Report No-60 "Iraq, the evidence" contact AFI Research rbmedia.com
Return To Top February 23, 2003 US offers India $2.5bn, oil to support war against Iraq
Pakistan’s Jang quotes the Asian Age in this story.
NEW DELHI: The United States has offered to give India the $2.5 billion owed to it by Iraq and assure its oil supply for unambiguous support of its war against Baghdad, a report said on Saturday. The Asian Age newspaper said that Washington would also award New Delhi a major chunk of reconstruction activities in post-war Iraq in exchange for unconditional backing. The report did not specify when or through what channels Washington's offers were conveyed to New Delhi, but said State Department officials had told visiting Indian foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal that US and Indian interests could converge after the war. It said oil remained a major lure, with Washington making clear that all countries clearly standing behind the United States would get a share in the proceeds of the war and removal of Saddam Hussein. India imports most of its oil and gas and its projected requirement in the fiscal year to March is 108 million tonnes of crude oil, against local production of 33 million tonnes. Estimated consumption of 55 million tonnes of natural gas compares with domestic production of 24 million tonnes.
Return To Top February 23, 2003
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin
Lately there has been lot of speculation about coup in Pakistan. Most of it is based on many misperceptions about the Pakistan Army.
Coups are launched by dynamic men like my comrade Aslam Watanyar, the indomitable socialist from Paktiya, who with a tank unit changed the course of history of Afghanistan. The fact that the PDPA Government failed in the long run does not diminish Watanyar's role.
The Pakistani officer corps comprises largely of lower middle class origin people. This breed is more interested in self-advancement and climbing the social ladder than in any sublime grand strategic heroic venture like a coup. Their coup is getting a good ACR (Report) and becoming a general. After all, the brilliant Von Stauffenberg, who placed the bomb in Hitler's bunker, was an aristocrat! Lenin and Mao were from the more well off classes. This is not the case with the Pakistan officers. The large majority come from humble backgrounds, thus are socially conservative, cautious and narrow and petty in outlook.
Who would launch the coup? Historically the Pakistani intelligence agencies have been more proficient in spying on their own people than in real intelligence work. Thus the famous ISI miserably failed in real intelligence operational work! They failed to detect location of Indian Armoured Division in 1965.They failed to find when the Indians came 35 miles inside Siachen in 1984. All they succeeded in was in finding coup makers! Thus they located the Attock Conspiracy, the indomitable Tajammul who wanted to liquidate the usurper Zia in 1980. All this makes a coup difficult.
So what are the possibilities?
1- A classic coup by an organised group -Low 20 % but possible.
2- A Random Assassination attempt -Possible -50 % (Like Mrs. Indira Gandhi, who was liquidated by a body guard ).
3-A super power planned disposal-like that of Zia in 17 August 1988 - Brilliantly planned, faultlessly executed by USA in all probability - High -80 %
Aziz Khan has no command of troops. His potential as replacement of Musharaf is not likely. The average Pakistani officer beyond colonel is a meek submissive docile man as far as coup launching is concerned. The system ensures "Goof Selection Syndrome". All who go beyond colonel are castrated and have no guts left to mount a coup.
The third possibility: The USA would be ideally happy if Musharraf is removed in an accidental crash, an unnatural death. This would give them an excuse to destroy Pakistan's Nuclear Assets. A moral justification to launch a just war.
Musharraf would be more useful to USA as a dead man than alive perhaps in the aftermath of the Iraq War of 2003.The world would be told that the USA had to act because Pakistan's Nuclear assets would have fallen in Islamist hands in the situation following Musharraf's demise.
God save Pakistan! Pakistan has laboured for long but so far it has failed to produce a man among its higher leadership !
What can I say to the Pakistani officer corps: At this moment in PAKISTAN'S history we need a great man at the helm of the affairs who cannot be intimidated by one phone call from Bush. One who for his conviction would hazard war even with the heavens! Return To Top February 22, 2003 Forwarded by reader Ethan, a story by Owen Mathhews, Sa,I Kohen, and John Barry. Please click
MSNBC for original
Turkey is raising its price for allowing
U.S. forces to invade Iraq from its territory. In early negotiations with
the United States, Ankara spoke of sending in Turkish troops to set up a
“buffer zone” perhaps 15 miles deep along the Iraqi border. This would
prevent a flood of Kurdish refugees from northern Iraq, the Turks said. Ê
But now, NEWSWEEK has learned, Turkey is demanding that it send
60,000 to 80,000 of its own troops into northern Iraq to establish
“strategic positions” across a “security arc” as much as 140 to 170 miles
deep in Iraq. That would take Turkish troops almost halfway to Baghdad.
These troops would not be under U.S. command, according to Turkish
sources, who say Turkey has agreed only to “coordination” between U.S. and
Turkish forces.
Ankara fears the Iraqi Kurds might use Saddam’s fall to
declare independence. Kurdish leaders have not yet been told of this new
plan, according to Kurdish spokesmen in Washington, who say the Kurds
rejected even the earlier notion of a narrow buffer zone. Farhad Barzani,
the U.S. representative of the main Kurdish party in Iraq, the KDP, says,
“We have told them: American troops will come as liberators. But Turkish
troops will be seen as invaders.”
The White House did not respond to requests for comment; officials
elsewhere in the administration played down the Turkish demands as
bargaining tactics: “We told them flat out, no.” But independent
diplomatic sources in Ankara and Washington with knowledge of the
U.S.-Turkey talks say that while the precise depth of the “security zone”
has still to be agreed, the concept is “pretty much a done deal,” as one
observer put it. These sources add that the main U.S. concern has been
that U.S., not Turkish, troops occupy the northern Iraqi cities of Mosul
and Kirkuk, and that Turkish troops merely surround but not enter the
heavily Kurdish cities of Erbil and Sulemaniye. To get Turkey’s assent to
this, these sources say, the United States had to “cave” on its demand
that Turkish troops be under U.S. control.
“Turkey is playing hardball,” said Michael Amitay of the
Washington Kurdish Institute. “But if the U.S. agrees to these Turkish
deployments, there is a real risk that the Kurds will start a guerrilla
war against the Turkish troops.
Return To Top February 22, 2003 Iraq Ready To Talk if US Drops War
Haaretz for full article.
BAGHDAD - Iraq's Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan said in an interview broadcast Friday Iraq was ready for dialogue with the United States if it dropped its plans to invade the country. "We have said that we are with dialogue, we are for normal ties with all countries of the world, of course except the Zionist entity [Israel], even if we have differences with this or that [country]," Ramadan told Iraq's al-Shabab television station run by Uday, the son of President Saddam Hussein. "We have been asked several times: 'Are you ready for dialogue with the American administration to build economic ties and cooperation that fulfils mutual interests?' and we said yes... this still stands now," he said. "This process does not go along [with U.S. plans to invade]. If they abandon aggression and there is dialogue that achieves mutual interests away from interference in internal affairs... we'll have no objections," Ramadan said.
Return To Top February 22, 2003
Gear Gets to Turkey; Troops Wait Gear gets to Turkey; troops wait Return To Top February 21, 2003
Pakist
Pakistan Air Force, Several Other Senior Officer Die in Crash
Gurkhas deploy to Sierra Leone Return To Top February 21, 2003 Letters to the Editor on Syrian Tank Upgrades From SAM19701011
This updated type of T-55 has an add on armor system called the Kontankt-5 ERA add on armor system which is added to the turret, front hull, and side skirts of this tank. The older 115 mm gun is replaced with a 125 mm smoothbore gun and new fire control and ballistic computer systems. this gun cannot only fire high explosive and anti tank rounds but also reportedly the 9KP9 or 9KT20 anti tank missile.
The Ukrainian and Belorussian Governments are currently offering upgrade packages to governments that have T-55 tanks that cannot afford to buy new T-80 or T-90 tanks at the asking price of $600,000 per tank. The Ukraine Government began were the first were first to promote and this type of upgrade package purchased by the Syrian Army in 1995 under the designation T-55MV. All production has been done at tank plants number 7 and number 17 in Lvov, Ukraine. In addition the first 200 of these tanks were deployed with the Syrian Army 1st Corps in 1997 and in 1996 a further 400 order were placed. For delver by 1999. This reportedly was followed by another order in 1998 of another unknown number of tanks for delivery in 2001.
Recently this tank has been renamed for the world market the T-55M(6). In another report states that it can withstand hits from American M829 120 mm PDU rounds.
Could this mean that some of the intelligence reports are correct that the Syrians have been giving possibly upgraded and rebuilt T-55 and T-62 tanks to Iraq of this type? Is this what American and UK forces are going to be going Up against?
Will the Syrians and the Iranians intervene? What is the status of this weapon system around the world? It seems like a viable weapon against something the West has currently, not great but viable.
I found this information and sources from * Journal of Military Ordinance November 2001 Volume 11 number 6
From Johann Price, Editor Analysis
There have been all sort of murky reports of Syrian-Iraqi co-operation, but I have not heard any reports that Iraq (which has its own contacts with Belarus) has seen such improvement in the quantity and quality of its armour to seriously worry Coalition field commanders.
I am highly skeptical that either the Syrians or Iranians will cross in any depth in to Iraqi territory unless the coalition's thrust from the north is cancelled on account of Turkish intransigence. Neither state is ready for direct confrontation with the US. They would like however to dissuade any coalition incurions in to their borders either in hot pursuit or as some sort indirect approach. There are also probable concerns regarding uncontrolled refugee flows in the even of any prolonged fighting in the north.
The Syrians are great survivors and have consistently made the right call in terms of keeping the Americans off their back in the last decade and a half in terms without substantially changing their behavior. How many other Soviet client states can say that? There's certainly no love lost for Saddam, and they have managed to avoid the axis of evil list. There's just the opportunity to milk an increasingly desperate old enemy for everything he's worth. Think of the way Saddam sent half of his air force to Iran in 1991 to save them from Coalition PGMs. The Iranians have still got them.
Return To Top February 21, 2003
Letter to the Editor Re. US 2nd ACR Letter to the Editor Re. US 2nd ACR
From Roger Houston.
I wouldn't be surprised if 2ACR would be tagged to go to the
ITO (Iraqi Theater of Operations) as a follow-on force for occupation duties
ans peacekeeping. The 2nd Dragoons would be perfect for the oilfield
security mission, as well as internal security of the smaller cities that
were not hot.(like Basra maybe?). The unit has the Kiowa Warrior squadron
that could be used for scouting and surveillance along the Iranian border in
case something got interesting there. I would not put the 2nd against a
Republican Guard armored division equipped with T-72's and BMP'S unless it
had a bunch of air,artillery and armored support. I don't believe the 2nd
could do a repeat of 73 Easting in its present form.
The 278th ACR has just come off a very sucessful NTC
rotation. I am very surprised this unit has not been alerted for something.
The air squadron is a little lacking since it has not received the Kiowa
Warrior and Apache yet, but the ground squadrons have M-1A1,M-3A2,and
Paladins. Task Force an active aviation element and the 278th is a potent
force.
Return To Top February 20, 2003
Coup in Pakistan? India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction
Forwarded by Ram Narayanan, an article from Stratfor.
[Editor’s Note: Talk of coups in Pakistan is nothing new in Delhi. We personally feel its absurd to suggest Delhi is “is quietly warning that if
Washington doesn't drop Musharraf and find a true pro-U.S. general to lead
Pakistan soon, it might face a much bigger threat than Iraq”. Delhi knows quite well General Musharraf’s problems at home stem in large part because he is pro-US and the very great majority of his people are not. In the current situation no more pro-US general – if there is such a person - could come to power and hope to stay. Also, Delhi is not so naïve as to believe the US has merely to snap its fingers to effect regime change in Pakistan. For the rest, the article does lay out some interesting possibilities as to who might succeed President Musharraf should he start losing his hold, and is worth reading for that reason. Nontheless, Major Amin’s article, which follows Stratfor’s, is a considerably more perceptive analysis of President Musharraf’s position and rule.]
Indian sources are leaking rumors of a possible right-wing military coup in
Pakistan just as Washington is making final preparations for a war in Iraq. In
the event of the ouster of Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Gen.
Mohammad Aziz Khan, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, would
take over the military and the country. New Delhi is quietly warning that if
Washington doesn't drop Musharraf and find a true pro-U.S. general to lead
Pakistan soon, it might face a much bigger threat than Iraq.
Musharraf faces a challenge inside Pakistan in balancing the interests of those
opposed to his cooperation with Washington -- be they military or religious
forces -- while at the same time keeping the country from the receiving end of
U.S. guns and bombs. However, the coup rumors appear premature, and might
instead reveal a desire by New Delhi to manipulate Washington's relationship
with India's traditional nemesis: Pakistan.
India will not be alone in pursuing such schemes. As Washington gets closer to
war with Iraq, other nations will try to exploit the expected U.S. tunnel vision
-- hoping to press their own agendas and have the United States react without
taking time to analyze and prepare contingency plans.
Contrary to the initial rumors out of New Delhi, Indian intelligence sources
tell Stratfor that they have not seen new signs of an imminent coup in Pakistan,
though they do suggest such a plan might be in the works six months or more down
the road. According to these sources, there are two groups considering the
overthrow of the Musharraf regime -- "hard-line" military officers and
religiously motivated Pushtun officers.
The first group seeks to at least remove Musharraf from his position as Chief of
Army Staff (COAS) and shift Pakistan's military alliances away from Washington
and back toward other Muslim nations and China. Such a plot has not been
discounted by Pakistani sources, who tell Stratfor that discontent in the
military might lead some officers to try to sideline Musharraf, leaving him as
president but taking away his military power.
The other group of potential coup plotters, Pushtun officers, are seeking --
according to Indian intelligence sources -- to rally other Islamist factions in
Pakistan to overthrow Musharraf and place the country on a more fundamentalist
Islamic course. This would mark a drastic change in Pakistani political
succession, as previous coups all had military backing and were led by the COAS
-- who in this case is Musharraf himself.
Khan's role in all of this, according to Indian intelligence sources, is as an
as-of-yet uncommitted replacement for Musharraf as COAS, should the former group
of generals succeed in replacing Musharraf as army chief. Khan, often referred
to by Indian media as the "Islamic General," was a key facilitator in
Musharraf's coup to overthrow former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. Khan also was
a key player in the Kargil conflict in the disputed territory of Kashmir, and is
himself of Kashmiri ancestry.
Indian officials have long distrusted Khan, concerned that he would promote
additional Pakistani adventurism in Kashmir. And, despite their close
connections, Musharraf, too, grew concerned with Khan. On Oct. 8, 2001, Khan was
promoted above other generals from his position as corps commander for Lahore to
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee.
The move, rather than a promotion, however, was intended to weaken Khan's powers
and keep him under close observation. The JCS in Pakistan is a largely
ceremonial position, whereas the corps commanders wield real power. On the same
night, Musharraf sidelined the head of the Inter-Services Intelligence, another
potential competitor.
Musharraf since has walked a fine line between appeasing three competing groups
-- his restless generals, the Islamist factions and security personnel whose
fates were tied closely to that of the Taliban and the United States, which
offers the stark choice of cooperation or isolation and probable attack. New
Delhi is increasingly anxious to end Washington's support for Musharraf, whom
Indian officials say is doing little or nothing to stem cross-border attacks by
Islamist militants and Kashmiri separatists.
For India, leaking rumors of a right-wing coup just as Washington prepares to
engage Iraq is a low-cost gamble. At worst, no one listens. At best, Washington
itself decides to remove Musharraf. Somewhere in the middle, Musharraf feels
nervous and starts taking action against his own generals, particularly those
that India sees as the greatest potential threat.
While it might all be wishful thinking on India's part, New Delhi's actions are
representative of what other countries likely will do with increasing frequency
as Washington is drawn deeper into preparations for and engagement in war in
Iraq. Both nominal and close allies of the United States will use this time to
try to catch Washington off-balance and distracted with Iraq in order to advance
their own agendas. With the United States' focus growing tighter on Iraq,
Washington might miscalculate on another issue -- taking the word of an ally at
face value without taking time to fully analyze the situation and simply
shooting from the hip.
Return To Top February 20, 2003 Pakistan's Geopolitical Future
By Major A.H. Amin
It is an accident of history that the English East India Company saved the Indian Muslims from Hindu/Sikh domination during the period 1771-1849.Had the British Company not intervened India may have been a totally Hhindu/Sikh dominated state. In 1803 General Lake liberated Delhi from the Maratha yoke and in 1849 the English East India Company saved the Punjabi and Pathan Muslims from the Sikhs who had turned many of the Muslim mosques into stables and gunpowder magazines in retaliation to what the Muslim Afghan invaders had done to many of the Sikh places of worship. This fact that the British saved the Muslims is not taught in any history text book in Pakistan !
Till 1857 however the Muslims remained the leaders of anti British movements notably in the Sepoy Rebellion of 1857-58 in which they were the prime leaders. After 1858 however the Muslim elite adopted the policy of "Loyalism" as enunciated and led by the famous Syed Ahmad Khan.The only significant break with this policy came during the failed Khilafat Movement after which again the Muslim political leadership remained aligned with the British while the Hindu dominated Congress remained in constant conflict with the British. In the WW Two Mr Jinnah’s policy of supporting military recruitment brought the Muslims closer to the British.
The state of Pakistan was created because the Muslim middle and higher classes were not comfortable about their political and economic future in post British independent India which was likely to be dominated by the majority Hindu population. The higher classes mostly feudals feared land reforms, the middle classes because they could not compete with the Hindus in competitive examinations and the smaller mercantile/business class because they could not compete with their non Muslim counter parts. Of the 87 Muslims who entered the Indian Civil Service between 1922 and 1943, 29 came through merit having succeeded in open competitive examinations while the remaining 58 had failed to qualify on merit in the examination but were nominated by the British to balance the communal quota.
Out of this combination of interests arose the Pakistan slogan , raised by Whiskey drinking, British educated gentleman ,Muslims by birth , ambitious by nature who thought after the infamous rout or defeat of the Muslim League in 1937 Elections in all Muslim majority provinces that the best option to arouse the Muslim masses was recourse to the old slogan "Islam in danger" ! The Muslim masses responded and the result was the Pakistan slogan , initially dismissed by Mr Jinnah as a mad students idea ! Pakistan was created by the vote of the Muslims galvanised in name of religion by leaders who started their careers as Indian nationalists or as British toadies but were driven to join the Muslim League because they had little political future in a Congress Party dominated by the Hindus ! The same was true for the various disparate elements which finally joined the Muslim League like the Punjabi Unionists a landlord party which feared Congress not because it was a Hindu party but because it stood for land reforms ! The Sindhi landlords again because they were heavily in debt with Hindu moneylenders and because of land reforms.
Religion as a slogan was misused by the Hindu leaders also and it was Gandhi who introduced religion in politics. In this case the Hindu middle and higher classes were ambitious for power and saw themselves as the natural successor of the British Viceroy. Thus while the motivation in case of the Muslim leadership was fear that they would not get even a small slice of power, the motivation in the Hindu leadership’s case was they wanted all the cake for themselves as they convincingly proved after they came to power after the 1937 Elections.
Mr Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan was clear that the new state needed US military support and asked for it in October 1947 when Pakistan’s Ambassador to USA requested for US military and economic assistance to the figure of 2 Billion US Dollar , one of the pretexts being that Pakistan "presently faced a Soviet threat on her northern frontier" ! The US State Department patiently listened to this request and politely replied that presently the US Government had no source of credit available to meet the administrative expenses of the Pakistani Government but asked for a more precise breakdown of the 2 Billion demand into specific requirements ! Soon came a reply that 700 Million US Dollar was required for Industries,700 Million for agriculture and 510 Million for building and equipping defence services. When the USA regretted its ability to cater for the requirement Mir Laik Ali the special envoy requested immediate loan of 45 million USD for blankets ! The US again declined to provide blankets apart from polite excuses that some may be given at some stage from the War Assets Administration.
Mr Jinnah’s successors continued his policy of courting the USA was continued by his successors , both military and political. Pakistan Army Chief Ayub during his visit to US A in May 1958 even volunteered to send a Pakistan Army Corps to serve US interests in Iran or elsewhere in the Middle East . A break in these relations came after the 1965 indo-Pak War but the USSR invasion and occupation of Afghanistan from 1979-89 again brought the Pakistani military leadership under the usurper Zia and USA close. The relations became successively colder after Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan but the Post 9/11 Scenario was a blessing for the Pakistani military leadership since it enabled them to serve once again as mercenaries for the USA and in return get paid in terms of financial aid just like Sepoy Jahan Khan was paid by the British to fight against the King’s Enemies.
With this short background we will proceed to analyse Pakistan’s political and military history in brief and analyse the present situation. The Indian Army before 1947 was a staunch British collaborator and had no role in any anti British agitation. The Indian Navy both Muslims and Hindus was the only force which defied the British in the Naval Mutiny of 1946.Thus the post 1947 Indian and Pakistan Armies had a strong tradition of conservatism and loyalty to the Western powers. In India Nehru put the Indian Army into its place and established civilian primacy. However in Pakistan thanks to political incompetence and the fact that the Muslim League the main political party which led Pakistan was a temporary marriage of disparate elements temporarily united on one platform simply because of fear of Hindu Congress, army under its first Muslim Chief usurped power in 1958. Ayub had no political ideology except self interest and during his rule the seeds of secession of East Pakistan were firmly planted. Ayub’s successor Yahya had no ideology again but came to the conclusion that the only way out for the country was to hold elections based on universal adult franchise. Yahya’s successor the first directly elected prime minister Bhutto had an Islamic Socialist ideology (however flawed or imperfect) and initiated policies which led to his deposition in a US inspired military coup by army chief Zia in 1977. Zia however also had an ideology and continued Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons acquisition programme initiated by Bhutto. Here Zia was saved because of USSR invasion of Afghanistan which enabled him to carry on Bhuttos Nuclear Policy since USA at this point in time could not afford to embark on an anti nuclear adventure in Pakistan. In the umbrella of supporting the anti Soviet War in Afghanistan Zia also initiated a policy of supporting an anti Indian Insurgency in Indian Occupied Kashmir. The policy was not new, dating from 1947 , but had been discontinued after the failed Operation Gibraltar of 1965. Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan led to Zia’s elimination in a mysterious air crash with possible US involvement.
During the post Zia period from 1988-2001 Zia’s policies of supporting an anti Indian insurrection in Kashmir and Islamists in Afghanistan was continued by the army in general and the intelligence agencies in particular. The motivation here was mixed. There was the ideological element, some genuine individuals earnestly motivated to fight for a just cause. There was a material element since many in the agencies had much to gain from covert operations in terms of funds siphoned into secret bank accounts! The policy of Low Intensity War thus continued till at least 9/11 affair.
Army chief Aslam Beg actively supported and carried on the policy of adventurism and termed it as one which provide Pakistan with strategic depth. His successor Asif Nawaz did not want to continue it but was unable to enforce his will since the policy had many adherents at multiple tiers of command and also had civilian support, if not at the government level then at the private level. By and large Asif Nawaz’s successors tacitly allowed the same to continue till General Musharraf came as the army chief.Musharraf went a step further once he executed the Kargil Affair in which regular army units were employed in an operation designed to internationalise the Kashmir Issue by threatening the Ladakh Road. The motivation here was basically to assert the army’s primacy which had been seriously challenged when civilian prime minister Nawaz Sharif had sacked army chief Jahangir Karamat. However in the decisive stages of the Kargil Crisis Musharraf lost his nerve and Pakistan had to withdraw. This in turn led to a conflict with the civilian authority as a result of which Musharraf usurped power on 12th October 1999.
Kargil was different from the ongoing Low Intensity War in Kashmir since it involved regular army units while the Kashmir War involves civilian volunteer guerrilla forces. Kargil involved infiltration in high altitude territory not manned in winters while the Kashmir War is a classic guerrilla war behind enemy lines. The Kargil Affair was an institutional endeavour conceived to re-assert the army’s primacy and to embarrass Pakistan’s own civilian leadership . Kargil was a miltary defeat of the Pakistan Army but became the catalyst which enabled General Musharraf to capture political power. Kargil was called off by a single order while the Kashmir War has such strong roots that no one in Pakistan can call it off by issuing a single operational instruction!
9/11 provided General Musharraf the rationale to attempt a volte face with the argument that adventurism in terms of supporting Low intensity wars is a threat to Pakistan’s security. However Musharraf’s pragmatism is not shared by a large section of people both in Pakistan and outside Pakistan. In Pakistan many in the civil and military quarters regard the post 9/11 policy of Musharraf as a sell out and an outright betrayal. Outside Pakistan many in USA and other G-8 countries regard Musharraf as a transitory leader and feel that Pakistan’s Nuclear potential must be destroyed.
It must be remembered that the present Pakistani political and military leadership has no ideology unlike its predecessors like Mr Bhutto or even General Zia. The military leadership consists of middle class or lower middle people who have done well in this world , having risen from humble origins into the moneyed class and are supreme pragmatists. The politcal elite again consists of disparate elements united by ambition and ones who would collaborate with any one to retain their power or privileges! Even the Indians or any power that matters! The tradition of defying the army as set by Mr Z.A Bhutto was abandoned by his daughter once she agreed share power with the army and the army nominated president in 1988.Her successor Nawaz Sharif was again an army groomed man and had no ideology except self interest. True that he later on in his second term tried to assert power , sacked an army chief but was removed by the second army chief.
The fact is that Pakistan is now led by pragmatists who have no ideology since 1988. Initially these pragmatists were unable to restrain the ideologically motivated elements in both the armed forces and in the populace but 9/11 has been a watershed in Pakistan’s history. The Zia military regime was ironically forced into adopting an ideological line not simply because Zia was a religious man but because the geopolitical situation at that time forced them to do so. Today the same act is being repeated in a reverse direction i.e the geopolitical situation is forcing the Pakistani leadership to abandon ideology! The first was albeit a positive trend. The second being done now is a negative step. A country created on the basis of an ideology cannot abandon ideology!
The Pakistani state though outwardly stable is most fragile geopolitically at this stage. The army has destroyed all integrity and cohesion left in the politicians, judiciary and the people. Opportunism in politics has reached heights hitherto unknown! While there was a Z.A Bhutto in 1971 to save the country once the army had lost the war, today in case of military defeat there is no politician worth his salt who can restore stability. Musharraf’s team although outwardly sound has no great men, since the Indo Pak armies ensure mediocrity in higher ranks. All the top brass is busy in pursuing personalised agendas.
Now some strategic turning points. Kargil operation launched by Musharraf and the subsequent withdrawal under Vajpayee’s threat proved that Nuclear power is no guarantee that India would not embark on limited wars. The fact that one phone call from Bush reduced the entire military junta into docile school boys again proves that Pakistan has no more sovereignty left.
With this bleak background there is little hope of Pakistan’s future as a strategically independent state who can resist the fall out of Bush’s war against terrorism.
The USA will strike at a time and place of its own choosing and would use Musharaf’s ouster as a pretext to reduce Pakistan to size ,destroying the country’s nuclear potential and reducing it to a South American Banana Republic. What would be the left ?The politicians who sit in Pakistan’s National Assembly can be bought or coerced with a few million rupees. They are descendants of collaborators and their life script is no ideology or any grand idea but personal fortune building!
The story of the Pakistani state is a story of various generals pursuing personalised agendas, creating politician test tube babies and tolerating them till they remained docile! Men from humble backgrounds climbing up the social ladder jumping from old Morris cars into Mercedes and BMW’s. There is neither ideology, nor constitution, nor any military talent or political acumen left. To compound the contradictions while the well off drink and womanise on the house the common man is persecuted by police thugs for drinking local booze and dating with a sweet heart won after an year’s hard work !
What are the options available? Since the successive military regimes have systematically destroyed constitutions, political organisation and intellectual freedom there is little hope for reform. The current of history would now take its own course. Defeat in war or slow decay, Balkanisation, anarchy, civil war, all these may be round the corner. Out of this chaos a new order would emerge. Ideology mixed with ethnicity. Some city states, some free ports, part Somalia, part Ethiopia, part Panama, many things but nothing inspiring.
Return To Top February 20, 2003
Are the War Delays Over? Our reader who opined that the US 3rd ACR was a more logical candidate for Iraq instead of the US 2nd ACR [a light unit] has been shown right with the announcement that the former unit has been ordered to deploy to the Gulf. The 3rd ACR is a very powerful brigade sized unit with a combination of tanks, helicopters, Cavalry Fighting Vehicles, and SP artillery. It is composed of four "squadrons", a US cavalry squadron being equal to a battlion or a regiment in most armies.
For full story click Debka
The muddle and uncertainty that have in the last three days confused perceptions surrounding the Iraq War in European and Middle East capitals are making way for some clarity. The pendulum can now be clearly seen to be veering towards “on” rather than “off”. It is also possible to discern which reports swirling around the airwaves were designed to mislead.
DEBKAfile’s military sources in Washington now maintain that, despite reports to the contrary, President George W. Bush has finally resolved to launch military action against Iraq on schedule. Here are some examples of reports that sowed uncertainty:
1. Because of logistical difficulties, the Americans have not yet attained the optimum level of troop strength for going to war at their jumping off bases. Our sources maintain that the strength present equals the assigned figure.
2. Turkey’s refusal to allow US troops bound for northern Iraq to cross its territory will delay the offensive. DEBKAfile’s Washington sources reveal that Washington presented Ankara with a 48-hour ultimatum to agree to terms for its participation in the conflict or count itself out, in which case the Americans will send their army into northern Iraq by another route. The US Treasury will also save itself a large sum in aid.
In any case, since the leaders of Iraqi Kurdistan are part of the US-led coalition, the US war command will only need enough troops to capture the northern Iraqi oil cities of Mosul and Kirkuk and surrounding oil fields - not the entire region. Those American columns can enter Iraq by way of Jordan.
3. As for the urgency of the US-UK second Security Council resolution, its only importance for the US president is as a means of drawing some of the sting from the anti-war backlash preying on such war allies as Tony Blair. Privately, Bush has washed his hands of the world body. When the time comes, he intends to settle scores with the UN as well as with Germany, France and Russia for behavior which he sees as leaving America in the lurch.
Return To Top February 19, 2003 Russian citizens start leaving Iraq
FromJang of Pakistan.
MOSCOW: Russia has begun evacuating its citizens from Iraq, a news agency reported on Tuesday.
The ITAR-Tass news agency cited diplomatic sources in Cairo as saying the evacuation had begun. It said more than 1,000 Russian citizens were in Iraq. The Foreign Ministry and several companies working in Iraq said they could not immediately confirm the report. Whether or not to evacuate "is the Foreign Ministry's prerogative", said Dmitry Dolgov, a spokesman for oil company Lukoil. He said a contingency plan coordinated by the Russian Embassy in Baghdad was in place but that he knew of no decision to activate it.
Russian media reported that Russian companies held a meeting on Tuesday in Baghdad and decided to evacuate. Many foreign embassies, earlier, pulled out non-essential staff and urged citizens to leave, but Russia, which opposes a military operation and has strong economic ties with Iraq, had so far stuck firm. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said late last month that there were about 700 Russian "specialists" in Iraq.
Tuesday's reports came a day after a delegation of several dozen Russian lawmakers including Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov, scholars and journalists arrived in Iraq for a three-day visit.
Return To Top February 19, 2003 Statement on Iraq By A Former UNSCOM Inspector
Reader Gerry Hol forwards this to us with a comment:
”
I'm not quite sure what to make of this but before making a judgement yourself, consider the background of the author detailed at the end of the statement.” "Here's Your Smoking Gun: Iraqi Nukes" Statement by Bill Tierney, former UNSCOM Iraqi ArmsInspector, Camp X-Ray interrogator/interpreter, and intelligence analyst CHICAGO (February 14, 2003)-- I have seen enough to convince me that the Iraqis do have nukes, and I know exactly where they enriched the uranium to do so. Forsome time now, experts have said Iraq is moving towards a nuclear weapon. Secretary of State Powell emphasized Saddam's intense desire to obtain a nuclear weapon in his presentation before the Security Council. Just how much time must pass before people are willing to say the Iraqis have arrived? Even the skeptics admit that the lingering obstacle has been accumulating enough enriched uranium for a weapon. Without unambiguous evidence, most commentators are unwilling to make the call that the Iraqis have nukes. As a former inspector and intelligence analyst involved with nominating inspection targets, allow me to lay out my case that the Iraqis have succeeded. As groundwork, the Iraqis successfully ran a nuclear weapons development program during the eighties and hid it not only from the International Atomic EnergyAgency (IAEA), but Western intelligence agencies as well. We know and appreciate how skilled they are at concealment. Shortly after the start of weapons inspections in1991, the Iraqis went to extraordinary efforts to move uranium enrichment equipment, specifically electro-magnetic isotope separation (EMIS) using calutrons, away from inspectors. I will refer to this as the Kay Inspection, after David Kay, the chief inspector on the ground. The Iraqis claimed to have unilaterally destroyed this equipment, but KhidrHamza, formerly a nuclear weapons designer, stated in his book "Saddam's Bombmaker," that Iraq has the machine tools to easily rebuild this uraniumenrichment equipment. In 1996, during an inspection of Tuwaitha Nuclear Weapon Research Facility, the Iraqis attempted todrive a vehicle past a checkpoint with a document fromthe Iraqi Revolutionary Command Council. This documentreferred to mysterious coded projects. After we foundthe document, the Iraqis first tried to wrest it awayin a tug of war, then managed to regain the documentthrough another counter-inspection tactic. This is anincredible amount of effort to hide information fromUNSCOM. Tuwaitha is the workshop for constructing thebomb. In September 1997, I took part in an interviewinspection regarding the movement and concealment of uranium enrichment equipment from the Kay Inspection. Scott Ritter had identified units and personnel involved with the concealment. Instead of providing these personnel, the Iraqis sent senior officers ofthe Special Republican Guards (SRG), along with intelligence officers and Jaffar Dhia Jaffar, head ofthe "atomic energy" program. These officers attempted to pass off a pathetic cover story, which was promptly shredded. Scott then explained what actually happened,and that he believed the Iraqis still had the nuclear enrichment equipment. The Iraqis attempted to hide their panic. The 4th Special Republican Guard Battalion was the unit that moved the nuclear enrichment equipment awayf rom the Kay Inspection. I inspected this unit with Scott Ritter in June of 1997. The Iraqis held us upfor a long period before allowing entry, while their minder in the UNSCOM helicopter caused a diversion by lunging for the flight controls. Amir Al-Saadi, our high level escort, removed any mention of the unit commander during the time of theK ay Inspection, knowing that we would request tointerview him. After the inspection, I learned that the Iraqis were extremely concerned that we would attempt to inspection a nearby, unnamed, location.They would not allow us in under any circumstances. From having been on the inspection, I knew this information was referring to Jabal Makhul Presidential Site. This is an extremely large site that takes up aswath of the Hamrin Mountain range. Its location makes it perfect for drilling deep tunnels into the side of the mountain. We inspected this site in September1997. General Muhammad Amir Rashid, a senior advisorto Saddam, drove 140 miles from Baghdad to the site, got out of his car, stated "there will be no inspection of this facility," got back in his car and drive off - completely against protocol. In 2001, the London Sunday Times published an article by Gwynne Roberts on an Iraqi defector who claimed theIraqis had several nuclear weapons in a heavily guarded bunker under the Hamrin Mountains. Jabal Makhul Presidential Site is the most heavily guarded location in the Hamrin Mountains. From the additional detail provided by this source, I knew in my gut that this information was true. This explains why theIraqis almost crashed the helicopter during the inspection at the 4th SRG Battalion - to keep it from going over the mountain to inspect the inside of Jabal Makhul Presidential Site. The Iraqis may still storethe weapons there, although any sensitive items were probably moved out before the presidential site" inspection" of March 1998, then again before thel atest round of inspections. So if the Iraqis do have nukes, where did they enrich the uranium? I believe the answer lies beneath what appears to the World as a power generation station for a water treatment plant in the vicinity of 3337North04420East. A number of indicators point to this facility as a uranium enrichment processing lant. I do not have authority to discuss these indicators. Further investigation of this facility with technical intelligence means revealed inconsistencies with a normal power generation plant. High-tension powerlines lead to the plant, but if it is not producing electricity, then the wires could provide electricity needed for the uranium enrichment. Electro-magnetic isotope separation's major disadvantage is the large amount of electricity required. A foreign contractor started to build this water treatment plant after the Gulf War, but halted half way through on the Iraqis' request. This allowed theIraqis to document the "benign" intent of the facility, only later to finish it to the specifications required for a uranium enrichment plant. In addition, this water treatment plant is only a few miles south and on the same side of the river atTarmiya nuclear weapons research facility. Tarmiya was discovered to be the center for EMIS after the war. Workers could drive their cars to Tarmiya and then take a shuttle bus to where they really worked. U.S.satellites would see activity at Tarmiya, with only a car or two at the water treatment plant. In addition,it is in a very pro-Saddam and secure area of Iraq. After the hue and cry of civilian suffering from damage to water treatment plants after the Gulf War,what better place than a water treatment plant to hidea nuclear weapons facility? This facility was installed in approximately 1996. Did it run, or was it just being prepared for operations after the sanctions? I believe the Iraqis' steadfast refusal to allow random airborne radiation monitoring indicates that the facility has been active. The water treatment plant was inspected three times inthe early nineties, but never to check on anunder ground chamber under the power generation plant.On one inspection, the team examined a liquid nitrogen plant near the water treatment plant because they suspected a connection to Tarmiya Nuclear Research Facility. Nitrogen is used as an EMIS diffusion pumpcoolant. The inspectors' concern was a connection toTarmiya, but the nitrogen was really intended for thenearby under-ground EMIS plant. I brought this to the attention of WMD analysts within the U.S. government, but they were not interested, based on the no findings from the previous UNSCOM/IAEAinspections. I disagree with their assessment. Why make this public? Won't the Iraqis just scramble and move everything before the inspectors arrive? They may get some or all of the machined parts out, but there is no way they can fit an underground chamber onthe back of a truck. They probably won't be able to mask radiation either. Furthermore, it is possible that if the inspections run their course without investigating these sites, and Saddam faces a military attack, he could announce then that he has nuclear weapons as a means to deterour invasion of Iraq. Mr. Blix, Mr. Baradei, please inspect within the area circled on the accompanying map. Look for a chimney or the remnants thereof, follow the power lines, and check for a ramped entrance. The ramp will be concealed against overhead detection. Your ground-penetrating radar teams should be able to find it. If I am wrong, then it will only mean three hours and a few gallons of gasoline lost. Please inspect this site. --Bill Tierney Mr. Tierney is a former UNSCOM inspector and intelligence analyst at Central Command HQ. He currently works as an international background investigator for Owens OnLine, Inc. Background on Bill Tierney: The Wall Street Journal tentatively accepted ane ditorial by Mr. Tierney scheduled to run in theFriday, Feb. 14, 2003 edition, but made an eleventh hour decision not to run it. Bill Tierney entered the Army in 1983 after studying classical guitar at the Hartt School of Music and the Royal Conservatory, Madrid Spain. Trained in Arabic language and Iraqi dialect (honor graduate) and interrogation Became warrant officer in 1990. Participated in Gulf War as liaison officer to Saudis,Kuwaitis, and Egyptians. Was interrogator duringg round offensive phase. Obtained Master Degree in Middle East Studies - Arabic in 1993. Led counterintelligence team at Haitian Refugee Camp, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba 1994. Stationed at Central Command HQ 1995 as command interpreter, intelligence analyst, and targeting specialist. Participated in nine UNSCOM inspections 1996 - 1998,most focused on the Iraqi concealment mechanism. Left the Army in July 2000. Worked as linguist at Prince Sultan Air Base, SaudiArabia August 2000 to Sept., 2001. Worked as interpreter/interrogator at Camp X-RayGuantanamo Bay January, Feb., 2002 Hired as international background investigator, compliance officer, sales and marketing, project officer with Owens Online, Inc. Tampa FL August 2002. Travel to Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Iraq.
Return To Top February 19, 2003 NATO makes end run around France on defense of Turkey
NATO makes end run around France on defense of Turkey Return To Top February 18, 2003
101st gears up to ship out to Persian Gulf
Extracts from Stars & Stripes Return To Top February 18, 2003 Hamas chief killed in Gaza operation
Extracts from By Ha’aretz
February 25, 2003
Washington's Growing Backyard War
US plans total war against Kim February 24
Iraq Hints at Destroying Al-Samoud 2 Missiles February 24
Terrorism a pretext to conquer world, says Malaysia's Mahathir February 24
US, Philippines Offer Different Versions of Bolstered US Troop Presence February 23
6th Afghan Battalion Graduates Training February 23
Iraq: Why No smoking Gun? February 23
US offers India $2.5bn, oil to support war against Iraq February 23
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin February 22
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
February 24, 2003
Iraq Hints at Destroying Al-Samoud 2 Missiles
Terrorism a pretext to conquer world, says Malaysia's Mahathir
US, Philippines Offer Different Versions of Bolstered US Troop Presence February 23
6th Afghan Battalion Graduates Training February 23
Iraq: Why No smoking Gun? February 23
US offers India $2.5bn, oil to support war against Iraq February 23
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin February 22
Letters to the Editor on Syrian Tank Upgrades February 21
Letter to the Editor Re. US 2nd ACR February 20
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
February 23, 2003
6th Afghan Battalion Graduates Training
Iraq: Why No smoking Gun?
US offers India $2.5bn, oil to support war against Iraq
Coup in Pakistan - Misperceptions and Reality: Letter from Major Amin February 22
Letters to the Editor on Syrian Tank Upgrades February 21
Letter to the Editor Re. US 2nd ACR February 20
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
The first story from the Manila based Inquirer emphasises the official Filipino description of the deployment; a small contingent of US forces in the Philippines conducting an exercise for a fixed duration. Washington has not presented a different picture in media statements.
Note the differences between the two reports in terms of the role and footprint of US forces, a concession designed to avoid the kind of nationalistic Filipino political activism that ended the American presence at Clarke airbase and Subic Bay. Unfortunately the fiction is so half hearted that even official and semi-official sources can not keep their stories straight. Consider for example this US Pacific Command Public Affairs Office news release from January 16:
6th battalion of Afghan Army graduates training
Turkey and the US
Iraq Ready To Talk if US Drops War
Gear Gets to Turkey; Troops Wait February 21
Pakistan Air Force Chief, Several Senior Officers Die in Crash February 21
Gurkhas Deploy to Sierra Leone february 21
Letters to the Editor on Syrian Tank Upgrades February 21
Letter to the Editor Re. US 2nd ACR February 20
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
February 21, 2003
Pakistan Air Force Chief, Several Senior Officers Die in Crash
Gurkhas Deploy to Sierra Leone
Letters to the Editor on Syrian Tank Upgrades
Letter to the Editor Re. US 2nd ACR February 20
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction February 20
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future February 20
Are the War Delays Over? February 19
Russian Citizens Start Leaving Iraq February 19
Statement on Iraq By A Former UNSCOM Inspector February 19
NATO makes end run around France on defense of Turkey February 18
Stars & Stripes by Jon R Anderson
ANKARA, Turkey — Scores of U.S. military trucks and heavy transportation gear were unloaded in Turkey’s easternmost seaport Wednesday as the country’s top leaders continued to debate approval for American combat troops to also enter Turkey.
In another major development, NATO on Wednesday approved the urgent deployment of AWACS radar aircraft, Patriot missile systems and chemical-biological response units to Turkey.
“Alliance solidarity has prevailed,” said U.S. Ambassador Nicholas Burns. “By taking this step, NATO has lived up to its core responsibility … to respond to an ally in a time of threat.”
After weeks of wrangling, including an attempt by France to block the decision, the 18 ambassadors took less than 15 minutes to back a recommendation from alliance military experts to “implement defensive measures as a matter of urgency.”
“We’ll move ahead very quickly,” NATO Secretary-General Lord George Robertson told Associated Press Television News. “Turkey will get what it asked for and what it needs.”
More than 500 U.S. military vehicles were offloaded Wednesday in Iskenderun, a port city tucked in Turkey’s far corner of the Mediterranean just opposite the Syrian border.
Turkish television video feeds from the port showed everything from Humvees and 5-ton trucks to 18-wheel fuel rigs and heavy-hauling “low boy” trailers staging at pier-side unloading areas. Winding, rugged roads heading east from Iskenderun follow along the Syrian border and lead eventually — more than 360 miles later — to Turkey’s mountainous frontier with Iraq.
Hundreds of Germany-based troops have been arriving at air bases in eastern Turkey in recent days to begin preparing seaports, bridges, roads and support facilities for an influx of tens of thousands of troops that U.S. war planners hope to push through Turkey as part of a possible northern invasion of Iraq.
Although Turkish officials approved site preparations three weeks ago, local lawmakers still must give final approval for combat forces to pass through the country.
The Turkish parliament was to consider the issue on Tuesday, but 11th-hour bartering over the details of a multibillion-dollar economic aid package has delayed that vote. Turkey is seeking $10 billion in grants and up to $20 billion in long-term loans, diplomats said.
On Wednesday, U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Robert Pearson again urged a quick decision during more top-level meetings with Turkish leaders.
“Time is a critical issue for us," Pearson said after his meeting.
Aides said that Washington has not yet fully responded to Turkey’s $30 billion aid request, explaining Pearson was delivering an “initial response.”
“We can reach a resolution because Turkey, and the U.S. were always able to do so,” Pearson said. “We want to reach an agreement as soon as possible.”
Col. Nancy Burt, spokeswoman for alliance commander Marine Gen. James Jones, said NATO leaders approved Turkey’s request for deployments of defensive units to guard NATO’s only Muslim nation against possible counterattacks from Iraq.
Three batteries of Dutch Patriot-missile defense systems left for Turkey by sea this week and are expected to take three weeks to arrive. The anti-missile rockets, supplied by Germany, will be operated by 370 Dutch Air Force troops.
Deployment of the biochemical units will wait until the Turkish military presents a detailed list of what exactly it needs to fill shortfalls in its defenses. NATO’s military headquarters will then ask allies for specific units to move to Turkey.
With land, sea and air forces already mustering for an Iraq attack from the south in Kuwait and the Persian Gulf, Pentagon leaders want to open a second front from the north, forcing Saddam Hussein to split his defenses.
Military officials, however, say time is quickly running out for Turkey to come aboard.
The lead vessels of a 20-ship armada carrying hundreds of tanks, fighting vehicles, helicopters and other war gear from the Texas-based 4th Infantry Division are already approaching the Turkish coastline.
“It’s not like we can park them in the Mediterranean indefinitely,” said one senior military official. “We are quickly reaching a point where a decision will have to be made.”
Return To Top February 21, 2003
From HM Ministry of Defence
A Company group from the 2nd Battalion The Royal Gurkha Rifles is being deployed to Freetown, Sierra Leone, Defence Minister, Lord Bach, announced today.
This deployment demonstrates the UK's continuing military commitment to supporting the settlement process in Sierra Leone, and our ability to conduct such deployments rapidly and at short notice, notwithstanding our involvement in operations elsewhere in the world. The deployment is expected to last until mid-March.
HMS Iron Duke, a type 23 Frigate, is also planning to visit Freetown during the period of the Gurkha's deployment.
British troops helped bring stability to Sierra Leone when they first deployed in May 2000; 2002 marked the country's first full year of peace for a decade.
The Company group, plus HQ and support elements, totalling 300 troops, leaves for Sierra Leone tomorrow.
The Gurkhas will work alongside the UK-led International Military Advisory and Training Team (IMATT), which is helping develop professional, effective and democratically accountable Sierra Leone Armed Forces.
In the coming weeks on the Iraqi-Syrian Border as the Syrian begin to shift more forces east we may see some of the new weapon systems and some older rebuilt ones that the Syrian Army has recently have been procuring. The Syrian Army has currently been withdrawing troops from Lebanon as you know and sending them east as fast as possible, and reportedly Iran is shifting forces west also. In open source articles I have the Syrian Army rebuilt in the last three years through the Belorussian Government an upgraded tank called the T-55M(6).
February 20, 2003
Coup in Pakistan?India Seeks to Exploit US Distraction
Pakistan's Geopolitical Future
Are the War Delays Over? February 19
Russian Citizens Start Leaving Iraq February 19
Statement on Iraq By A Former UNSCOM Inspector February 19
NATO makes end run around France on defense of Turkey February 18
101st gears up to ship out to Persian Gulf February 18
Hamas chief killed in Gaza operation Februaru 18
Iraq-al Qaeda Partnership to Target Gulf Oil Fields February 17
Uday Hussain's Aide Defects February 16
February 19, 2003
Russian Citizens Start Leaving Iraq
Statement on Iraq By A Former UNSCOM Inspector
NATO makes end run around France on defense of Turkey February 18
101st gears up to ship out to Persian Gulf February 18
Hamas chief killed in Gaza operation Februaru 18
Iraq-al Qaeda Partnership to Target Gulf Oil Fields February 17
Uday Hussain's Aide Defects February 16
Nato 'leaks' secrets to woo France, Germany, Belgium February 16
Iran's hardliners renew death edict on Rushdie February 16
New Plan to Land US Troops Deep Inside IraqFebruary 15
Editor's Note
February 18, 2003
101st gears up to ship out to Persian Gulf
Hamas chief killed in Gaza operation
Iraq-al Qaeda Partnership to Target Gulf Oil Fields February 17
Uday Hussain's Aide Defects February 16
Nato 'leaks' secrets to woo France, Germany, Belgium February 16
Iran's hardliners renew death edict on Rushdie February 16
New Plan to Land US Troops Deep Inside IraqFebruary 15
Afghan warlords face world criminal court prosecution February 15
Militants fire rockets, coalition drops bombs in Afghanistan February 15
Belgium and World Order February 15
February 18, 2003
From the San Francisco Chronicle
Brussels -- Resolving a bitter dispute that pitted the United States against France and Germany over military plans on Iraq, NATO agreed on Sunday night to an American request to supply Turkey with equipment to defend itself in the event of a war to overthrow Saddam Hussein…
The dispute was resolved when it was agreed to have the military staff of the NATO Defense Planning Council, which does not include France, make plans for Turkey's defense, specifically by sending AWACS air reconnaissance planes, Patriot missiles and chemical and biological warfare defense teams to Turkey.
France had objected to such a step on the grounds that the Security Council has not yet authorized the use of force against Iraq. Shifting the decision to the Planning Council rather than NATO itself was a way of circumventing French opposition.
Germany went along with the compromise, and the last holdout, Belgium, agreed to go along under pressure from other NATO members, dropping its long- held demand that any NATO decision be linked to authorization of force by the Security Council.
After Sunday night's announcement, France, Germany and Belgium issued a joint statement reiterating their opposition to military action unless it is authorized by the council.
Despite the NATO breakthrough, there were no signs Sunday that the council dispute was closer to being resolved. U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice once again warned that the Bush administration wanted the council to authorize the use of force within "weeks, not months" if Iraq continued to fail to comply on weapons inspections.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — It’s crunch time for soldiers of the Army’s 101st Airborne Division, who, on orders to deploy to the Middle East, have worked double time to ship out their helicopters and equipment from Blount Island, Fla., to the Persian Gulf.
Crews on Thursday loaded the decks of transporters USNS Bob Hope and USNS Dahl, anchored at the Blount Island port terminal, with a portion of the air assault division’s supply of vehicles and 275 helicopters.
Key to the arrangement was ensuring that all of the division’s 75 Apache attack helicopters make it out on the first two ships of what will be roughly five or six needed to get the entire division overseas, said Brig. Gen. Edward Sinclair, assistant division commander of the 101st, stationed at Fort Campbell, Ky…
It’ll take about three weeks for the vessels to reach the Persian Gulf. The Dahl was set to sail Friday; the Bob Hope on Saturday.
The majority of the 20,000 air-assault soldiers of the 101st will be flying over in the next few weeks. Some will travel on the ships to maintain the equipment and provide force protection.
The use of the $298-million apiece LMSRs directly is linked to the experienced failures of the Persian Gulf War, in which the Army was too slow getting there and when they did, didn’t have access to some equipment, Thompson said.
Following the war, the Navy and Army teamed up to develop and buy larger vessels that now accommodate 2½ times more cargo and travel almost twice as fast.
But they’re still not quite fast enough, Thompson said.
“Speed is where we’re headed, and that’s part of the transformation,” he said. “Ideally, it would be, ‘beam me up, Scotty.’”
While owned by the Navy, the Navy Military Sealift Command contracts civilians to operate the inventory of 18 transport vessels. The Navy has 170 noncombatant ships crewed by civilians, spokeswoman Marge Holtz said.
…Riyad Abu Zid, the military commander of the Hamas, was killed yesterday southwest of Bureij refugee camp when he tried to resist arrest by an elite army unit that sprang a surprise checkpoint to make the arrest. Also yesterday, two Palestinian gunmen were killed and four other wounded trying to block a home demolition, that of the man the army says is responsible for Saturday's deadly attack on the tank.
On Sunday, six Hamas operatives were killed while handling a mysterious unmanned plane they planned to use to deliver a bomb inside Israel.
The IDF Spokesman said that in the death yesterday of Abu Zid, he had opened fire on the soldiers who tried to stop his car outside the camp, and they returned fire. A helicopter was brought in to medivac him to Soroka Hospital in Be'er Sheva, but he was declared dead on arrival at the hospital. Army sources emphasized the aim was to arrest - not kill - him, in the operation, so he could be interrogated about the Hamas command structure in Gaza. The army said Abu Zid had planned to set in motion a series of suicide bombings and car bombings inside the Green Line.
The 33-year-old Abu Zid was named head of the Hamas military wing last year after two previous commanders were taken out of action by IDF operations. One, Salah Shehadeh, considered the founder of the Hamas military wing, was killed when an F-15 dropped a half-ton bomb on the house where he was hiding out in a crowded Gaza City neighborhood. A dozen other people were killed in that action.
Mohammed Deif, long considered the most wanted man on Israel's list of terrorists, was gravely wounded in an operation that followed, when Deif assumed command of Iz a Din al-Kassam, the Hamas military wing.
Deif was spotted yesterday at the funeral for the six Hamas men killed on Sunday. He vowed vengeance for their deaths and that of Abu Zid and promised more suicide bombings, Qassam rockets, and other attacks, "to let Sharon know he can't get away with this," according to a Channel Two TV news report that showed Deif in a mask, with only his eyes visible. He was walking with a pronounced limp. Military sources say he is now blind in one eye and his hearing has been impaired after he survived an IDF missile attack on his car last summer.
Abu Zid has been involved in intifada activity going back to October 1990, when he participated in the lynch of a reservist who lost his way in Bureij. He was sentenced to nine years in prison and was released in 1999, becoming the personal assistant to Shehadeh.
Army sources said yesterday the IDF would continue its campaign with a series of operations in the Strip in response to the attack on the tank. The sources admit that after the tank attack, Israel has dropped some of the constraints that it had self-imposed in advance of American action in Iraq. The sources said the army is now undertaking broad operations, including "pinpoint prevention" - assassinations - deep inside Palestinian territory in Gaza. Other activities, including arrests and house demolitions, are expected in the near future, along with armored corps and infantry incursions.
Debka for fulla rticle.
[Debka says US special forces and marines, supported by and UK and Jordanian special forces, have completed the conquest of west Iraq, in part to prevent destruction of the oil wells. Editor]
Blix-ElBaradei arms inspection reports to the UN Security Council on their Iraq mission get briefer, more non-committal and less related to reality on the ground. Not surprisingly, their latest “findings” as presented on Friday, February 14, failed to dent established views; the advocates and the opponents of military action against Iraq remained in exactly the same positions as before.
The same fate will most likely befall the arms inspectors’ next report, scheduled for February 28, after another two weeks’ grace.
Dragging the inspection process from one loudly heralded and widely televised appearance to the next will increasingly exacerbate the transatlantic rift, weaken the arguments for war as perceived by world opinion (Tony Blair may be the first political casualty of this trend), and play into Saddam Hussein’s hands, the while further undercutting the United Nations’ reputation for coming to grips with world crises.
The United Nations is further challenged now by the prime...
Return To Top February 17, 2003
February 17, 2003
Iraq-al Qaeda Partnership to Target Gulf Oil Fields
Uday Hussain's Aide Defects February 16
Nato 'leaks' secrets to woo France, Germany, Belgium February 16
Iran's hardliners renew death edict on Rushdie February 16
New Plan to Land US Troops Deep Inside IraqFebruary 15
Afghan warlords face world criminal court prosecution February 15
Militants fire rockets, coalition drops bombs in Afghanistan February 15
Belgium and World Order February 15
Iraq-al Qaeda Partnership to Target Gulf Oil Fields
Debka for fulla rticle.
[Debka says US special forces and marines, supported by and UK and Jordanian special forces, have completed the conquest of west Iraq, in part to prevent destruction of the oil wells. Editor]
Blix-ElBaradei arms inspection reports to the UN Security Council on their Iraq mission get briefer, more non-committal and less related to reality on the ground. Not surprisingly, their latest “findings” as presented on Friday, February 14, failed to dent established views; the advocates and the opponents of military action against Iraq remained in exactly the same positions as before.
The same fate will most likely befall the arms inspectors’ next report, scheduled for February 28, after another two weeks’ grace.
Dragging the inspection process from one loudly heralded and widely televised appearance to the next will increasingly exacerbate the transatlantic rift, weaken the arguments for war as perceived by world opinion (Tony Blair may be the first political casualty of this trend), and play into Saddam Hussein’s hands, the while further undercutting the United Nations’ reputation for coming to grips with world crises.
The United Nations is further challenged now by the prime...
Return To Top February 17, 2003
February 16, 2003
Uday Hussain's Aide Defects
Nato 'leaks' secrets to woo France, Germany, Belgium
Iran's hardliners renew death edict on Rushdie
New Plan to Land US Troops Deep Inside Iraq February 15
Afghan warlords face world criminal court prosecution February 15
Militants fire rockets, coalition drops bombs in Afghanistan February 15
Belgium and World Order February 15
Arabs Ignore Bin Laden War Call February 14
Air Strategy for War "Timid" February 14
Adib Shaaban, the right hand of Saddam Hussein’s powerful son Uday, has defected.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly reports exclusively that this key member of Saddam Hussein’s administration, who was charged with his son’s most sensitive missions, traveled to Jeddah at the beginning of this week, saying he needed to put through some gold transactions ahead of the war.
From Jeddah, he flew to Beirut and… disappeared.
US intelligence sources report that Shaaban never really went to Beirut. He made his way under cover to Damascus Monday and was picked up by an unmarked plane for an unknown destination.
As Uday’s closest aide, he also managed a chain of official publications, including the authoritative Babel, and was in on the Saddam regime’s deepest secrets.
Uday commands the secret army known as Saddam’s Fedayeen, the backbone of Baghdad’s defenses and custodian of the weapons of mass destruction that were not smuggled out to Lebanon.
Uday is also the chief of the ruling Baath Party’s covert service.
Shaaban must therefore be a veritable treasury of Saddam Hussein’s secrets. In American hands, Uday’s chef de bureau would be even more valuable than the proverbial smoking gun.
Return To Top February 16, 2003
Nato 'leaks' secrets to woo France, Germany, Belgium
By Zia Iqbal Shahid. For the complete story, click Jang.
[Editor’s note: this story is a bit odd. Surely as members of NATO France, Germany and Belgium have access to all NATO intelligence. Perhaps the story means to say the US has given information to NATO to try and convince the recalcitrant members.]
BRUSSELS: The Nato sources, to save the 19-nation military alliance from a total annihilation, have undertaken to leak some classified, confidential and top secret intelligence reports detailing military movements of Saddam Hussein and indicating Turkey's vulnerability in the wake of Iraq crisis.
Several indicators are available in Brussels suggesting that the Nato has adopted the course, what is called "calculative leak" by revealing some top secret, classified and sensitive intelligence information to emphasise the gravity of the situation in its pursuit to convince France, Germany and Belgium that military planning to support Turkey is direly needed.
Two separate incidents of leaking intelligence information contain a "memo" by Nato Chief George Robertson addressed to the France, Germany and Belgium trio.
Return To Top February 16, 2003
Iran's hardliners renew death edict on Rushdie
Iran's hardliners have renewed the death edict on India-born British author Salman Rushdie issued 14 years ago by the late founder of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, saying the sentence was "irrevocable."
The hardline Revolutionary Guards, directly answerable to Iran's current Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the "fatwa" issued in 1989 following the publication of Rushdie's controversial novel The Satanic Verses was still valid.
"The historical decree on Salman Rushdie is irrevocable and nothing can change it," said a statement by the military organisation, published on Friday to pay tribute to the Iranian people for their massive participation in the demonstration marking the 24th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution victory.
In the statement quoted by the official Iranian news agency IRNA, the hardline organisation said the late Khomeini had well seized the threats posed to the Islamic Revolution and it was based on his divine missions that he issued the edict against Rushdie.
Iran's current president, the moderate Mohammad Khatami, has said the death sentence should be seen as closed. However, hardliners within the Iranian Republic have occasionally renewed their call for Rushdie's death for writing a novel, which they have denounced as blasphemous.
This has continued despite the Iranian government publicly committing itself in 1998 to not carrying out the death sentence, a decision which led to the signing of a deal between Iran and Britain to normalise relations.
Return To Top February 16, 2003
February 15, 2003
New Plan to Land US Troops Deep Inside Iraq
Afghan warlords face world criminal court prosecution
Militants fire rockets, coalition drops bombs in Afghanistan
Belgium and World Order
Arabs Ignore Bin Laden War Call February 14
Air Strategy for War "Timid" February 14
Iraq February 13
China Sending peacekeepers to Congo February 13
Turkey asks for talks on thwarted aid bid February 12
Iraq Placing Explosives Around Oil Wells February 12
South Korea Believes North Has No Nukes February 12
Why Hussein sees history on his side February 12
Coalition warplanes bomb Afghan cavesFebruary 12
Debka Argues The Old World Order Is Ending February 11
London Guardian
February 14, 2003
New Plan To Land First US Troops Deep Inside Iraq
Pentagon plans blitzkrieg to stop Saddam from destroying oil fields and dams
Forwarded by Joseph Stefula, an article by Julian Borger. For full story click The Guardian.
Under new US war plans, thousands of helicopter-borne troops and paratroopers would be flown deep into Iraq to seize oilfields, dams and banned weapons, and advance as far as Baghdad on the first day of the fighting, Pentagon officials and defence analysts said yesterday.
President George Bush met his top field commander, General Tommy Franks, yesterday to review plans quite unlike those used in the last Gulf war. That began with weeks of aerial bombardment, but the US suspicion that Saddam Hussein will try to wreck his country rather than surrender, dictates that ground troops would be involved in the fighting on the same day as the air force or even before.
"I think the targets will be aimed at decapitation," one US defence official said in a briefing. "You want to take away all his capabilities to respond with any WMD [weapons of mass destruction]. You don't want him to blow his dams, set fire to oilfields, or fire Scud missiles at neighbouring countries. You also want to put him immediately in a box in Baghdad and Tikrit."
The US currently has more than 130,000 troops in the Gulf, including some special forces already inside Iraq preparing airfields and communications. There will be six aircraft carriers including the Royal Navy's Ark Royal and 500 US air force planes in the region by the end of this month. Starting this week, 3,000 soldiers a day are being flown to the area on chartered civilian planes to ratchet up the pressure on Baghdad.
Return To Top February 15, 2003
A story by Naveed Ahmad. For full story click Jang.
ISLAMABAD: Afghan warlords who commit future atrocities can now face prosecution by the new International Criminal Court (ICC), Human Rights Watch said, as now Afghanistan has deposited its accession to the ICC Treaty at the United Nations.
Under ICC provisions, the treaty will take force in Afghanistan on May 1, 2003. After that date, the ICC will have the authority to investigate and prosecute serious war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity committed on Afghan soil.
Human Rights observers believe, "For over two decades, perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Afghanistan have enjoyed total impunity. On May 1, that impunity will formally end."
The Afghan regime is also earning widespread appluase for "tremendously courageous" step of the cabinet to ratify the ICC treaty. "It is an important step not only for Afghanistan, but for improving justice worldwide," obserrvers believe.
Return To Top February 15, 2003
Militants fire rockets, coalition drops bombs in Afghanistan
For full story click Jang
BAGRAM, Afghanistan: Suspected Taliban remnants fired rockets into a town in southern Afghanistan on Friday, as US-led coalition planes carried out more raids on militant hideouts, officials said.
An Afghan security official said two rockets landed in the town of Spin Boldak on the Afghan-Pakistan border early in the morning, while another landed near a Pakistani border post.
He said Taliban remnants could have been responsible for the attacks, which did not cause any casualties or damage.
Coalition planes in a pre-dawn raid on Friday destroyed caves in the southwestern province of Helmand where military officials said up to 100 men suspected of being linked to the ousted Taliban were holed up. A US military spokesman said an AC-130 gunship, B-1 bomber and A-10 aircraft attacked the caves in Baghran valley in Helmand province where an ambush of US Special Forces this week triggered the latest bombing raids.
Return To Top February 15, 2003
Editorial from Israel’s Haartez
The Belgian Supreme Court this week accepted an appeal by survivors of the Sabra and Chatila refugee camp massacres in September 1982, ruling that Israelis who do not have diplomatic immunity may be put on trial. The decision applies to those who were senior officers in the Israel Defense Forces at the time - the chief of staff, the theater commander, the divisional commander. It also applies to then defense minister Ariel Sharon, once the immunity he has by virtue of being prime minister lapses.
This judicial decision is rather astounding, as the Belgian prosecution also noted in its opposition to the survivors' petition. What is the connection between Belgium and the atrocities committed by Phalangists in Beirut, in terrority for which the IDF - acting on behalf of the Israeli government - was responsible? The prosecution had argued that for there to be grounds for trying someone suspected of crimes against humanity, some connection with Belgium was necessary.
Belgium's status is no different from that of any other sovereign state, and it is entitled to enact laws and judge its own citizens, or anyone who commits crimes against them. But the Belgian legislature has elevated its country's justice system above those of every other nation, and is trying to impose its rule on the citizens of countries with no connection to Belgium.
Israel has pursued and captured those guilty of crimes against humanity whose victims were members of its own nation, people who later became its citizens. Its laws forbid similar crimes and acts of massacre and murder. Policemen and soldiers accused of such crimes have been tried, and have not infrequently been convicted and served their sentences. Public outrage forced Menachem Begin's government - that same government that decided to deploy the IDF in West Beirut following the murder of Bashir Gemayel - to set up a state commission of inquiry. Its three members included both the sitting Supreme Court president, Yitzhak Kahan, and a future Supreme Court president, Aharon Barak.
Furthermore, the government almost unanimously adopted this commission's conclusions and recommendations, including firing Sharon as defense minister and limiting the tenures of senior officers. The indirect responsibility attributed by the commission to Sharon and others in no way reduced the direct and substantial responsibility borne by the Phalangists and others in Lebanon. But the proceedings in Belgium are not directed against them; they are aimed only at the Israelis.
The world order established in the wake of the Allied victory in World War II is based on the United Nations and the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Last year, an International Criminal Court with authority to try war crimes was also established, but it is not authorized to judge crimes committed before its establishment.
But there is no middle level, on which a particular country judges its neighbors' leaders, between the local justice systems of the UN's member states and the international justice system. It never occurred to Israel, for instance, to put on trial in Jerusalem Belgians suspected of being involved in massacring natives during that country's colonial occupation of the Congo.
The political background to the Belgian effort to put Ariel Sharon on trial is transparent and worrying, and it will certainly cast a heavy shadow on relations between Belgium and Israel. But it seems that the arrogance that prompted Belgium's assumption of the right to judge Israeli politicians and officers will in the end come back to haunt it. The presumption of the Belgian parliament, which enacted the universal jurisdiction law, is liable to destroy not only the Belgian legal system, but also its ties with the other nations in the world.
Return To Top February 15, 2003
February 14, 2003
Arabs Ignore Bin Laden War Call
Air Strategy for War "Timid"
Consultations on measures to protect Turkey
February 13
Tenet: North Korea has ballistic missile capable of hitting U.S. February 13
U.S., Coalition Plan to Restore Post-War Iraq February 13
Turkey asks for talks on thwarted aid bid February 12
Iraq Placing Explosives Around Oil Wells February 12
South Korea Believes North Has No Nukes February 12
Why Hussein sees history on his side February 12
Coalition warplanes bomb Afghan caves February 12
Arabs ignore bin Laden war call
By David R. Sands: for full story click Washington Times
Arab and other Muslim governments yesterday brushed aside a new tape by Osama bin Laden calling for a regionwide Islamic war against the West, and Saddam Hussein's regime said the United States was unfairly using the tape to link Iraq to bin Laden's al Qaeda terror network.
Few Middle East governments offered any official response to the new 16-minute bin Laden tape, broadcast Tuesday on the Qatar-based Al Jazeera network and considered authentic by U.S. intelligence officials.
In the call to arms, bin Laden said Muslims should rise against any U.S.-led military strike on Iraq and "liberate renegade ruling regimes" in Jordan, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
Saudi Interior Minister Nayef Ibn Abdul-Aziz said his agency had picked up no hints of the terrorist strikes promised in the bin Laden message. And a leading member of the Iraqi Shi'ite opposition to Saddam was one of many in the Arab world who accused bin Laden of trying to capitalize on Iraq's situation to boost his own organization.
Return To Top February 14, 2003
By Rowan Scarborough: for full story go to Washington Times
The Bush administration's desire to spare dual military-civilian targets in Iraq has produced an air war plan that is too timid and does not properly prepare the battle space for ground troops, according to interviews with military officers.
But a spokesman for the U.S. Central Command, which will run the operation, called the war plan "comprehensive, modern and flexible."
The officers said the plan, as of a few weeks ago, would largely spare infrastructure targets, such as bridges, and most, if not all, telephone communications.
The officers said the plan deviates in significant ways from the 1991 38-day air campaign during Operation Desert Storm, in which telephone communications, power systems and bridges were targeted from the first day to isolate Saddam Hussein and his military forces.
The reason for the change: The Bush administration wants to spare hardships to Iraqi civilians and to show that the real target of the bombing campaign is Saddam.
Return To Top February 14, 2003
Consultations on measures to protect Turkey
Tenet: North Korea has ballistic missile capable of hitting U.S.
U.S., Coalition Plan to Restore Post-War Iraq
Turkey asks for talks on thwarted aid bid February 12
Iraq Placing Explosives Around Oil Wells February 12
South Korea Believes North Has No Nukes February 12
Why Hussein sees history on his side February 12
Coalition warplanes bomb Afghan caves February 12
Debka Argues The Old World Order Is Ending February 11
Editorial from Arabnews.com: Back to 1914? February 11
Pakistan Says Its Nuclear Program In Safe Hands February 11
15 Nations Order Diplomats Back From Kuwait February 11
Consultations on measures to protect Turkey
Press Conference by NATO Spokesman, Yves Brodeur
Good evening. And thank you for being so patient. I hope that I won't disappoint you.
The Council met, the meeting ended at 8:45. So far, we haven't been able to conclude our discussions as we had hoped today.
The countries which were not in a position to go along with the new proposal this morning are not at this point in a position to do so tonight. So there is no change in the position of the countries which could not agree to the new proposal put on the table by the Secretary General of NATO this morning.
Therefore, we expect to continue our discussions tomorrow, at a time to be decided, meaning that it is likely that there will be another meeting tomorrow, probably tomorrow morning, but we haven't yet agreed on the time.
I wish to stress though that one thing is clear, again, is that the issue here is not whether, it is when. That hasn't changed. It is still a timing issue.
I'll take questions. Please.
Q: Is the Secretary General going to work out a new compromise or will he stick to the present proposal?
Yves Brodeur: Right now, we're not considering putting on the table a new proposal. So we will still work on the basis of the proposal tabled this morning.
…
Q: Yves, the new proposals, as they were outlined to us by various NATO officials, involved sending the AWACS planes, the Patriot missile batteries, along with chemical and biological warfare units to Turkey. But stripping out the troop elements associated with the Balkans and U.S. bases in Europe, how do you think that is going to make this proposal more appealing to France, Germany and Belgium?
Yves Brodeur: As I said, the issue -- and that was made clear again tonight -- the issue is not substance, it's a question of timing.
The three delegations who have difficulties with the proposal are all saying that they haven't changed their minds, their stance on this. They still feel that the time is not right for NATO to make that decision as we speak.
Q: But if the question is timing, what makes you think you can solve this problem tomorrow then?
Yves Brodeur: I didn't say that we can solve the problem tomorrow, the only thing I said is that we will continue our discussions tomorrow in the hope that we can arrive at a decision.
…
Q: Why did Secretary General Robertson decide to call the meeting tonight?
Yves Brodeur: Secretary General Robertson decided to call the meeting tonight because he felt, again, that we had a proposal on the table which could form the basis for a consensus, to a consensus. Throughout the day, there were consultations, again, between capitals, hoping that we could tonight achieve a positive outcome.
We haven't been able to conclude and therefore, we will continue as I said. But again, the meeting was called because it was hoped that delegations' governments had had enough time to consult and to arrive at a decision in time for the meeting tonight.
I'll take one last question please. Madame.
Q: So the strategy right now, that is the problem of the timing, would be to make a meeting every day until those three say yes?
Yves Brodeur: Strategy is to keep working essentially and to continue our discussion. Consultations will go on. And we'll see if we can, we hope that we can actually arrive at a situation where we can conclude this discussion as soon as possible.
Thank you very much. Merci.
[Orbat.com note: It should be noted that France, Germany and Belgium are quite isolated on the issue within NATO. Even the Greeks of all people have criticised the use of the veto. ]
Return To Top February 13, 2003
Tenet: North Korea has ballistic missile capable of hitting U.S
CNN
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- North Korea has an untested ballistic missile capable of hitting the United States, top U.S. intelligence officials said Wednesday.
While testifying at a Senate committee hearing in Washington, CIA Director George Tenet was asked whether North Korea had a ballistic missile capable of reaching the U.S. West Coast.
Before answering, Tenet turned to very quickly consult with aides sitting behind him.
"I think the declassified answer, is yes, they can do that," Tenet said.
Defense Intelligence Agency Director Vice Adm. Lowell Jacoby, also testifying at the hearing, said outside the hearing room that the North Korean missile has not yet been flight tested, according to The Associated Press.
Moments earlier Tenet said it was likely that North Korea had been able to produce as many as two plutonium-based nuclear weapons.
The estimate is not new -- it was laid out in an unclassified CIA document in December 2001-- but Tenet is the most senior U.S. official to say so publicly.
The 2001 report said North Korea's Taepo Dong 2 missile may be capable of hitting the West Coast of the United States, as well Alaska and Hawaii.
The revelation came shortly after the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency declared North Korea in breach of international nuclear agreements and sent the issue to the U.N. Security Council.
The International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation executive board voted 31-0 to cite Pyongyang for being in breach of U.N. safeguards. Two countries, Russia and Cuba, abstained.
Russia had expressed concern over sending the matter to the Security Council, fearing it could push North Korea into further defiance. Sudan was not allowed to vote because it has not paid its dues, and another nation was not present.
Some officials have said there are moves to create a package for North Korea that would try to achieve a diplomatic solution. But the Security Council also could impose sanctions on Pyongyang in an attempt to persuade the North to drop its nuclear plans.
North Korea has said such a move would amount to a declaration of war.
The decision to send the matter to the Security Council comes at the same time that body has been dealing with weapons inspections in Iraq and whether Baghdad has been in compliance with U.N. Resolution 1441, which calls on Iraq to disarm.
Friday, the two top U.N. weapons inspectors report back to the council on their latest findings within Iraq.
European Union international policy chief Javier Solana -- who spent the last two days in meetings in South Korea -- said earlier Wednesday that now is not the time to impose sanctions on North Korea.
"I don't think this is the moment to do sanctions, and I do think the sanctions may contribute to the opposite that we want to obtain, which is defusing of the crisis," Solana said before the IAEA vote.
During his visit to Seoul, Solana has met with top South Korean officials, including President Kim Dae-jung, President-elect Roh Moo-hyun, the foreign minister and the minister of defense.
Solana also may travel to North Korea in the coming weeks to discuss ways to defuse the nuclear impasse. He said he would base the timing of any mission to Pyongyang on the wishes of North Korea's neighbors.
"All of them have told me 'the sooner, the better,' so we will do it the sooner, the better, Solana said.
Tensions have mounted on the Korean peninsula since last October when the United States said North Korea admitted to secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons program in violation of a 1994 deal.
Pyongyang, which denies the U.S. claim, responded by backing out of a nuclear non-proliferation treaty earlier this year, kicking out U.N. nuclear monitors and restarting a mothballed nuclear power plant in a move it says will compensate for an energy shortfall.
Return To Top February 13, 2003
U.S., Coalition Plan to Restore Post-War Iraq
Extracts from By American Forces Press Service by Linda D. Kozaryn
WASHINGTON, Feb. 11, 2003 -- Once Saddam Hussein's regime is history, the United States and its coalition partners will pitch in to help the Iraqi people restore their country, Douglas J. Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, said on Capitol Hill today.
The United States aspires to liberate Iraq, not occupy it, Feith told members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people. Iraq does not and will not belong to the United States, the coalition or to anyone else," he said.
A U.S.-led coalition cannot take military action to eliminate the Iraqi threat to the world "and then leave a mess behind for the Iraqi people to clean up without a helping hand," he said. "That would ill serve the Iraqis, the United States and the world."
If there is a war, the United States would be committed to stay in post-war Iraq as long as necessary to help restore stability and would be determined to leave as soon as possible.
"We're going to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and likewise the terrorist infrastructure; safeguard Iraq's territorial integrity; and begin the process of economic and political reconstruction," Feith said.
Eliminating weapons of mass destruction would be a huge undertaking, he noted. It would involve securing, assessing and dismantling Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities, facilities and stockpiles.
Defense officials are preparing for the task, he said. U.S., U.N. and coalition officials, along with the new Iraqi government, would begin by first locating Iraq's widespread weapons of mass destruction sites and then rapidly and safely disabling them so they're not a threat to coalition forces. They would then have to dispose of nuclear, chemical, biological and missile capabilities and infrastructure.
How much time will it take? "We can't now even venture a sensible guess," Feith said.
Once Iraq is liberated, U.S. and coalition forces also would help provide humanitarian relief, organize basic services and work to establish security for the liberated Iraqis. Feith said the United States would encourage coalition partners, nongovernmental organizations, the United Nations and other international organizations to contribute to the effort.
As the Iraqi people put political and other structures in place to provide food, security and other necessities, he added, the United States and coalition partners would want the Iraqis to run their own affairs.
"Our goal is to transfer as much authority as possible, as quickly as possible, to the Iraqis themselves," he said. On the other hand, he added, the United States wouldn't try to foist off burdens on those who are in no position to carry or manage them.
The sooner reconstruction is accomplished, he said, the sooner the coalition would be able to withdraw and the sooner the Iraqis would regain complete control of their country.
The immediate responsibility for administering a post-war Iraq, Feith said, would fall on U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks, commander of U.S. Central Command and commander of U.S. and coalition forces in the field. A new office within the Defense Department would help coordinate the reconstruction effort.
On Jan. 20, President Bush directed the creation of a post-war planning office within Feith's policy organization in the Pentagon. The Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance, staffed by officials from departments and agencies throughout the government, is considered an "expeditionary office."
"In the event of war, most of the people in the office will deploy to Iraq," he said.
The charter for the new office includes planning and implementation. "The intention is not to theorize, but to do practical work," Feith said. The office will establish links with U.N. agencies and nongovernmental organizations that will play a role in post-war Iraq, as well as counterpart offices in the governments of coalition countries and various free-Iraqi groups.
For several months, he noted, an interagency working group has been doing contingency planning for humanitarian relief. It has established links with U.S. Central Command, U.N. agencies and nongovernmental organizations involved in relief efforts.
The working group has developed a concept of operations for U.N. and nongovernmental groups to provide aid. The group would also establish civil- military operations centers so U.S. forces could coordinate providing relief and restart the U.N. ration distribution system, using U.S. supplies until U.N. and NGO supplies could arrive.
Other interagency groups are planning to vet current Iraqi officials to determine with whom U.S. officials should work, and they're also working on post-war elimination of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
The function of the new Defense Department office is to "integrate all of these efforts and make them operational," Feith said. "It is building on the work done, not reinventing it."
Return To Top February 13, 2003
February 12, 2003
Iraq February 10
Pakistan, India Expel Top Diplomats February 9
Mega-terror Menaces on Three Continents February 9
Turkey asks for talks on thwarted aid bid
Associated Press
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) — France, Germany and Belgium blocked NATO efforts Monday to begin planning for possible Iraqi attacks against Turkey, deepening divisions in the alliance over the U.S.-led push to oust Saddam Hussein.
Turkey immediately requested emergency consultations under NATO's mutual defense treaty — or Article 4 — the first time a nation has done so in the alliance's 53-year history.
"I am not seeking today to minimize the seriousness of the situation. It is serious," said NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson during a break in the meeting of alliance ambassadors, where he called the atmosphere "very heated."
Diplomats said France, Germany and Belgium would do serious harm to the credibility of NATO if they would reject Turkey's direct request for help.
Article 4 declares NATO members will consult when "in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the parties is threatened."
Early Monday, France, Germany and Belgium blocked the automatic start of NATO procedures for the military planning to protect Turkey, arguing it would force the crisis into a "logic of war" when diplomatic alternatives still stood a chance of success.
"It would signify that we have already entered into the logic of war, that ... any chance, any initiative to still resolve the conflict in a peaceful way was gone," Belgian Foreign Minister Louis Michel said.
The move was a blow to the United States, which has lobbied hard for more than three weeks for the alliance to begin military planning and won the support of 16 of the 19 NATO allies.
"This is a most unfortunate decision," said U.S. ambassador to NATO Nicolas Burns. "Because of their actions, NATO is now facing a crisis of credibility."
Still, Lord Robertson sought to play down the divisions. "What is important, is that we arrive at a consensus and I'm confident we will," he said.
Turkey's Foreign Minister Yasar Yakis also sought to soothe tempers. "There was no veto on defending Turkey," Yakis told reporters in Ankara. "There is disagreement over the timing" but not on the principle of defending Turkey, he said. "These problems can be overcome."
He did not say whether Turkey would directly ask NATO to start contingency planning to defend Turkey against an attack.
Diplomats said they expected France and the other holdouts to drop their objections to the military planning when faced with a direct request from the Turks under the treaty.
"I trust the alliance will stick together and we will help Turkey," Norwegian Defense Minister Kristin Krohn Devold said Sunday. "I have a strong belief in commonsense."
Over the weekend, at an international defense conference in Munich, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warned continued delays in responding to Turkey's request were "inexcusable" and risked undermining the credibility of the alliance.
He intensified his criticism in an interview published Sunday in Italy's La Republica newspaper. "Shameful, for me it's truly shameful," Rumsfeld was quoted as saying. "Turkey is an ally. An ally that is risking everything ... How can you refuse it help?"
In France, officials stood by their position but said they would help the Turks if they judged it necessary.
"If Turkey was really under threat, France would be one of the first at its side," French Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie told reporters in Munich. "Today, we don't feel that threat is there."
As well as trans-Atlantic differences, the deadlock highlighted deep divisions among European allies. The majority, led by Britain, Spain and Italy, is backing the tough line against Iraq taken by the United States and has been opposed by France and Germany.
NATO's military commanders say the planning for the limited support for Turkey can be wrapped up within a few days once they get the go-ahead, but actual deployment of the NATO units will need further approval from the 19 allies.
All NATO decisions require unanimous support from the allies.
[Orbat.com note: The specific Turkish requests are for NATO E-3 AWACS aircraft, chemical and biological agent detection teams and Patriot missile systems. Turkey will eventually have its requests approved by NATO, but this kind of acrimony always leaves scars. N. American readers should know that Norway has condemned the French veto. Besides the UK the governments of Italy, Spain and Holland all remain broadly supportive of the need for action in Iraq. Belgium quite vociferously opposed Desert Storm in 1991, going to the extent of refusing the sale of artillery shells to the British MoD for the duration of hostilities. The French withdrew its forces from the integrated military structure of NATO in 1966, and has used its veto a number of times. So French and Belgian obstructionism on this issue is not surprising. What is potentially much more damaging is that Germany under Gerhard Schroeder has joined their ranks. NATO is too important to ever be ‘irrelevant’, but any weakening of NATO weakens the influence of both the US and Europe.]
Return To Top February 12, 2003
Iraq Placing Explosives Around Oil Wells
Pakistan’s Jang reports that
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is moving large amounts of explosives to the country's oil fields, in apparent preparations to destroy them in case of a US-led military invasion, NBC News reported late on Monday.
In the event of war, the US military will try to secure the Iraqi oil field early in the operation, according to NBC News. But it is unlikely it will be able to get to all 1,500 Iraqi oil wells in time.
In Iraq, UN inspectors paid a surprise visit to a Baghdad missile plant on Tuesday. In their daily rounds of inspections, conducted despite a holiday in Iraq, a UN team went to the 17th of Nissan factory, which makes molds and casts, including components for Iraq's al-Samoud ballistic missiles, the Information Ministry reported. The findings of the two-day experts meeting that ends on Tuesday at UN headquarters in New York may be incorporated in an update report Blix must file with the Security Council of Friday.
The reports on Friday by Blix and chief nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei are expected to help decide the next steps to be taken by the Security Council in the long-running Iraq crisis. In another development, Turkey has offered a safe haven to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein if he steps down to prevent a US-led war, a Turkish newspaper said on Tuesday. Aides to the prime minister were not immediately available for response to the report. Foreign Ministry officials had no immediate comment. The mass-circulation daily Milliyet said Prime Minister Abdullah Gul had made the offer to Iraq's number two, Taha Yasin Ramadan, during a secret visit he made to Ankara this month.
Return To Top February 12, 2003 South Korea Believes North Has No Nukes
Extracts from Associated Press Return To Top February 12, 2003 Why Hussein sees history on his side From the Christian Science Monitor by Scott Peterson Return To Top February 12, 2003 Coalition warplanes bomb Afghan caves
For complete story including an attack on Khost airport click Jang
BAGRAM AIR BASE: Coalition warplanes bombed caves in central Afghanistan after at least five heavily-armed extremists ambushed US Special Forces as they picked their way through a remote mountain valley, the US military said on Tuesday.
Colonel Roger King said the patrol was attacked at dawn on Monday by machineguns and rocket propelled grenades (RPGs) from overhead ridges as it was exploring Bahgran valley in central Uruzgan province.
There were no US casualties from the attack, which occurred at around 6:30 am, King told reporters at Bagram air base. "Close air support was requested, and coalition F-16s dropped five 500-pound bombs. More than 100 rounds of 20mm ammunition was fired on three targets consisting of various caves and at least five armed men." He said there was no indication of any extremist casualties in the exchange.
Return To Top February 12, 2003 Debka Argues The Old World Order Is Ending
[Editor’s note. Debka is generally not prone to deep thinking, usually focusing on its agenda. In our opinion, however, whoever wrote this article has shown a through understanding of the real stakes in the clash between US supporters and opponents at the UN, NATO, and the EU, institutions whose days Debka argues are now done, because the world order they were designed for is now ending. At Orbat.com we’ve been inclined to accept the theory that the US seeks to remake the Mideast and the Arab world. The implications of what Debka says are even wider: we may be seeing a US effort to remake the whole world.]
US-Europe Iraq Standoff Throws UN, NATO and EU into Fatal Crisis
For full story click Debka.com
The world’s key international bodies - the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union - are splitting fatally over the Iraq arms crisis. A NATO emergency session was deadlocked Monday, February 10, when three leading European nations, France, Germany and Belgium, encouraged by Russia – a non-member – blocked an American request to extend boosted protection to Turkey in a war contingency, chiefly AWACS surveillance planes, Patriot missiles and anti-chemical and anti-biological warfare teams.
France, Germany, Russia and Belgium argued that approval of Washington’s request would send out two wrong signals:
1.That they approve of American military action against Iraq and are prepared to join in – which is untrue. The Russian and French presidents stated jointly in Paris Monday that Iraq must be disarmed by peaceful means, that the UN inspectors must be allowed continue their mission and that war was only a last resort.
2. By sending Turkey the two teams, they would affirm that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction for which Turkey needs protection. This would cut the ground from under the UN inspection mission and any further diplomacy, clearing the way for military action without further ado.
Return To Top February 11, 2003 Editorial from Arabnews.com: Back to 1914?
From Arabnews.com
In Makkah at this very moment, some two million pilgrims are praying for peace among nations, peace in Iraq, peace in our homes, peace in our hearts. Not just in Makkah, but all over the world, millions upon millions of Muslims are making the same prayer. And not only Muslims. Millions upon millions of Christians, Jews and others too, in the US, in Europe, everywhere.
And yet because of the Bush administration’s steadfast, arrogant refusal to be swayed from its determination to topple Saddam Hussein, all we can contemplate is a world on the brink of war.
That the Americans have ignored Arab appeals to draw back from the brink and settle this crisis by means other than force does not come as a surprise. Washington only sits down and talks to the Arabs when it wants something from them, not the other way around. It is not US contempt for Arab opinions that astounds. It is the contempt they show for their allies and friends. The Europeans are not traitors or fools, as too many in the media and politics in the US try to make out. If the Germans, the French, the Russians, the Belgians and others all agree that an attack on Iraq is madness at this point in time, the US should listen, not hurl abuse at them. The Europeans are America’s oldest, best and truest friends. If someone cannot listen to the advice of his friends, then he is truly lost.
Washington’s adventurism is a descent into the unknown. It is all tactics and no strategy. It has no plans beyond toppling Saddam Hussein, and after that, nothing more concrete than a vague hope of democracy in the country. It is inexcusable. No government should ever go to war without an endgame in mind.
But it is not what will happen in the days after an invasion that frightens. Saddam Hussein’s regime will probably fall very quickly and whatever fury there may be in the Middle East rapidly subside. It is what happens three or four months afterwards that terrifies. The Iraqi opposition hate each other as much as they hate Saddam Hussein. Without a strong force at the center — and the US cannot afford to remain long — there is a real danger of Iraq falling apart. Who knows where that could take the region. Will it destabilize Arab Gulf states?
There will be dire consequences if the Americans attack Iraq; of that we can be sure. But no one knows what they will be. That includes the US. That is what is so terrifying.
Washington compares Saddam Hussein to Adolf Hitler and the situation to the run-up to World War II. World War I is a more frightening comparison. It started with ultimatums and troop movements which took on an unstoppable momentum of their own, resulting in the most lunatic, most destructive war the world has ever known. By the time it was over, those Prussian, Russian, Ottoman, and Hapsburg empires that thought they could control events had been swept into the history books and the maps of Europe and the Middle East entirely redrawn. None of that was foreseen in 1914.
There is a chilling feeling that this is August 1914 all over again. Prayers for peace are desperately needed.
Return To Top February 11, 2003 For full story please click Jang.
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan said on Monday its nuclear programme was in safe hands and was defensive in nature, as it had a proper control and command structure, which everyone knew well. "Pakistan's nuclear programme is directed entirely by Pakistan and Pakistani people and it is not directed by others," Foreign Office Spokesman Aziz Ahmed Khan told the weekly briefing. He was responding to reported remarks by British Prime Minister Tony Blair who recently said that Pakistan should minimise its nuclear programme.
Return To Top February 11, 2003 15 countries call back diplomats from Kuwait
For full story please click Jang
ISLAMABAD: Fifteen important countries have called back their diplomats and embassy staffers from Kuwait. Pakistan ambassador to Kuwait, Shafqat Saeed has sought instructions from the Pakistan government as to wheather Pakistani diplomats should be retained or called back in view of the situation prevailing in Kuwait. The reliable sources of foreign office told The News on Monday night that on the report of Pakistan ambassador, the foreign ministry is reviewing the situation on emergency basis and a decision in this connection will be taken within 48 hours. It is expected that all diplomats will be called back.
Return To Top February 11, 2003 Al Qaeda’s Opening Shot in Iraq War
For full story click Debka.com.
Saturday night, February 8, in the Iraqi-Kurdish city of Suleimaniyeh, al Qaeda and Iraqi military intelligence fired their first shot of the US-Iraq war - by assassination. They used their shared surrogate, the extremist Kurdish Ansar al-Islam of northeast Iraq, to eliminate the top command of the pro-American Patriotic Union of Iraqi Kurdistan’s fighting militia.
The three-way collaboration between Baghdad, al Qaeda and the Kurdish fundamentalist terrorists provided a live and incontrovertible smoking gun. The price was heavy, a grave setback for US war plans.
DEBKAfile’s military analysts compare the murders to the assassination of the Afghan Northern Alliance commander Shah Massoud two days before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington.
Then, the killers posed as journalists; this time, they pretended to be defectors.
Ansar al Islam, which has been fighting the PUK for two years and whose members trained in Afghanistan, used double agents to...
Iran Official Denies US Talks
For full story click Islamic Republic News Agency/
Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi
here Sunday denied the news published in Washington Post on contact
between Iran and US officials regarding Iraq.
The daily recently claimed that Iranian and US officials met in
Europe to discuss the crisis in Iraq.
US Civil Reserve Air Fleet Stage I Activation Announced
For full story click Globalsecurity.org
The Secretary of Defense has given authority to the commander, U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) to activate Stage I of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) to provide the Department of Defense additional airlift capability to move U.S. troops and military cargo. This measure is necessary due to increased operations associated with the build-up of U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf region. CRAF aircraft are U.S. commercial passenger and cargo aircraft that are contractually pledged to move passengers and cargo when the Department of Defense's airlift requirements exceeds the capability of U.S. military aircraft.
The authority to activate CRAF Stage I involves 22 U.S. airline companies and their 78 commercial aircraft -- 47 passenger aircraft and 31 wide-body cargo aircraft. While this authority is for all 78 commercial aircraft in the CRAF Stage I program, the USTRANSCOM commander, Air Force Gen. John W. Handy, is only activating 47 passenger aircraft. Currently, U.S. military airlift aircraft and CRAF volunteered commercial cargo aircraft are meeting the airlift requirements. However, if required, the USTRANSCOM commander can activate those 31 cargo aircraft in the CRAF Stage I program.
US, UK to seek 48-hour deadline for Saddam's exile
For full story click Jang
LONDON: The United States and Britain are drawing up plans to give Iraqi President Saddam Hussein as little as 48 hours to flee Baghdad or face war, as part of a second UN resolution, the Sunday Telegraph reported.
Such a resolution could be put before the UN Security Council by next weekend if weapons inspectors conclude in a key report on Friday that Saddam is still refusing to give up weapons of mass destruction, the British paper said.
But a Downing Street spokeswoman downplayed the report, saying: "It is far too early to be talking about that sort of thing. "We are where we are and we need to let the inspectors get on with what they are doing before we start going down the road of what a resolution would look like."
The Telegraph quoted a senior UN Security Council diplomat as saying that Britain would put forward the resolution because Washington "does not want to be seen to need it". "The resolution being discussed would declare that Saddam is in material breach of UN resolutions, which authorises the use of all necessary means to disarm him," the diplomat added.
Return To Top February 10, 2003 Pakistan, India expel top diplomats
By Mariana Baabar writing in the Jang.[Article has been shortened.]
[Editor’s note: in the Commonwealth, a High Commissioner is the equivalent of an ambassador, so the expulsions are symptomatic of a worsening crisis.]
ISLAMABAD: Terming relations with India "extremely bad", Pakistan on Saturday ordered the acting Indian high commissioner and four other commission officials to leave the country within 48 hours, swiftly reciprocating a similar move by New Delhi earlier in the day.
"Relations between India and Pakistan are extremely bad because of the actions of the Indians. It appears they are determined to ensure that relations worsen and remain tense," said Foreign Office spokesman Aziz Ahmed Khan at a hurriedly called press conference.
India had earlier expelled Pakistan's Acting High Commissioner Jalil Abbas Jilani a day after police accused him of funding separatists in held Kashmir. He and four other Pakistani staff at the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi were also ordered to leave within 48 hours.
Pakistan and India scaled down their diplomatic presence during the military stand-off last year that followed a 2001 raid on India's parliament New Delhi blamed on Pakistan-based Islamic groups. Neither side has since reappointed ambassadors.
Vikram Misri, counsellor at the Indian High Commission, was called to the Foreign Ministry and informed about the expulsions.
Again reciprocating Indian move, Islamabad has also decided to cut down the strength of its high commission in New Delhi from 51 to 47.
The spokesman insisted that Islamabad has acted with great restraint, maturity and responsibility in the face of every provocation from New Delhi.
When asked why Pakistan felt to react, Khan replied, "Sometimes your hands are forced. Pakistan has been very patient and acted with maturity. This time Pakistan has acted in equal measure. We have acted only when it is needed to take that action. We have never flouted the code of conduct as responsible governments don't flout agreements."
The spokesman said that if one was to read reasons into the recent actions by New Delhi, it appears that after the manner it conducted the Gujarat elections on anti-Pakistan feelings and succeeded, it appears that the same tactics would be used for the upcoming state elections.
"They want to experiment the same kind of policy," replied Khan. However at this stage, he said, he would refrain from speculating whether the missions in both countries would close down completely.
On a possibility of a meeting between President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee at the upcoming NAM meeting, the spokesman replied, "we will not be found wanting. Pakistan is ready for any kind of meeting." The spokesman said the recent actions of India would create problems for Indian citizens who wish to come to Pakistan since the staff will be drastically reduced.
Agencies add: Aziz Ahmed Khan said Pakistan's acting high commissioner has been asked to leave on totally trumped up charges. He said India has also asked four staff members to leave on "no-replacement" basis which reflects their design to reducing the strength of the mission which would create problems for those in India, who wish to visit Pakistan.
About allegation of cross-border movement, coming from the Indian Prime Minister, the spokesman reiterated Pakistan's proposal of deploying UN observers to verify claims. "But the Indians do not agree to it because if they agree to something like this, they won't be able to make these baseless allegations," he added.
In New Delhi, Indian foreign ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna said India "did not intend any downgradation in the level of (Pakistan's) representation" and would grant a visa to the person Pakistan named in the envoy's place. Sarna told reporters that the other four Pakistan High Commission officials being expelled were Habibur Rehman, Aftab Ahmed, Abdul Razak and Mohammad Nazir. He said the four were not diplomats.
However, reacting to Pakistan's tit for tat expulsions, Sarna told Reuters: "It is a pure and simple act of retaliation. It shows Pakistan's compulsive hostility towards India. It is unfortunate that Pakistan has chosen to react in this way."
In New Delhi, Jalil Abbas Jilani, the expelled acting Pakistani high commissioner, has said the Indian decision was meant to avoid dialogue with Pakistan and gain domestic political mileage.
Jalil Abbas told APP: " The decision clearly indicates that the writ of the hardliners within the government is prevailing."
It would not only heighten the tension between the two countries, but it was also meant to avoid meaningful dialogue between the two countries, he said.
"The motivation behind all such decisions taken by India during the last years are clearly meant to project ongoing just and indigenous Kashmiris freedom struggle as terrorist movement," he said.
About Indian allegations, he said: "These are utterly baseless and since last many years, India had invented every incident to blame Pakistan. India has never substantiated its allegations with concrete evidence", he said, adding this development will have extremely negative impact on the already tense relations between the two countries and prevailing situation in South Asia.
Return To Top February 9, 2003 Mega-Terror Menaces on Three Continents
For full story click
Here.
With the approach of American military action against Iraq, the United States and its war allies, including Israel, have gone on top alert to steel themselves against a multi-pronged mega-terror offensive assault.
According to DEBKAfile and DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s exclusive counter-terror and intelligence sources, six entities have come together to prepare this offensive, operating both together and independently. They are:
1. Iraqi military intelligence, or rather the dread Unit 999, which is an arm of the super-secret Fedayeen Saddam (Saddam’s Martyrs), commanded by the Iraqi ruler’s eldest son, Uday. Return To Top February 9, 2002 What To Expect From Iraqi Military
An ABCNews.com story; for complete article, click from Military.com
During the Gulf War, the Iraqi military buckled so quickly that some of its soldiers seemed almost eager to surrender. Televised images of Iraqi soldiers incinerated in their vehicles helped convince President Bush to end the ground war after only four days because of his concerns the world would consider continued pummeling of retreating Iraqi forces as a virtual slaughter. Since then, years of sanctions and continued allied attacks in the no-fly zones have left the Iraqi military in even worse shape. So should American and British forces, now preparing for another war, expect a cakewalk against a badly degraded Iraqi army? The consensus from American military planners and analysts: absolutely not.
Return To Top February 9, 2003 By Johann Price.
The American television network ABC will present an 'exclusive' tonight on al-Qaeda supporters in an unnamed Gulf royal family. Any of those expecting al-Saud, or perhaps the one of the seven from the UAE will be surprised when the open secret is broken and al-Thani of Qatar are named. After Ramzi Yousef's little mishap in Manila in January of 1995 his chief co-conspirator KSM fled to Qatar and formed a cell with an even older al-Qaeda figure, Shawqi al-Islambouli brother of Anwar Sadat's assasin Khaled al-Islamboulis. One year later in January of 1996 KSM was indicted for his role in the 'Bojinka' plot to simultaneously bomb 11 American airliners over the Pacific. The FBI contacted the Qatari government, which agreed to hand him over. The FBI team was diverted once it arrived in Doha, and the terrorists escaped to Prague with passports provided by the Minister for Endowments and Islamic Affairs, Ahmad bin Abdallah Arab al-Marri.
The assistance has not ended since 9-11. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed spent at least a couple of weeks in hiding there after the attacks in safe houses paid for by prominent Qataris. ther names you can probably expect to hear in the programme: Abdul Karim al-Thani, member of the royal family and a fundamentalist who is one of the leading financiers of terrorists. A man who funded and protected Zarkawi (now infamous after Colin Powell's presentation) transitting between Afghanistan and Iraq. Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem bin Hamad al-Thani, former chief of police and the man who first revealed the degree of sympathy in sections of the Qatari establishment. He fled the country after failing to unseat his cousin in a Feb 1996 attempt on behalf of the emir's father, who was deposed in June of 1995. Now serving a life sentence in Qatar after being snatched from Beirut. Interestingly Saudi, Bahrain and Egypt supported the coup attempt. The Saudis are deeply unhappy over Qatar's political and social modernization. Bahrain and Qatar have a long running feud, and both Egypt and Saudi may have been unhappy over the kinds of people being harbored by Qatar. The problem here is that the Emir, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani is not a fundamentalist, but he is in essence little more than the first among equals. He has used his position to push greater transparency and is even moving towards the involvement of women in the political process. Under Khalifa al-Thani Qatar has moved towards normalization of ties with Israel and has quite a healthy economic relationship with it. Most of all he has allowed the expansion of al-Udeid air base, providing the US an alternative to Saudi Arabia. Qatar is playing host not only to the bulk of airpower outside Kuwait, but most of the apex theatre command and control facilities. Working out how to suppress support among some of Qatar's elite to al-Qaeda without weakening the emir has been a serious concern. This ABC programme is going to make it much harder to handle the problem discreetly, but it is also going to make it much harder for those with a purely military focus to ignore this serious issue. Return To Top February 8, 2003 [Editor’s Note: an FIR is a First Information Report, a document police open when registering a case. POTA is the Prevention of Terrorism Act, a draconian anti-terrorist measure used in India. For all the notoriety of this act, which permits preventative detention, it has greater safeguards for the accused than US laws in effect after September 11, 2001. The problem in India is that the Government is given an unlimited benefit of doubt by the courts and review bodies. Against that, POTA detainees are not subjected to the enormous psychological and physical pressures American detainees experience. Because India is a poor country, any jailed person lives in a state of considerable discomfort, but Indian jails are far more humane than American ones.]
NEW DELHI: Pakistan's Charge d'Affaires Jaleel Abbas Gilani has been named in the FIR registered after two arrested Hurriyat activists alleged that he funded separatist activities in Jammu and Kashmir while the duo were remanded to 10 days' police custody. Anjum Zamrooda Habib, chief of Muslim Khawateen Markaz, a Hurriyat constituent, who alongwith Delhi-based Hurriyat spokesman Shabir Dar were arrested on Thursday night, confessed before Pota judge S N Dhingra that Rs 3.07 lakh recovered from her was handed over to her by the Pakistan High Commission to be passed on to amalgam chairman Abdul Gani Bhat as a "nazrana" (gift). The two, who have been arrested under Pota, were produced amid tight security before the special judge, who remanded them to 10 days of police custody. Police recovered Rs 2 lakh from Hurriyat office and arrested Dar after Habib alleged that he was also receiving money from the High Commission. The 23-party amalgam denied any involvement in the case and termed the police action as "politically motivated". Delhi Police, which had named the Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan High Commission in the FIR, had sent its report to the Ministry of Home Affairs, police said. The ministry would take a decision and later send it to the external affairs ministry for an appropriate action as Gilani enjoys diplomatic immunity.
Return To Top February 8, 2003 Pakistan lodges strong protest
By Mariana Baabar writing in Pakistan’s Jang
ISLAMABAD: The government on Friday lodged protest with the Indian government, when it summoned its acting High Commissioner Sudhir Vyas to the Foreign Office against what it called "ridiculous and baseless" allegations against its Acting High Commissioner Jalil Abbas Jilani, in New Delhi.
According to diplomatic sources, Pakistan's protest to Sudhir Vyas was verbal and only took a short time. In turn Vyas told the Foreign Office that it was not the Indian government itself, which had made charges against Jilani but was only quoting what the Indian police had charged.
Jilani is alleged to have paid a Kashmiri woman so that she would pass on these funds to the leadership of All Parties Hurriyat Conference. The charges against Jilani become absurd as both countries are observing all the movements of its diplomats and know well, that they are under surveillance.
Islamabad, in a statement, asked Delhi to end the systematic campaign of disinformation against Pakistan. According to a Foreign Office spokesman: "The government of Pakistan has lodged a strong protest with the Indian government over the ridiculous and baseless allegation made by Indian authorities accusing Pakistan's acting High Commissioner Jalil Abbas Jilani of providing money to the representatives of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference."
Pakistan also expressed grave concern over the ongoing campaign of vilification against Pakistan and officials of the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi.
The spokesman said: "The campaign is part of a strategy by the BJP government to mislead the Indian public opinion to whip up anti-Pakistan hysteria for electoral gains. New Delhi has framed APHC representatives to discredit the freedom movement in Indian occupied Kashmir, as well as to find an excuse for yet another crackdown on the APHC leadership as part of its brutal suppression of the Kashmir people."
Islamabad called upon the government of India to put an end to its systematic campaign of disinformation against Pakistan highly provocative statement and measures, which continue to vitiate the environment between the two countries.
Instead Pakistan reminded the government of India of its responsibilities under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as well as the Bilateral Code of Conduct concluded by the two countries in 1992.
"The government of India must discharge the obligations it has assumed under the two agreements to ensure the safety and privileges of officials of the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi," the spokesman said.
APP adds: Minister for Information and Media Development Sheikh Rashid Ahmed condemned the implication of Pakistan's acting High Commissioner in an FIR by the Indian authorities as the worst example of diplomatic depravity.
"Registering an FIR against acting High Commissioner under POTA law is the worst example of diplomatic depravity," he told reporters while replying to a question here. "They have exhibited their mentality by naming the High Commissioner in a complaint under this law," he said, adding, "they (India) have further exposed their most uncivilised law of the world."
Rejecting all allegations levelled against the top Pakistani diplomat in India, he said this is the continuation of the vilification campaign, which started with baseless allegations and expulsion of our diplomats last month.
Responding to a question regarding statement of an arrested APHC representative before an Indian court, he said anyone can be pressurised to give any statement.
Return To Top February 8, 2003 British Troops Will Stay in Iraq For 3 Years
Neil Tweedie of the UK Telegraph says in a February 5 story that between 10-20,000 British troops will remain for 3 years and beyond as part of an American-led stabilization force. This gives an important clue to US plans for Iraq post Mr. Saddam Hussein. The commander of US 3rd Army is expected to military governor.
Excerpts from the story:
1. The British force is expected to control a
sector of Baghdad. It is top-heavy with infantry units, allowing it to mount
intensive patrols.
2. [The British] have had had to scale down its contingents in the Balkans and West
Africa over the past year, with the 2,000-strong force in Kosovo due to be
pulled out by the end of April. There are also plans to cut the number of
troops in Northern Ireland. Even then, more reserve servicemen and women may
be required. Some 6,000 army reservists have been called up, with a warning
that they might be asked to serve for a year.
3. American commanders are believed to be reluctant to place the Challenger
tanks and Warrior infantry fighting vehicles of the UK's 7th Armoured
Brigade too near to their own armoured forces because of the primitive state
of British communications, which could lead to confusion in battle and a
proliferation of friendly-fire incidents.
4. The disparity in British and US communications equipment is the most serious
issue in the two armies working together. The digital radios in US armoured
vehicles allow their commanders to send and receive fully-encrypted
information, giving them a thorough awareness of the battle via the
"tactical internet".
Each radio has a satellite positioning device that automatically sends out
the position of the tank or infantry fighting vehicle in question, reducing
the chance of friendly fire - "blue on blue" - incidents. British armoured
vehicles are equipped with the Clansmen radio dating from the 1960s and
1970s.
An analogue system, it has an extremely limited ability to transmit data.
Return To Top February 7, 2003 US 101stAirmobile Division Ordered Overseas
The US 101st Airmobile Division has been ordered deployed in one of the final pieces of the buildup against Iraq. It is believed the division will head for Turkey, where the Parliament formally approved the stationing of US troops in-country and the expansion of airbases US forces will require. US forces in the theatre are now at 113,000 and expected to reach 150,000 by mid-February and 200,000 by end February.
Iraq Building Baghdad Defenses The Associated Press quotes analyst Anthony Cordesman to say that:
"There are also indications that some elements of the Republican Guards may be training in urban warfare to fight in civilian dress, and that Iraq will deliberately mix such loyalist elements, the security services and popular forces in civilian dress to fight urban battles under conditions where the U.S. and British may find it impossible to distinguish combatants from civilians," Cordesman wrote.
There is no reliable estimate of Iraq's exact military strength, Cordesman said, but he estimates there are 389,000 full-time active duty troops, 2,200-2,600 battle tanks, 3,700 other armored vehicles, 2,400 major artillery weapons and 300 combat aircraft. He estimates Iraq has 850 surface-to-air missile launchers and about 3,000 anti-aircraft guns. Iraq Shifting Troops To Kuwait Border
The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that
Iraq is moving troops and artillery closer to its southern border with Kuwait and deploying them astride highways in preparation for U.S. attacks, according to military officers with access to the region.
Iraqi forces also are increasing intelligence activities along the demilitarized border, sending tough-looking "civilians" to visit the area, the officers said. U.S. commanders, meanwhile, have dispatched crew-cut American "engineers" to the border, the officers said.
Most of the Iraqi troops look ragged, and some complain that they are eating only bread and are not being paid, said officers in the 32-nation U.N. Iraq-Kuwait Observer Mission (UNIKOM), based on the border.
"Some say their families were put under protective custody" to make sure they fight, said a UNIKOM officer who traveled recently on the Iraqi side of the 150-mile border. North Korea Threatens Preemptive Action
North Korea issued its most belligerent statement yet, saying that preemptive action was not the province of the US alone. It again demanded direct talks. In Washington the Administration came under attack from critics demanding tougher action on North Korea. The US again said it had no plans to use military force to resolve the nuclear program dispute, but would not enter talks unless North Korea promised to abide by earlier agreements to shut down its weapons program.
Insulation Damage Doubted As Columbia Crash Cause
NASA is growing increasingly disinclined to believe that Columbia crashed because of lift-off damage to its tiles caused by a block of insulation foam. Among causes being investigated are space debris or orbiting rocks damaging the wing, or the accidental firing of explosive bolts.
Return To Top February 7, 2003 Afghan National Army Doing Well in the Field
From the American Forces Information Service, an article by Jim Garamone.
U.S. officials in Afghanistan have said the Afghan national army units are gaining operational experience and are working well with coalition troops.
The Afghan units are working with U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers, who are advising them in an operational setting.
"Reports on the two battalions in the field so far have been very positive," said Army Col. Roger King, spokesman for Combined Joint Task Force 180.
For example, soldiers of the 2nd Battalion of the Afghan national army and Special Forces advisers located a series of arms caches in and around the village of Madr in Bamian Province.
One battalion deployed to Orgun-E in Paktika Province. The population of the area, on the border with Pakistan, is majority Pashtun, and the province was a stronghold of the Taliban. When the battalion moved into the area, the locals thought it was another unit of foreign coalition forces, King said.
"The battalion was disciplined and behaved well to the local population," he said. "The people could certainly tell the group wasn't the forces of a warlord."
The battalion commander met with the town council and explained to the leaders of the area that the unit was part of the Afghan army, that it was multiethnic and would not respond to the whims of any local warlord. He also explained that the unit was in the area to help the population and to get rid of terrorist elements.
The unit became popular with the people of the area. "They had so many people knocking on the door that the unit sponsored a recruiting drive in Orgun-E and signed up 135 men for the Afghan army," King said.
There have been growing pains, he noted. While the leaders of the unit are very comfortable working at platoon level, they need more training in company and battalion maneuvers. Operational experience is helping the Afghan units learn these lessons.
"There was one unit out for two months," King said. "By the end of that time, they were performing pretty well." Based on his own infantry experience, he said, "The unit is adapting to new tactics quickly. They do 'fire and movement,' 'covering fire,' and 'assaulting an objective' just about as well as anyone."
Afghan authorities are working on getting the national army into more places. In addition to Orgun-E, a battalion is now stationed in Bamian, and further plans call for a unit to work with the U.S. Army's 82nd Airborne Division.
"It's important for the Afghan national army to get out with the population," a DoD official said. "The people then see that the government is trying to protect them. The army must provide the security so that the economic benefits of peace can follow."
Return To Top February 7, 2003 Korean Developments Return To Top February 6, 2003
Cave-Clearing Ops Proceed in Spin Boldak Area Return To Top February 6, 2003 National Guard And Reserve Mobilized As Of February 5, 2003 Return To Top February 6, 2003 Russia willing to sell missiles, planes to Pakistan
Extracts from an article By Aslam Khan writing in the Jang of Pakistan.
[Editor’s Note: Pakistan’s rapprochement with Russia is a logical counter to the increasingly stronger Washington-Delhi axis. Pakistan has turned to Russia for weapons before. A late-1960s deal to reequip the entire Pakistan Air Force with Russian equipment was scrapped under Indian pressure, but eventually small quantities of T-55 tanks and Mi-8 series helicopters were shipped.]
ISLAMABAD: Russia is willing to sell Pakistan air defence missiles and fighter planes, reliable sources revealed to The News here on Tuesday.
They said Moscow is willing to sell air-defence missiles to Pakistan, though likely not the S-300U missiles for which Musharraf will request to Russian President Vladimir Putin. From Moscow's point of view, according to the sources, Russia's recent aviation deals with India will more than make up for the new sales to Pakistan.
Pakistan is interested in buying Russian aircraft to help bolster its air force. Islamabad also seeks Russian supersonic anti-ship missiles, though Moscow is unlikely to sell either of these anytime in the near future, the sources said.
However, by steering clear of ground or naval supplies, Moscow can avoid straining ties with India or trying to compete with the Ukrainian arms industry's established relationships. The visit will also see Musharraf and President Vladimir Putin using the opportunity to redefine relations and increase strategic options for
These initial discussions are, however, unlikely to produce any major breakthroughs: Talk on Kashmir, Iraq, the war against terrorism and even economic cooperation are all general discussions with little chance of instantaneous payback.
For Islamabad, building new ties with Moscow provides an opportunity to gain some assistance in dealing with India. Russia is India's top arms supplier and thus has a fair amount of leverage with the South Asian giant.
Pakistan hopes that Moscow reduces its arms sales to India or at least considers Pakistan's interests in any future weapons deals. In addition, Islamabad is looking to Moscow to expand its strategic ties internationally. Pakistan has seen first the US and then long-time ally China open new levels of dialogue with India, and leaders in Islamabad feel they must take similar steps to ensure that the international community continues to take its interests into account.
Although the broader strategic discussions will take years -- if not decades -- to develop, there are areas of concrete cooperation upon which the two nations plan to build their new relationship.
Both Islamabad and Moscow have similar, though not exact, interests in new oil and gas pipelines across Pakistan. Moscow sees these as a way to preserve Russian influence and involvement in any new export routes from Central Asia.
Islamabad sees Russian involvement as a way of strengthening the chances of projects success, and of reducing Indian resistance to having Pakistan as part of the energy supply corridor from Iran and Central Asia.
Sources say Musharraf will also raise the issue of building an oil pipeline from Kazakhstan through Central Asia to Pakistan, in addition to existing proposals for the Trans-Afghan gas pipeline and the Iran-India gas pipeline.
Both presidents see the real potential for defence cooperation as well. Moscow would like to enter the Pakistani arms market, but has been reticent due to potential objections from India and the competition from Ukraine. The first deals on the table are likely to be for air-defence equipment, including surface-to-air missiles and radars.
Return To Top February 5, 2003
Afghan troops, Taliban clash near Kandahar
From Pakistan’s Jang
Afghan government forces clashed with suspected Taliban fighters on Tuesday northwest of Kandahar, an Afghan official said, as Dutch aircraft reinforced US bombing of caves in the province.
The fighting broke out around noon in a mountainous area in the northern part of Shawali Kot district about 15 km northeast of Kandahar, said a senior official of the regional government, who asked not to be named.
He told Reuters both sides had used heavy weapons in the clashes, but he had no details of casualties or the number of fighters involved. "According to our intelligence reports, there were the Taliban in the area," the official said. "So we sent out our troops to look for them and the fighting began." He said the government had since sent reinforcements into the area and the fighting was continuing. The officials said it was unclear if US or other foreign forces were involved.
Two Dutch F-16 aircraft bombed the cave complex early on Tuesday as part of a follow-up to a US-led attack on the area last week, a Dutch military official said. "A cave complex where it was suspected that Taliban fighters or al-Qaeda fighters were hiding was bombed," Jos van der Leij, a spokesman for the Dutch airforce told Reuters. This was the first time since the start of their mission in Afghanistan that Dutch F-16s have used their weapons.
US troops fired anti-tank rockets into a cave in the complex on Monday after spotting a man moving into it armed with an AK-47 rifle. Col Roger King, a spokesman at the US military headquarters at Bagram north of Kabul, said US troops had so far identified 75 caves in the complex, cleared 49 and destroyed 12 with explosives.
Return To Top February 5, 2003
Saddam's iron fist keeps army in line
For full story click Washington Times
Iraqi generals who might be tempted to heed calls from U.S. and Arab officials to mount a coup against President Saddam Hussein could be dissuaded by recalling one fellow general's name: Kamel Sachet.
In 1998, Saddam ordered Gen. Sachet's execution, reportedly because Gen. Sachet had been unlucky enough to receive a letter from a former Iraqi chief of staff who had become an outspoken critic of his old boss after finding refuge in Denmark.
With such tactics — in addition to ensuring his top men are implicated in his worst deeds and by stacking his military command with close relatives and members of his clan — Saddam may believe he is coup-proof.
Saddam's survival for a quarter of a century has depended on a ruthless response to any hint of dissent. Some have been executed for plotting against him, and Saddam is believed to have killed scores of army commanders after his spies in their ranks reported signs of disloyalty.
Return To Top February 5, 2003
Stratfor On Al Qaeda’s Renewed Campaign
For full article click Stratfor.com
A string of attacks against Western citizens and assets in recent days suggests that al Qaeda has launched a new offensive. A surge in al Qaeda activity will force Washington and European governments to think seriously not only about how -- and whether -- to move forward with campaigns against both Iraq and al Qaeda, but also about strategies for dealing with intractable political problems that continue to fuel al Qaeda's activity.
Return To Top February 5, 2003
February 4, 2003 [Editor: With the Shuttle grounded, Mr. John Pike of Globalsecurity.com gives his assessment of Russia’s ability to keep the Space Station going. Mr. Pike is a leading non-partisan American military and space expert.]
Click Here for full article.
MOSCOW – Russia launched an unmanned cargo ship to the international space station Sunday, a day after the loss of the space shuttle
NASA plans had called for expanding the international space station, or ISS, during five shuttle flights this year. But space shuttle program manager Ron Dittemore said Saturday that flights would be put on hold until officials determine what caused the Columbia to break up.
With all space shuttles grounded, the health of the international space station suddenly hinges largely on the ailing Russian space program, and experts expressed doubts on Sunday about whether Russia was up to the task.
The Russian Interfax news service Sunday night quoted one unnamed Russian space expert as saying that "closing down the international space station this year is inevitable," even if shuttle flights were halted only briefly.
Keeping the station occupied is only one challenge. Another is keeping the giant complex of trusses, modules and solar panels from sinking out of its orbit - generally about 250 miles up - and burning up in the atmosphere.
Normally, each time a space shuttle visits and docks with the space station - and five visits were scheduled this year - it burns its engines enough to nudge the station higher, countering the steady descent of the station's orbit. The space station has a surface area about as big as two football fields, and it is slowly brought toward Earth by friction as it rubs against the outermost edge of the atmosphere.
But NASA officials said Sunday that the Progress vehicles were able to accomplish the same thing and that the space station had stored propellant that would also help it maintain its orbit.
But American experts and Russian space officials and experts questioned whether Russia would be able to supply any more than it had already committed to the program.
Russia, the only other nation able to service the international space station reliably, is physically capable of launching only the two manned Soyuz flights and the three Progress- class cargo freighters, which it had already pledged to send to the station this year.
Should the shuttle be grounded, the unnamed expert told Interfax, Russia would need to send three more Progress ships this year to prevent the space station from being mothballed.
Even if Russia had the money to build those rockets, they could not be ready until 2004, experts told Interfax.
That leads to the troubling calculus about keeping the station in space, said John E. Pike, a space technology expert and the director of GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington research group.
"Everybody's going to be looking closely at the inventory of Progresses and Soyuz boosters," he said, "running that against the need to reboost the station. Maybe the answer is that there's more than enough, or just enough, or more than enough for this year, but after that there's a real problem."
He said that if the Russian craft could not fill the bill, NASA would have to try to cobble together a tanker of some sort. If the station is not continually boosted higher, he said, trouble would be inevitable and would intensify the lower the station drifted.
Another article on the Globalsecurity.org site says [click here for full article]:
Russian officials told the Interfax news agency they could only launch three resupply ships this year, fewer than what would be needed with no shuttle flights.
"Russia is short of funds and will not be able to build the required number of Soyuz and Progress space ships that are necessary for the trouble-free functioning of the ISS," said Boris Y. Chertok, a pioneer of the Soviet space program and consultant to Energiya Design Bureau, the corporation that builds most Russian space vehicles.
Other Russian space officials said if they were given funding, they could use Russian Proton-heavy rockets to complete the station, something they see as a high priority.
Return To Top February 4, 2003
India in demand for arms deals
An article by Rajat Pandit of the Times of India
NEW DELHI: Several countries and armament giants are eyeing India with unconcealed glee these days. The wooing game is definitely on. India, after all, plans to spend an estimated $ 100 billion on weapon systems over the next decade. India, of course, is keen on diversification of weapon suppliers and joint co-production ventures. "India is looking for precision strike capabilities and sophisticated force-multipliers. The government also wants to use large defence procurements as a leverage in foreign policy," says an official. India, which bought arms worth $ 7,200 million during 1998-2001, is now all set to become the largest arms importer among developing nations by supplanting UAE which imported arms worth $ 10,800 million during that period. An indicator of this is the forthcoming Aero-India 2003 show at Bangalore. Around 180 prominent companies from 22 countries are taking part, with French prime minister Jean Pierre Raffarin and British defence procurement minister Lord Bach, among others, themselves leading delegations. Russia, of course, leads the pack. It hopes to sew up the Admiral Gorkshov aircraft carrier package deal by March-April. This $ 3-billion-package includes a squadron each of MiG-29K jets and anti-submarine Kamov helicopters, as also the lease of four TU-22m3 long-range strategic bombers and two Akula-class nuclear submarines. India is also likely to sign the deal for 18 Smerch multiple-launch rocket systems in the next few months. The Russians are also flaunting their Advanced Jet Trainer (AJT), the "MiG-AT", during the airshow. Also on display will be the Czech-American "L-159B" trainer. The lucrative 1.2 billion pound deal is, however, likely to go to the British Aerospace-manufactured "Hawk" AJTs. The French and the Israelis are not far behind the Russians. India, for instance, is soon going to ink the $ 1.8-billion deal for six French Scorpene killer submarines. France is also keen on the $ 8-billion deal for 130 Mirage-2000H fighters. Israel, in turn, has rapidly emerged as one of the largest defence collaborators with India. After several multi-million deals for "Searcher" Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and hand-held thermal imagers, "Green Pine", man-portable and Aerostat radars, India is now finalising the $ 1-billion "Phalcon" early warning radar systems agreement with Israel. The US, after several years of sanctions, has also joined the race now. After clinching the $ 146-million deal for eight AN/TPQ-37 firefinder weapon-locating radars, the US is offering advanced ground sensors, C-130J Hercules heavy-lift and the P-3C Orion maritime reconnaissance aircraft to India.
Return To Top February 4, 2003
India offered F-16s, transport aircraft
From Pakistan’s Jang
NEW DELHI: US military aviation giant Lockheed Martin Aeronautics on Monday offered a lavish range of hardware including F-16 fighter jets to replace India's ageing fleet of Soviet-built MiG-21 warplanes as the US army chief of staff and Italian Defence Minister Antonio Martino kicked off visits to India to improve defence cooperation.
Meanwhile, a British defence official said he hoped India would soon decide whether to approve a billion-dollar contract for trainer jets that Britain hopes to provide. The offer, including technology transfers and joint ventures, came ahead of a visit to India this week by French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, expected to discuss an eight-billion-dollar Mirage-2000 deal with India.
The fight for India's aviation market comes as speculation mounts that Delhi has put plans to buy equipment like badly-needed jet trainers on the backburner and is instead focusing on acquiring "operational assets".
Both France and Britain have fought since 1983 to supply 66 such trainers at a cost of $1.63 billion but now it seems they will have to wait yet another year, a senior defence ministry source said. "We were very young when this particular race started but if we are now invited then we believe our T-50 is the only supersonic trainer that would meet the requirement of the Indian air force," said Lockheed regional vice president Dennys Plessas in New Delhi.
"And if India wants to lease used F-16 from the United States government then we can extend supply and technological support and if India wants one F-16 for four of its MiG-21s, then we can make it in India," said Plessas. The US firm also invited India to participate in a Lockheed-led Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) global project, launched last October. The programme, worth $20 billion, has 100 overseas partners and plans to manufacture 2,000 aircraft, which can serve both the navy and air force, for Britain and the US before selling to others.
US Army chief of staff General Eric K Shinseki met top Indian defence officials in New Delhi. "He is basically here to talk to his counterparts in the military and ministry of defence." The Indian defence ministry said Shinseki, on a farewell tour of Asia ahead of his expected retirement, met his Indian counterpart NC Vij as well as the chief of the Indian Navy Madhvendra Singh.
He met Defence Minister George Fernandes on Monday afternoon for about 40 minutes, a defence ministry official said. Indian officials provided no details of the talks, but media reports said the situation along the Line of Control was to be discussed.
A British defence official said on Monday he hoped India would soon decide whether to approve a billion-dollar contract for trainer jets that Britain hopes to provide. "I hope an early decision can be reached. All price negotiations for the deal have closed. Now we are awaiting the government decision," said Jim Catchpole, first secretary, defence supply.
Meanwhile French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin said in an interview on Monday that France wanted deeper ties and a strategic partnership with India. Raffarin is to arrive in India this week on his first official visit outside Europe since he took office last year. Italian Defence Minister Antonio Martino kicked off a three-day official visit to India on Monday with talks with top-level officials, including his counterpart George Fernandes. Sources said Indian officials could during the meetings raise the issue of its plans to buy 66 jet trainer aircraft in a deal worth around $1.6 billion.
[Editor: Orbat.com had mentioned the US offer of F-16s to India several months ago. At that time Block 15s were being offered and India did not find this acceptable.]
Return To Top February 4, 2003
Pakistan Prime Minister Orders Crackdown on Baluch Tribes
Rauf Klasra writing in Pakistan’s Jang
ISLAMABAD: The Jamali government gave a go-ahead to the law-enforcement agencies for a grand operation against Bugti and Mazari tribes, involved in disruption of gas supply to the various parts of the country in order to establish the writ of the law in the troubled areas of Balochistan.
The decision was taken at a high-level meeting, presided over by the prime minister and attended by federal and provincial government authorities, in Islamabad on Monday, sources said. However, they added, the Balochistan government asked the Centre not to launch any operation in the troubled areas unless cleared by the provincial government.
The help of the ISI, whose officials also attended the meeting, could also be sought for the operation. The sources said Prime Minister Zafrullah Khan Jamali and President General Musharraf also discussed on Sunday the launching of the operation against those involved in the blowing up of gas pipelines and suspension of water and power supplies.
The sources said the government had decided to get tough on the tribesmen who were blackmailing it. It was noted that if the writ of the law was not established in the troubled areas, the tribes would continue to exploit gas companies and the government as they have been doing in the past.
The sources said the meeting was also against the revision of the agreement with the Bugtis that expired on December 31. The Bugtis, who have been asked to nominate their representative for talks to be held between the gas companies and the tribesmen, would not be given any big concession as was being widely expected.
The Bugtis would be offered to accept the old agreement with the companies that envisages payment of millions of rupees to the tribe each year. The sources said the meeting decided that the area along the gas pipelines should not be abandoned. It was also decided that projects for setting up schools, roads and other such development-oriented projects would be launched there. Police pickets and regular monitoring system would also be established in the area.
[Editor: From Washington’s viewpoint, this is a good development: Pakistan’s frontier tribes are out of control – if ever they can be said to have been in control – and are endangering the stability of Pakistan as well as hampering the war in Afghanistan.]
Return To Top February 4, 2003
Briefs From the BBC German Chancellor Suffers Heavy Defeats
From the BBC: For Full Story Click Here.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's party has suffered crushing defeats in two key state elections.
According to exit polls, the Social Democrats failed to gain power in Hesse and lost their hold on Lower Saxony - Mr Schroeder's home state.
The elections are being seen as a crucial test of Mr Schroeder's four-month-old federal government.
The conservative Christian Democrats were set to take control of Lower Saxony with 46% of the vote, and surge to an increased majority with 50% support in Hesse.
Observers say Mr Schroeder's anti-war campaign message failed to strike a chord with voters, who were more concerned about rising taxes, unemployment and a stumbling economy.
[The BBC says the local defeats may ironically help the Chancellor at the national level.]
Progress M-47 launched for Space Station Resupply
From the BBC, for full article Click here.
An unmanned Russian cargo rocket, headed for the International Space Station (ISS), has been launched from the Baikonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan as planned.
The Russians had already made clear that, despite the Columbia space shuttle disaster in the US, they would go ahead with their launch.
The Progress M-47 blasted off at 1259 GMT from the Baikonur facility, which Russia leases from the ex-Soviet Central Asian state.
The vessel, which is controlled from the ground, is set to bring supplies to the three-man crew aboard the ISS - two Americans and one Russian.
[The article briefly explores the pros and cons of using Russian space launchers now that the Shuttle will likely be grounded for some years.]
Serbia Seeks Permission To Post Troops in Kosovo
From the BBC, for full article Click Here
Serbia has asked Nato for permission to send its troops back into Kosovo, in the first such request by its reformist government since the ousting of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.
Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic made the request in a letter to Nato's commander for south-eastern Europe, Admiral Gregory Johnson.
He said the Serbian troops would fill any vacuum caused by Nato soldiers being posted to Iraq - although there are no immediate plans to do so - or to compensate for a planned reduction in the Nato force in Kosovo.
Mr Djindjic also expressed concern that local ethnic Albanian authorities would end up in charge of the province's security "without consulting authorities in Serbia and Yugoslavia".
[Kosovo criticized the request; KFOR says it has no plan to induct additional forces in the event existing forces are reduced.]
Kosovo Albanians Seek Independence
From the BBC, for full story Click Here
Kosovo's Albanians have been hoping for independence for 11 years, and they still are.
It is the main goal of all Albanian political parties, moderate or radical.
"The Albanians' national objective is recognition of [Kosovo's] independence by the USA and EU, with the aim of calming the region and our neighbours, and then walking towards Europe and civilised western world", says Ibrahim Rugova, leader of the Democratic League of Kosovo (LDK).
Return To Top February 3, 2003
UN Assessment of Afghanistan Situation
From the Islamic Republic’s News Agency IRNA
UNSC: Amid 'remarkable' gains, challenges persist in Afghanistan The top United Nations envoy for Afghanistan told the Security Council last Friday that while impressive gains had been made over the past year, the country still faces tough challengesand the peace process was "far from secure" amid worrying reports thatsupport for the remnants of the Taliban might be growing in some areas, said a press release from the UN Information Center (UNIC) in Tehran. Briefing the council in an open meeting in New York, Lakhdar Brahimi, Secretary-General Kofi Annan's special representative for Afghanistan, stressed that while in 2002 the challenge was to shore upthe fragile foundations of peace, this year Afghanistan would have to meet the rising expectations of its people, namely "strengthen and build on the foundations of the state, and address the political and security uncertainties." Reviewing the first year of the Bonn peace process, Brahimi underscored that major political milestones had been reached on time, including the holding of the Emergency Loya Jirga and the establishment of the Transitional Administration. At the same time, he noted that this year's agenda for Afghanistanwill be every bit as challenging, if not more so. While he was optimistic that the "remarkable progress" made to date could be capitalized on and the challenges ahead could be met, he cautioned that further advancement will require the continued commitment of the Afghan people to the process together with the sustained engagement ofthe international community. Towards that goal, President Karzai has been discussing the need for the government to articulate - and for the international communityto support - a clear plan of action setting out the main goals for coming year. Going forward, Brahimi said, the focus would be on solidifying thekey institutions of the state, pursuing national reconciliation, and showing tangible results on reconstruction projects to build the economy and increase confidence in the government. Brahimi told council members that too many Afghans felt excluded from the government and the political transformation under way. "The door should be open to those who wished to participate in good faith," he said. "Leaving them outside the fold led to a growing incentive to undermine the peace process." Despite the relatively calm security situation, incidents continued to occur, as a result of inter-factional tension and sporadic terrorist activity. Today, Brahimi said, a bus carrying 16 passengers detonated an explosive device as it approached a bridge to the southwest of Kandahar. Investigations were ongoing in that incident, in which 12 people have reportedly died. Across the country, tensions between factions remained. In the west, fighting broke out recently in the province of Badghis, where the authority of Ismael Khan was being challenged by the local Governor, Gul Muhammad. So the overall peace process in Afghanistan needed to progress "much further before we can safely said it is irreversible," Brahimi said. With a range of doubts lingering in their own country, Afghans were watching closely developments elsewhere, fearing that they might be forgotten again. "[Afghans] do not clamour for international assistance for the sake of international assistance," Brahimi said, "but they understand all too well how vulnerable they still are to forces that, if unchecked, might consume them again and undo the significant progress of the past year.
Return To Top February 3, 2003
U.S. troops won't be ready to fight Iraq until at least mid-March
From Globalsecurity.orgGlobalsecurity.org, article from the Knight-Ridder Newspaper Group, dated January 27, 2003.
By Drew Brown
CAMP DOHA, Kuwait - While the Bush administration keeps warning that time is running out for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to disarm, the U.S. troops, tanks and supplies needed to make war against Baghdad won't be ready for a possible invasion until mid-March at the earliest.
After weeks of deployment orders, an estimated 60,000 troops are in the Persian Gulf region and another 100,000 are due to follow them.
But the U.S. ground presence in Kuwait now is at less than 20,000 soldiers, a small fraction of those required to invade Iraq.
Privately, U.S. military officers in Kuwait voice skepticism over an assessment from the Pentagon that American forces will be ready for war by late February if President Bush orders military action.
Some retired officers and military experts agree.
"You could conceivably be two months or more away in order to satisfy every ground commander," said retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark, the former NATO commander who oversaw the 1999 allied effort that ousted Serbian forces from Kosovo. "The force isn't there yet."
Though the Pentagon's war plans remain secret, a number of senior officials have indicated that an invasion force to be massed largely in Kuwait probably would consist of three heavy Army divisions, a light division, one Marine Expeditionary Force and a contingent of British troops and armor.
So far, only the Army's 3rd Infantry Division, which has been training in Kuwait since last spring, has significant numbers of troops, tanks and other armored vehicles on the ground. The last of the division's 19,000 soldiers and their equipment should be in place and combat-ready by mid-February.
Two squadrons of cargo ships began unloading tanks, armored vehicles and other equipment and supplies for the 60,000-man 1st Marine Expeditionary Force a little more than 10 days ago. Marine Corps officers describe the arrival of personnel and equipment as "robust and continuous," though they decline to say when they expect their forces to be ready for action.
The Army announced eight days ago that its 4th Infantry Division at Fort Hood, Texas, would spearhead a 37,000-member task force as part of the buildup. But the division is still loading its equipment aboard ships in Corpus Christi, Texas, which could take another week or more. Transport by ship to the Persian Gulf takes about 18 to 21 days, according to GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington-area research group that tracks military and intelligence issues.
Three other Army divisions, the 1st Calvary, also at Fort Hood, the 101st Airborne at Fort Campbell, Ky., and the 1st Armored, based in Germany, haven't received orders to deploy but could as early as this week.
The Navy has drawn up plans to deploy as many as seven of its 12 carrier battle groups. But Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld hasn't yet decided how many carriers will be in the final battle plans, said a senior Defense Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt will head to the eastern Mediterranean within the next week, the official said.
The 4th Infantry Division's helicopters, artillery, Humvees and other vehicles can be transported to the region by C-5 and C-17 cargo jets, but it would take as many as 500 sorties to deploy the entire division, according to military officials familiar with the 4th Infantry's logistics.
Such a massive deployment would further be complicated because about 25 percent of the C-5 fleet, which first took to the skies in 1970, is down at any given time because of repairs and maintenance.
"It really has been a hurry-up-and-wait kind of process, in that a lot of troops have gotten deployment notices in the last couple of weeks, but it's going to take a long time to get their equipment there," said Patrick Garret, a military analyst for GlobalSecurity.org.
It takes roughly 30 to 45 days to deploy a tank-heavy Army division overseas, according to Clark. Once on the ground, troops have to "marry up" with their equipment, move to forward staging areas and get organized. Troops must be trained. Commanders have to draw up battle plans and carry out rehearsals. This all can take weeks even under optimal conditions.
Still, "there's no question of the outcome," said retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, who led the 24th Infantry Division in the famous "left hook" that cut off the Iraqi occupation army in Kuwait during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
McCaffrey thinks the preponderance of the ground attack forces could be in the region within 30 days. As they were preparing for battle, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps jets could begin bombing targets in and around Baghdad and other strategic sites. Special operations troops could attack Scud missile sites and suspected chemical and biological facilities. Other efforts could focus on psychological operations to convince Iraqi soldiers to surrender.
But McCaffrey admits that generals, by their very nature, are cautious: "If left to the generals, we would still be there another year" before attacking.
"If I was commanding a division that was going in, I would be fighting to get the entire team on the ground and let them acclimatize for a month before commencing operations," he said.
Return To Top February 3, 2003
February 1, 2003
Sharon could stand trial in Belgium
Haartez of Israel for full story.
BRUSSELS - The Belgian Senate ratified two key amendments early Friday aiming to keep alive a ten-year-old war crimes law under which international leaders can be indicted. Under the new amendments, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon could stand trial in a Belgian court after he retires from Israeli politics.
News of the Absurd
Sources report a US soldier broke his leg while searching a cave complex in Afghanistan. It seems the media are getting increasingly desperate in trying to find evidence of US casualties in Afghanistan.
HQ US 1st Infantry Division Ordered to Turkey
2000 men from the HQ of the US 1st Infantry Division in Germany have been ordered to Turkey. The point of interest is will they take over the 37,000 troops of Task Force Iron Horse built around the 4th Infantry Division or if this is an advance movement of the division itself. In the latter case US troops will eventually total the 80,000 the US wanted in the first place.
US Advises Diplomatic Families To Return from Saudi, Kuwait
Full story in the Arabnews.com.
The US State Department has issued a travel warning on Saudi Arabia authorizing the dependents of American diplomatic staff in the Kingdom to return to the US if they wish to do so. It has also recommended US private citizens in the country to look “rigorously”...
Return To Top February 1, 2003
28 Pakistani Nationals Arrested For Al-Qaeda Links in Italy; Pakistan Government Denies Charges Against Them
From Pakistan’s Jang
NAPLES: Italian police have arrested 28 Pakistani men suspected of links to al-Qaeda in one of the biggest anti-terrorism operations Italy has seen since the September 11 attacks on the United States.
Military police burst into an apartment in central Naples on Wednesday night as part of a routine sweep against illegal immigration and ended up discovering enough explosives to blow up a three-storey building, officials said on Friday.
They arrested all 28 men staying in the apartment after finding 800 grams of explosives, 70 metres of fuse and various electronic detonators crammed behind a false wall. Religious text, photos of Jihad martyrs, piles of false documents, maps of the Naples area, addresses of contacts around the world and more than 100 mobile telephones were also found in the run-down lodgings, police said.
A judicial source said the maps had various targets marked out on them, including the headquarters of Nato's southern European command, the US consulate in Naples and a US naval base at Capodichino, just outside the port city.
Lieutenant Colonel Pat Barnes, a spokesman for the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany, said protection levels at all the US naval facilities in Italy were raised one notch on Thursday night as a result of the arrests.
In a statement, the police said they believed the men, aged 20 to 48, were members of al-Qaeda network. "The men have been arrested and charged with association with international terrorism, illegal possession of explosive material, falsification of documents and receiving stolen goods," the statement from Naples police headquarters said.
The police said the explosive material was sufficient to make a bomb capable of blowing up a three-storey building and that some of the fuse was laced with highly flammable nitroglycerine. As well as the religious texts written in Urdu, cuttings of Pakistani newspapers and manuscripts of "God is great" were found.
Meanwhile, Pakistan's Foreign Office said allegations of planning sabotage levelled against 28 Pakistanis arrested in Italy were unfounded. "The circumstances suggest that the allegations being levelled against them are baseless," spokesman Aziz Ahmed Khan told newsmen while commenting on the reports.
He said Pakistan's ambassador in Italy Zafar Hilali was in constant touch with the concerned authorities and had requested counsel access to the detainees. Pakistan's ambassador to Italy Zafar Hilali denied the men were terrorists and said the arrests appeared to form part of a campaign of targeting innocent Pakistanis living in Italy.
"According to my information none of these men had anything whatsoever to do with terrorism, none of them had anything like explosives," he told PTV by phone. He said 24 of the 28 men had applied for permits to work in Italy and were legal, adding that they were unfortunate only because they were living in a house owned by the Mafia.
Return To Top February 1, 2003
Iraq More Units to Deploy
The US Army is deploying five Army National Guard infantry battalions to the Gulf under HQ 18th Airborne Corps. This is in contrast to 1991, where the Army refused to send a roundout brigade to the theatre. Elements of the 45th Infantry Brigade have been ordered to the theatre, there is no indication if the brigade itself is going. These National Guard units might well become part of the occupation force.
More units alerted
The 1st Cavalry, 1st Armored, 10th Mountain, and 101st Air Cavalry Divisions have been alerted for movement. Including the I MEF, 3rd and 4th Infantry Divisions already in the theatre or enroute, this is a bigger force than was earlier anticipated – assuming all these units are going to the Gulf. Elements of the 1st Infantry Division have also been alerted. We expect that in addition to one brigade of the 82nd Airborne already ordered to the Gulf, the 173rd Airborne Brigade and the 2nd Cavalry Regiment will also deploy. The US Marine Corps appears already to have four expeditionary brigades either in the theatre or enroute.
A short war
The US plans a 100 hour war, with 150 hours as a maximum. Iraq’s infrastructure will not, by and large, be targeted, nor will most of the army. The idea will be to decapitate the Iraqi command, by pass Iraqi units that offer no opposition, and to advance to Baghdad in the shortest possible time. As orbat.com has been saying for some time, there are no plans for any large-scale fighting inside Baghdad. Casualties, both allied and Iraqi [civilian and military] are to be minimized.
US Admits Troops in Northern Iraq
Though the presence of US troops in Northern Iraq has been an open secret for some months now, the US government admitted only yesterday that troops in small numbers are operating in the region. Debka.com in particular has been reporting the presence of US troops, and has published pictures of US Navy Construction Battalion 74 working on an airfield in Northern Iraq.
Coast Guard, Seals deploy to Theatre
Eight 110 foot cutters of the US Coast Guard are deploying to the Gulf, approximately 600 sailors. It is the Coast Guard’s first combat deployment since Vietnam. The cutters will provide port security.
Seals are also deploying, including at least one team already training in Bahrain. These are not the famous Ramboesque SEALS [Sea, Air and Land], the US Navy’s commandos, but the sea lion variety, which will apparently be used for anti-UDT patrol. In a twist that perhaps only the Americans could come up with, the seals are supposed to slip a handcuff onto the arm or leg of an enemy combat diver. The diver will then be pulled up by the seal’s boat crew.
Jordan Succumbs to US Pressure
Jordan is the latest country to buckle under US pressure. Unlike Gulf I [from the Iraqi viewpoint that was Gulf II] where Jordan was neutral, special forces teams will operate from Jordan, as well as CSAR teams. US aircraft will overfly Jordan to and from Iraqi targets. In return, US Patriot missile batteries will help protect Jordan.
Diplomatic Pressure on Iraq, France, and Germany Increases
With eight NATO countries, Australia and Canada now lining up behind the United States, diplomatic pressure on Iraq is increasing, and France and Germany may have to decide soon on participating in some way or being sidelined in the reconstruction of post-war Iraq as well as suffering serious damage to their partnership with the US.
Return To Top January 31, 2003
Final Israeli Parliament Tally
From Israel's Haaretz.com
Ariel Sharon's Likud and the National Religious Party will each gain an additional seat in the entering Knesset,While the right-wing gained as a result of the soldier's vote in the election for the 16th Knesset, Amir Peretz's One Nation and the Hadash Party each lost a seat. Dov Chenin (Hadash) and Adisso Messala (One Nation) will not be in the Knesset, their seats taken instead by Likud's Ayub Kara and NRP's Nissan Slomiansky.
... barring any major surprises, the new Knesset will have 38 MKs from the Likud Party, six from NRP, three from One Nation and three from Hadash. This increases the religious, right-wing bloc of the incoming Knesset to 69 seats: Likud (38), Shas (11), National Union (7), National Religious Party (6), United Torah Judaism (5) and Yisrael b'Aliyah (2). The left-wing bloc weakens by one seat to 33: Labor (19), Meretz (6), Hadash (3), Balad (3) and Ra'am (2). The center bloc also weakened by one seat.
Return To Top January 31, 2003
A Times London story from the Australian [Extracts]
NATO was deeply divided yesterday after four member states, led by France and Germany, refused even to discuss a US proposal to send alliance Patriot missiles and surveillance aircraft to Turkey to protect the country from a possible Iraqi attack.
The proposal has been blocked for two weeks and Washington, which wants to take protective measures to demonstrate its commitment to Turkey, has become increasingly angry.
France and Germany, leading the way in rejecting the war option, insist moves to protect Turkey from possible retaliatory action by Iraq are inappropriate while diplomatic efforts are still under way to resolve the confrontation with Iraq.
Ankara confirmed on Wednesday that it wanted NATO to deploy Patriot anti-missile batteries in southern Turkey, which borders Iraq.
If France, Germany, Luxem bourg and Belgium were to reject a formal request for help from Ankara, it would be the first time in its history that NATO members would have failed to honour the terms of the Washington Treaty.
Return To Top January 31, 2003
Pakistan plans to strip Pakistani Kashmir Government of all powers
By BISHESHWAR MISHRA, writing in the Times of India.
[Editor: we remind readers that the Times of India would naturally put its own twist on the story, but if the report is correct, then serious trouble is brewing in Pakistan Kashmir.]
Put off by his vehement opposition to the raising of Mangla dam's height by 40 feet, the military rulers of Pakistan have decided to divest Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) "prime minister" Sardar Sikandar Hayat Khan of his powers.
A report to this effect, available with the Indian government, indicates that PoK "president" Maj Gen Mohammad Anwar Khan (who represents the Pakistan government) is gradually taking over all civil powers. The report also indicates that even the PoK supreme court will be rendered defunct soon.
The raising of the Mangla dam's height would primarily serve to divert PoK's water to the drought-affected farmers of Pakistan's Punjab province. The people and leaders of PoK have been protesting against this, alleging that the step would submerge the entire Mirpur district. When the dam was constructed in 1960, over 80,000 people were rendered homeless with the old Mirpur town getting submerged.
PoK premier Sikandar Hayat Khan had demanded that if the Pakistan government goes ahead with this project it would have to compensate not only those who would be displaced now but also those who were affected earlier. He had also demanded a share in the revenue from the electricity being generated from the dam.
Hayat Khan has also alleged that the PoK "president" was putting pressure on him to accept the draft proposal sent by the federal government which sought to abolish the office of PoK "prime minister", the PoK supreme court and the office of the chief election commissioner and reduce the number of seats in the PoK "legislative Assembly" from 48 to 26.
Anwar Khan has already transferred the PoK "chief secretary" Mohammad Naeem against Hayat's wishes and appointed Shahid Raft. Anwar Khan has also instructed all departments to stop putting up files to the "prime minister", resulting in complete confusion in the bureaucracy, the report says.It adds that Anwar Khan has ordered the re-introduction of army monitoring teams to oversee the working of the PoK "government". This means that the army would be directly involved in the day-to-day working of the PoK "government".
Meanwhile, Maj Gen Wasim Ashraf, commander of the Muree division which oversees PoK affairs, has directed Sikandar Hayat Khan to immediately submit a performance report, signalling that his days are numbered.
Return To Top January 31, 2003
January 30, 2003 Attack Bangladesh: Indian Fundamentalist Leader
[Editor's Note: For five decades Hindus have been expelled from Pakistan - where hardly any remain now - and from Bangladesh, where several million remain. The Government of India, aside from some pathetic bleating from time to time, has done nothing about this ethnic cleansing, which may be the largest since the end of World War 2. Your editor does not subscribe to the philosophy of the VHP with regard to this influential movement's call for a Hindu India. Nonetheless, as an Indian citizen, he is compelled to ask why the world community has never taken Pakistan or Bangladesh to task for this ethnic cleansing.]
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) international general secretary Pravin Togadia has advised the Union government to attack Bangladesh and annex three of its districts “if the policy of ethnic cleansing against Bangladeshi Hindus and Buddhist Chakmas continues’’.
Addressing a press conference here on Wednesday, Mr Togadia said that the contiguous belt consisting Khulna, Mymensing and Chittagong districts should be occupied by India and used for rehabilitating Hindus and Buddhists who fled Bangladesh due to persecution.
Recalling that India’s first home minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel had threatened to carve out a territory from the then East Pakistan if the persecution of Hindus continued, Mr Togadia said, Hindus in Bangladesh were safe till the Khalida Zia regime came to power.
As fundamentalist elements were included in this government, the persecution restarted. “[Hundreds of thousands] of Hindus and Buddhists have entered West Bengal in recent months,’’ he said.
The Indian government should immediately launch a campaign to send back the estimated [27.5 million] illegal Bangladeshi immigrants ‘if the BJP-led government at the Centre was of a true nationalist character,’ Mr Togadia said.
Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishna Advani should present an action plan on this issue to the nation. Mr Togadia said a Dharma Sansad would be held in Delhi between February 22 and 24 to discuss all issues relating to Hindutva, including the temple construction at Ayodhya.
Mr Togadia said neither Gandhian ideology nor Nehruvian secularism was an answer to growing Islamic terrorism. “Only the declaration that India is a Hindu rashtra and the revival of the virile Kshatriya tradition could save the country,’’ he observed.
Return To Top January 30, 2003
From Pakistan's Jang
US turns down Pak plea for INS opt-out
The United States on Wednesday politely rejected Pakistan's request for an exemption from new immigration rules imposed on citizens of 20 mainly Muslim states as part of an anti-terror crackdown.
Pakistan Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri asked Secretary of State Colin Powell during their meeting at the State Department, for an opt-out for Pakistanis. "I've urged the Secretary of State that Pakistan should be excluded from this list," Kasuri said and added: "Pakistani nationals in the US should be provided the necessary relief and flexibility under the law. What we are afraid of is mass deportation of Pakistanis under any provision or pretext whatsoever, and it will be devastating and will place undue pressures on our relationship."
Powell told reporters: "I assured the minister that we are very sensitive to those concerns. He gave me a number of ideas as to how some of these concerns can be dealt with. I also reinforced that this is not something directed at Pakistan or directed at Muslims or directed at Pakistanis in America."
But he signaled that there would be no opt-out for Pakistan, saying: "We will continue to learn from our experience with the program," and assured to implement this program in a dignified manner.
[Editor's Note: We wonder if the Honorable Minister understands that the registration program applies - so we are told - to every nationality and not just to Muslims. It has started with the perceived most dangerous Muslim countries, but - if our information is correct - in the next round India will be included. We would also appreciate if the Minister would explain to the American people what happens to Americans whose visa status in Pakistan is in doubt, and what the requirements are for a legal status American who wants to live in Pakistan. We are willing to wager the treatment of American illegals and legals is not much different from India. As such, we suspect that if the American people knew the details, they would be unlikely to treat the Minister as politely as Secretary Powell.]
500 Rangers to patrol gas pipeline
[Editor's Note: We hope these two stories give our American readers some idea of what life in tribal Pakistan is like. We understand right now America is not interested in excuses from Pakistan, and that Pakistan's government has been running with both the tribals and the Americans. Nonetheless, the Government of Pakistan faces some genuine difficulties with regard to the tribal areas and our readers, at least, should understand a different law applies there.]
MULTAN: Some 500 rangers, headed by a colonel, have taken up their patrol duty along the Sui gas pipeline, Rajanpur and Rojhan police sources told APP by telephone on Wednesday.
Besides, border military police (BMP) and Punjab police personnel are also assisting the rangers in this task of protecting the national assets. The sources claimed that DIG DG Khan, DCO Rajanpur and SSP Rajanpur went to Dera Bugti to hold parleys with the Bugti chieftain Nawab Akbar Bugti for the release of three policemen allegedly kidnapped by the tribesmen of the Bugti clan.
The sources further claimed that some senior officers from Islamabad also visited Rajanpur and discussed the matter with the local administration on Wednesday. But details of the talks were not known.
Some 20 Bugti tribesmen kidnapped DSP Rojhan, Rana Tahir Mansoor, SHO Rojhan Inspector Muhammad Farooq, driver Muhammad Tufail and gunman of DSP Nazar Hussain Monday night.
The perpetrators also hijacked the official jeep with registration No RP-7700 and took away an official kalashnikov. The kidnappers were armed with rocket launchers, hand-grenades and kalashnikovs, the police officials said. Later, the kidnappers released the DSP in the midst of the mountains who walked for 11 hours to reach Dauli, the BMP check-post adjacent to Mazari Goth, some 300 km from here.
Tribal romance claims five lives in North Waziristan
PESHAWAR: Rival tribes in NWFP have been battling each other on mountain peaks with rockets, missiles and heavy machine guns for two days in a dispute sparked by a forbidden romance, residents and officials said on Wednesday.
"Fighting started when a woman of one tribe eloped with her boyfriend from the other tribe," Hajji Nazir, an elder of the tribal district of North Waziristan, told AFP on telephone. "In response the woman's tribe kidnapped two women from the other tribe."
The Wazir and Mahsood sub-tribes had launched battles in the inaccessible Shawal area of North Waziristan, in remote mountains 175 kilometers south of Peshawar, on Tuesday. "Both tribes are using heavy arms, including ground to ground missiles, rockets, heavy machine guns and other sophisticated heavy arms," an official from the North Waziristan administration in Miranshah said by phone.
North Waziristan resident Najab Wazir said that five people had been killed in the fighting. Officials were unable to confirm any casualties because of the remoteness of the fighting area. The warring tribes had taken up positions on mountain tops, Nazir said. The local "Jirga" or council of elders had been unable to halt the fighting. "We sent 60 members of the Jirga into the area but they failed to reach it as all the routes have been closed by heavy snowfalls," senior administration official Naeem Anwar said. "We have no access to this far-flung tribal area and we are trying to solve the problem with the help of local elders."
Tribes living in the mountainous belt hugging Pakistan's northwest border with Afghanistan are deeply conservative. The area is awash with weapons and clans frequently battle each other with heavy arms over long-running family feuds.
Return To Top January 30, 2003
Bush Sets His Military Three Conditions for Late February Offensive
Debka [Abbreviated article, click for full article]
More time for the inspections is now the prime issue before the Security Council members when they go into consultation on the inspectors’ reports this week.
However, this is the last commodity the Bush administration can afford to offer after so many declarations and delays.
Out of the blue, the British government found an unconventional means of announcing the disclosure on March 1 of a new dossier revealing the locations of Saddam Hussein’s hidden VX and Sarin stocks on the basis of “human intelligence”. The disclosure came in the middle of a Sky TV News panel program on Monday, January 27, just a few hours before the Blix-ElBaradei performance at the Security Council. It was made by Robert Fox, the British network’s senior political editor “on behalf of our government”.
Except for the American panelist, the other participants – from France, Russia and China – were unmoved and continued to urge that the inspectors be given more time.
According to DEBKAfile’s Washington and London correspondents, the British disclosure was the opening shot of the joint US-UK strategy of letting the Security Council and inspection team go their own way, while proceeding with military action against Iraq, without waiting for authorization from the world body. The inspectors might clamor for more intelligence from Security Council members to complete their search for Iraq’s concealed weapons of mass destruction; but the United State and Britain would keep their intelligence information up their sleeves and release it as suited their objectives, not those of the world body.
At best, clandestine data might be dealt out in dribs and drabs. As DEBKAfile has reported before, the Americans suspect the inspection teams are penetrated by Iraqi double agents who make regular reports to Baghdad. This was as much as admitted by Hans Blix in his report to the Security Council. Last week, when the inspectors set out for an unannounced visit to a site suspected of containing engines for the prohibited long-range al-Hussein missiles, they met with unaccountable holdups. An American spy satellite discovered why when it photographed Iraqi military crews hurriedly loading engines from the site aboard giant trucks.
The most telling aspect of the British disclosure is the date: March 1.
The last DEBKA-Net-Weekly, published on January 24, reported from exclusive Washington sources that the White House has fixed on the last week of February for a final decision on military action against Iraq. That is the moment for President George W. Bush has set to determine if America goes to war with or without “a coalition of the willing” - whether or not the UN inspectors find weapons of mass destruction, with or without an amendment to Security Council Resolution 1441, and without considering a French, German or Chinese veto or domestic opinion polls.
Our sources in Washington report that the US President has set his team three provisos for launching military action in the last week of February-first week of March:
1. By February 23-25, the entire American invasion force for the first stage must be fully assembled and ready to go.
2. If the heads of the Pentagon, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Myers and war commander, Gen. Tommy Franks, cannot assure the president that the military buildup is complete and everything is set to go, the offensive will be delayed for a new decision.
3. All three war chiefs must be absolutely certain that the military, logistical and intelligence resources at the disposal of America’s war effort are capable of waging and winning a short war of no more than 100 hours – 6 days at the outside. Failing this guarantee, Bush will allow more time for collecting reinforcements.
The promised British revelation of Saddam’s secret chemical weapons cache is therefore timed precisely to coincide with the still tentative timetable for launching war on Iraq, whether by a cruise missile blitz, heavy air bombardment, or paratroop landings at the concealed WMD sites and their destruction.
Because of the tight time factor, a competition has sprung up between the two opposing camps: the United States, Britain and their covert allies, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt, versus the anti-war faction led by Russia, France, Germany, China and the United Nations. Members of the second camp may well switch sides once the offensive is in progress, but first they must show their own peoples and the Muslim world that they were ready to put up a fight to prevent it – even at the risk of an open breach with Washington.
The American-led camp is also taking a grave risk, that of mortally wounding the United Nations. Many observers wonder how long the world body will survive if the United States goes to war against Iraq in flat defiance of its institutions and majority will.
Aware of this hazard, President Bush last year warned the United Nations that inaction on Iraq would condemn it to the same fate as League of Nations. It was then that America and Britain maneuvered themselves into a blind alley, when they placed the onus of making Iraq disarm in UN hands.
However, Security Council members opposed to the war likewise drove the world body into a no-exit situation by their unanimous endorsement of Resolution 1441. Their failure to back the Bush administration now could put the world body’s survival in jeopardy. The United Nations itself, and not just Saddam Hussein, face existential danger over the whole unconventional weapons issue.
Return To Top January 30, 2003
January 29, 2003 After an Afghan prisoner led US and Afghan government forces to a hideout housing 80 Taliban fighters now owing allegiance to the outlaw Gulbaddin Hekmatyar, heavy fighting ensued. Five hundred troops, including 200Americans, are now in the second day of a battle that has seen air attacks by AC-130s, B-1s and B-52s, and F-16s. Eighteen Taliban are said to be dead, no figures for US/Afghan casualties have been given so far, and Mr. Hekmatyar is not on the scene.
From Pakistan’s Daily Jang.
US B-1 jets drop 19 2000-pound bombs on Taliban positions
PESHAWAR: Conflicting claims of casualties were made by rivals as heavy fighting rages between US and Afghan troops on the one side and Taliban and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar men on the other in Spin Karez mountains near Spin Boldak on Tuesday.
A Taliban spokesman who requested not to be named told The News that one US helicopter was shot down, while seven US soldiers and 15 Afghan troops were killed in the fighting. He claimed that only five Taliban were injured.
Khalid Pashtoon, a spokesman of the Kandahar governor, said that 18 Taliban and three Afghan troops were killed. He also claimed that the deputy of Taliban commander Hafiz Abdul Raheem, who is heading Taliban in the fighting, was also among the killed.
The Taliban spokesman, however, rejected the claim by the spokesman of Kandahar governor. Agencies add: The American and coalition forces were battling 80 rebels aligned with renegade leader Hekmatyar in the largest-scale fighting in Afghanistan in 10 months, the US military said.
At least 18 rebels were killed in the fighting, which began Monday in Adi Ghar mountain, Spin Boldak, the military said. There were no coalition casualties or civilian injuries. "It's the largest concentration of enemy forces since Operation Anaconda," US military spokesman Roger King said from Bagram Air Base, referring to a fierce eight-day battle last March against Taliban and al-Qaeda holdouts in southeastern Afghanistan, about 400 kilometres northeast of the current fighting.
King said up to 350 troops were involved in the fighting on the American side, including troops from the 82nd Airborne division, US Special Forces and allied Afghan militia troops.
Fighters received aerial support from American B-1 bombers, which dropped 19 2,000-pound bombs on enemy positions, including deep caves, King said. F-16 fighters flown by unidentified European allies had dropped a pair of 500-pound bombs, while AC-130 gunships and Apache AH-64 helicopter gunships were also pounding the enemy with rocket and cannon fire, King said.
"We've had reports of various numbers of armed men, groups of people trying to gather in order to carry out attacks on the coalition," King said. "We've been actively engaged in trying to develop intelligence that would lead us to a precise location and yesterday
(Monday) we did." The fighting -- about 15 miles north of Spinboldak and near the border with Pakistan -- was triggered by a small shootout pitting armed attackers against US Special Forces and their Afghan government allies who were working to clear a mud-walled compound.
One of the attackers was killed, one injured and one detained, King said. The detained suspect told questioners that a large group of armed men had massed in mountains nearby, King said. Apache helicopters sent to investigate came under small arms fire, and then fighter aircraft went to pound the area, King said.
"Our intelligence leads us to believe that they are most closely aligned with the Hizb-e-Islami movement, which is Hekmatyar's military arm," King said. "We've had reports over several months that he's been attempting to consolidate with remnants of al-Qaeda and Taliban."
King would not speculate on what the guerrillas were planning, but said that the largest contingent of coalition forces were stationed in nearby Spinboldak. "That's an obvious target," he said.
King said the latest battle might last some time. "It's a relatively large area. It's rough terrain. There are some caves, there may be more that we don't know about, so it could take a considerable period of time," King said. He said fighting was centred on rocky, unpopulated terrain around the Adi Ghar mountain, which was near the border, so it was possible that fighters of other nationalities were involved.
Afghan government officials in the southern border town of Spin Boldak said at least one Afghan soldier had been killed in the clashes. The fighting was centred on the Adi Ghar mountain, 23 km north of Spin Boldak, US and Afghan officials said.
Khalid Pashtun, spokesman for the governor of the southern city of Kandahar, also said Hekmatyar's men were fighting alongside Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters, although most of those captured so far were "apparently Taliban".
Other officials said a former Taliban police chief of Kandahar Hafiz Abdul Majeed was believed to be leading the rebels, along with another Taliban commander Hafiz Abdur Raheem. Afghan officials say the Taliban are trying to regroup in southern and eastern Afghanistan, and there have been regular small-scale attacks on US and government positions recently.
Mushtaq Yusufzai adds: Four Afghan security guards of the American troops in Paktika province were gunned down by unknown assailants when they were returning to the Machadat Kot camp on Tuesday.
The slain tribesmen were identified as Layaq Khan Wazir, Ala Jan Wazir, Alaf Din Wazir, Malik Shahi Wazir while another Muhammad Roshan Wazir escaped unhurt. Reliable sources informed The News from Angoor Adda, that all killed were belonged to the Wazir tribe of South Waziristan Agency and all of the slain were having dual citizenship of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
They said like many Afghans, these tribesmen were also working with US troops as security guards in Machadat Kot camp. Majority of the people there are having dual citizenships and houses both in Afghanistan and Waziristan Agency, they informed.
Sources said all of the five tribesmen were returning from a nearby bazaar known as Navey Adda, a few kilometres from Angoor Adda, when unknown assailants started firing from the bushes.
Four of them died on the spot while one Muhammad Roshan managed to safely escape and informed American troops about the attack. Sources said that later the US troops called aerial service for searching the attackers.
"After the incident, a number of US helicopters could be seen flying over the Pak-Afghan border, especially near the Angoor Adda. But so far they could not arrest any one," the sources added. Meanwhile, a large number of tribesmen from Wazir tribe in Wana, headquarters of South Waziristan Agency, attended the burial ceremony of the four tribesmen who were laid to rest at Birmal, Paktika province. According to the sources, the US troops and tribal elders of the slain tribesmen accused Taliban for killing their men.
Return To Top January 29, 2003
Sharon’s Likud crushes Labor in Israel Election
From the Haaretz of Israel, please click for full story.
Ariel Sharon crushed Israel's left Tuesday to become the first incumbent Israeli prime minister to win re-election since the 1980's, and immediately launched an all-out bid to form a unity government with the decimated Labor Party. An aide to Sharon said that the prime minister would not form a narrow right-wing government, and that if he failed to cobble together a unity coalition he would not hesitate to call new elections.
With 73.4 percent of the polling staions' votes counted, official results showed Likud with 37 seats, Labor with 19, Shinui with 15, Shas with 10, the National Union with six, Meretz with seven, the National Religious Party with five, United Torah Judaism with six, Hadash with four, Balad with 3, One Nation with three, Yisrael b'Aliyah with three and the United Arab List with two seats.
Television projections released immediately as polling stations closed Tuesday night showed Sharon's Likud sweeping to victory in the elections for the 16th Knesset, garnering 35 seats, with the Knesset's right-wing bloc predicted to capture up to 67 seats in the 120-seat house. The forecasts also indicated that the Labor-led left-wing bloc had been decimated
Return To Top January 29, 2003
Bush at the Rubicon
If, instead, a thumping triumph in Iraq solidifies the administration's
proclivity to give short shrift to the rest of the world's views, the U.S.
could find itself with few friends and allies when it runs into trouble on
some future battlefield—or, for that matter, on the occupied territory of
post-Saddam Iraq, writes Strobe Talbott.
How Bush Can Avoid the Inspections Trap
Martin Indyk and Ken Pollack comment that with an iron will and some
skillful diplomacy, President Bush can find a way out of this inspections
trap. But he must do it quickly.
The Dangers of Delaying an Attack on Iraq
Michael O’Hanlon argues that for those who still wish to avoid war the
only remaining hope is to make such a strong statement of the
international community's readiness to disarm Iraq forcefully that Saddam
Hussein changes course and comes clean. But if that does not work, we need
to have the courage of our convictions and get the military job done soon.
Return To Top January 29, 2003
January 28, 2003 Letter to the Editor from Keith Loescher
Keith Loescher
[Editor’s note: the 4th Infantry (Mechanized) Division is said to be heading for Turkey now that the impasse between Washington and Ankara on stationing US troops in Turkey has been worked out. Turkey, it is being said, may have agreed to 15,000 US troops but will turn a blind eye to 40,000 troops.]
Return To Top January 28, 2003
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times
By Michael Theodoulou writing from Nicosia, forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
FIVE thousand men and women in a 15-ship flotilla led by HMS Ark Royal are
due to start training exercises off Cyprus today in the largest maritime
deployment since the Falklands War. The task force is expected to sail to
the Gulf at the end of the week.
Two hundred bags of letters are awaiting the fleet on Cyprus, where fresh
provisions will also be loaded. They include 22,000 kg of Cyprus potatoes,
33,000 kg of fresh vegetables and 20,000 eggs. “Sailors and marines love
chips with everything,” Lieutenant Commander John Bower of the Royal Navy
said.
Five Tornado GR4s arrived last week for bomb training and air-to-air combat
practice. Three hundred marines of 40 Commando, Royal Marines, based at
Taunton, arrived for training two weeks ago and will leave with the naval
task force. The exercises are part of a long-planned deployment which
military spokesmen insist does not represent a commitment of forces to
military action. However, the task group, which has more than 40 helicopters
at its disposal, is understood to have been boosted by extra personnel and
hardware because of the possibility of war in Iraq.
Training aside, Britain’s two bases on the island will play a key role as
staging and supply posts in any conflict. Commanders say it is unlikely that
they will be used for direct military action. The last time an aircraft left
them loaded with bombs for offensive action was during the Suez crisis in
1956.
Return To Top January 28, 2003
German troops to protect U.S. bases
Extracts from an article by Aaron Kirchfeld, writing in the Frankfurter Allgemaine Zeitung, forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
Even with Germany hardening its opposition to any military action against
Iraq, 2,600 German troops are preparing to take up guard duties this weekend
against possible terrorist attacks at about 95 U.S. military installations
around Germany.
“The threat to U.S. installations has not changed, but because of American
troop deployments they are no longer able to guard their own bases,“ Lt.
Col. Markus Werther, a spokesman for the German military, the Bundeswehr,
told F.A.Z. Weekly.
“The deployment will begin some time this weekend and immediately affects
around 2,600 soldiers,“ Werther added. “How long it lasts depends largely on
developments in world politics.“
Military sources told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that as many as
7,000 troops from the German armed forces could ultimately be made available
to help secure U.S. bases. Half of the troops will come from the army and
the other half from the air force, the navy and security units.
News of the largest-ever Bundeswehr deployment followed Chancellor Gerhard
Schröder's announcement on Tuesday night that Germany intended to vote no if
there is a second United Nations resolution on Iraq and it explicitly
authorizes an attack on that country.
Germany has, however, stopped short of telling the United States that it
cannot use its bases in Germany for logistical purposes or to stage air
raids in connection with an Iraq campaign.
The security assistance to U.S. bases around Germany, which officials said
was promised at the end of November, has been described by critics as an
attempt by the German government to repair rifts with Washington amid
Schröder's continuing opposition to an attack on Iraq.
American officials have asked for the Bundeswehr to be prepared to guard
U.S. bases for up to two years, but some high-ranking German officers have
called privately for a much shorter commitment. They say that the Bundeswehr
would be overextended because of major deployments in Afghanistan and the
Balkans.
Meanwhile, German Defense Minister Peter Struck said on the weekend that in
the case of a war he supports the evacuation of injured American soldiers
with Bundeswehr planes.
Return To Top January 28, 2003
>New Mossad Chief: A trigger-happy adventurer? Apparently not
Israel’s Haaretz for full story.
By Yossi Melman.
During his few appearances since he began his job five months ago, Meir Dagan, the new head of the Mossad - Israel's espionage agency - has been outlining his credo and his agenda. Beyond statements about the need to make operational activity the top priority of the Mossad, Dagan has emphasized a number of goals. He has said that the most important issues for the organization will be the following: 1) the gathering of information about the efforts being made by Arab countries to attain unconventional weapons and missile capability; 2) intensified cooperation with parallel intelligence organizations worldwide; 3) a fight against international terrorism, which the research division of Military Intelligence began calling "worldwide Jihad" years ago, even before the attacks of 9/11. There is nothing new in these emphases. Dagan's predecessor in the position, Ephraim Halevy, who was criticized for not doing enough to promote operational activity, would approve of them wholeheartedly. The only surprise is that Dagan did not set the war against terror as his top priority, as one would perhaps expect of someone who until a few years ago was the head of the Anti-Terror Unit in the Prime Minister's Office and acquired a reputation as a "killer" and an "adventurer." Dagan's "sober" agenda, at whose center is the awareness that terror is not the foremost strategic threat to Israel, is therefore evidence of a sober strategic vision and a responsible world view. rather than the "trigger-happy" attitude attributed to him. Nevertheless, it is clear that Dagan's personality and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's expectations of him will lead him to be more daring than was his predecessor. He will emphasize the aspect of "special assignments" that is part of the name of the organization - "Mossad" stands for the Israeli Institution for Intelligence and Special Assignments - and therefore will approve more operations, and will be less afraid to take risks than were his predecessors - Ephraim Halevy and Danny Yatom (who held the position for only about a year-and-a-half, during which there were two serious intelligence mishaps, one in Switzerland and one in Jordan). Dagan, in conversations with heads of departments, divisions, and branches, as well as with junior employees, has already begun to encourage them to be more creative in planning missions, and not to hesitate to present him with new ideas and plans for operations.
Return To Top January 28, 2003
January 27, 2003 Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment
Extracts from an article by Doug Alexander, writing in the
Ottawa Citizen. Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
LONDON -- Canadian soldiers are heading to the Persian Gulf as part of the
military buildup against Iraq, despite the Chrétien government's
wait-and-see approach to committing troops to a war effort.
Fifty-four Canadian Forces members are serving under Britain through a
long-standing military exchange program between Canada and Britain -- and a
dozen of them could see action in Iraq if war breaks out.
Six Canadian officers are attached to Britain's HQ 1(UK) Armoured Division,
which was ordered to deploy to Kuwait earlier this week as part of the
Britain's "contingency preparations" for Iraq.
The British deployment will likely put some Canadians on the front lines of
the emerging conflict, with Canadian Forces approval.
Canada has 24 exchange officers serving in the British Army, 17 in the Royal
Airforce and 13 in the Royal Navy -- with positions ranging from training
and support to command.
Lt.-Col. Robert Scantland, assistant army officer of the Canadian defence
liaison staff in London, said all Canadian exchange officers have been given
"blanket authority" to deploy, subject to concurrence from the deputy chief
of the defence staff in Ottawa.
Return To Top January 27, 2003
Army hats too floppy for war, say British troops
Article by David Charter forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay, source unknown. Extracts.
BRITISH troops are scouring Army surplus stores to replace the latest item
of kit to fall out of favour with frontline soldiers: their desert hats.
The brim of the standard issue hat is felt to be too floppy by many of the
troops preparing to head to the Gulf and hundreds are trying to buy a
narrow-brimmed version before they go.
It is the latest blow to the Ministry of Defence after scares over jamming
guns, clogged air filters and unreliable radios.
Another piece of kit flying off the shelves in Troopers is the shemagh, or
desert scarf, which costs £6.50. An order of two dozen sold out in a day
this week.
More worrying are the frequent requests for large-size desert boots. “There
is a problem getting boots above a size nine in the garrison,” said Mr
Deacon.
The Ministry of Defence said that it was common practice for soldiers to buy
their own kit. It denied that there were any shortages which would affect
troops travelling to the Gulf.
Kit in demand
Bush hat, £12.50: brim of standard issue is too floppy.
Hooded smock, £100: American-style desert jacket in short supply.
Boots, £35: apparent Army shortage sizes above 9.
Shemagh head scarves, £6.50: desert-style, not provided by Army.
Desert assault vest, £125: desirable extra not provided by Army.
Desert shirt, £20: soldiers want more than Army provides.
Rank insignia, £3.50: can be slow to arrive from the Army.
Return To Top January 27, 2003
India showcases its military prowess on R-day NEW DELHI: A grand spectacle showcasing the nation's awesome military might, economic growth, scientific and technological advancement and cultural diversity unfolded at the majestic Rajpath here marking the 54th Republic Day celebrations. Much to the amusement of the many foreigners among the crowd came the world's only surviving horsed cavalry - the 61 Cavalry which was followed by the indomitable war machines of the Indian Army - led by its latest and lethal acquisition the Russian - made T-90 tanks.Possessed with a high degree of mobility, protection and fire power, the tank is rated among the best in the world. The MI-17 IV - equipped with the most advanced weapon system and rated as the world's most potent helicopter, Indra-II low level radar and topping it all the BrahMos - the Indo-Russian cruise missile system with a velocity 2.8 times of the speed of sound and capable of carrying a warhead upto 300 kg with a maximum range of 290 kms - all exhibited for the first time - had viewers spellbound. The state-of-art 700 km range 'Agni -I', the T-72 tanks, the indigenous Arjun Tanks, the 155mm Howitzer 77b guns - the pride of Indian artillery during the recent 'Operation Vijay', and the indigenously developed Prithvi Missile System capable of striking terror in the heart of the enemy by its long reach and destruction capability brought to the fore the country's military prowess. Also of relevance in an era of biological weapons was the indigenously developed Mobile Decontamination System, used for decontamination of vehicles, equipments, personnel, their clothing, face mask and terrain against biological and chemical warfare agents. The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 'Nishant', the indigenously designed two-seater trainer Hansa, MI-35 helicopters and other weapon systems were also displayed.
Return To Top January 27, 2003 Turkey, Jordan (partway) Back on Track
While still holding out on permission for a full-scale, 80,000-strong US invasion force to be stationed in Turkey, the Gul government has ceded part of America’s requirements. DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military and Turkish sources say Ankara will make bases available for the landing of 25-30,000 US troops for the first stage of the war, turning a blind eye to up to 40,000, while also permitting US invasion troops the limited use of Turkish air and naval bases and civilian airports, including Istanbul’s international airport.
Jordan’s king Abdullah II this week lifted the restrictions he abruptly clamped down on the movements of American troops in the kingdom, their use of Jordanian bases as launching pads to invade Iraq and strike at the western bases from which Scud missiles were fired against Israel in 1991. He also renewed permission for US warplanes to reach Iraq via Jordanian airspace and gave the nod for Israeli air force flights through Jordanian skies, provided they were coordinated with the US and Jordanian authorities.
According to our sources, General Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, obtained Turkey’s concessions in the few hours he spent in Incirlik and Ankara Sunday, January 19.
Defining their accord as a military document, the Myers and the Turks agreed to set aside Turkey’s territorial claims in the two northern Iraqi oil cities Kirkuk and Mosul until a later stage.
Soon after Myers departed Ankara, American sources made it clear that the United States fully intended taking over Iraq’s oil fields, administering them in the long term and using Iraqi oil revenues to partly defray the costs of conducting war and maintaining a long-term military occupation of Iraq.
According to DEBKAfile’s Washington sources, the war bill which, unlike Gulf War I, America will carry more or less single-handed, is estimated at $130 billion, while maintaining app. 70,000 US troops in the country to protect the oil fields and maintain Iraq’s post-war stability could run to another $10-12 billion a year. To raise this cash, the United States plans to increase Iraq’s oil output from 1.6 million to 6.5 million barrels per day, necessitating further heavy outlay for renovating the badly run down Iraqi oil production equipment.
At the same time, the long-term, military-backed control over Iraq’s oil resources – on the spot rather than from outside the region – will make America the leading strategic-political-military force in the Middle East and Persian Gulf as well giving Washington a controlling interest in the global oil market.
In consideration of Washington’s regional design, the Gul government in Ankara decided that its wisest course at this stage would be to shelve its two-century- old claim to Iraqi oil fields for the time being.
The key clauses in the US-Turkish military agreement are:
1. Turkish passage for one light US division of no more than 15,000 troops to transit into northern Iraq - conditional on a US pledge to end the military campaign against Saddam Hussein within days.
2. Shortly before the invasion, Turkey will allow US troops to land at Turkish air and naval bases and go into action in Iraq.
3. In the first stage of the US offensive, the Turkish government and high command will bring the Turkish forces who drove into northern Iraq last month back to their bases. They will stay there until a new US-Turkish accord is negotiated to formalize Turkey’s standing in Iraq. DEBKA-Net-Weekly had earlier reported Turkish troops as having taken up strategic positions along main roads. The Turkish government and high command undertook not to exploit the US campaign to grab positions in northern Iraq.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military and intelligence sources note that, through this provision, General Myers lifted the Turkish military threat hanging over Kurdistan.
The carrot Myers proffered the Gul government, according to DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s sources in Washington, was an undertaking on behalf of President George W. Bush of US generosity in providing Turkey with post-war economic aid in return for responding to US demands for bases. The American general also held out possible US concessions to Turkey in the bargaining over the shape of the government administrations in northern Iraq and the Turkmen region.
Myers’ mission effectively ended the US-Turkish crisis that threatened US war plans in northern Iraq. According to the latest information, units of the 4th US Infantry Division, the whole of which was first tasked for the southern front, are now being shipped to Turkish bases for the jump into the northern oilfields together with 101st Airborne Division detachments.
These partial reversions by Turkey and Jordan to their first commitments, salvaged key elements of the original US blueprint for the war on Iraq, permitting a return to the three-way split of combat strength between the northern, western and southern sectors.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s sources in Washington and Amman attribute King Abdullah’s change of heart to the quieting of his acute eve-of-war jitters by renewed American guarantees to protect his kingdom and the reaffirmation of Israeli defense pledges. Jordan’s towns teem with Iraqi intelligence agents, whose subversive activities against the throne, hand in glove with dissident Palestinians and pro-Al Qaeda extremists, are intensifying as the war approaches.
On Thursday, January 23, Jordan requested the sale of an American air defense system to tighten control over Jordanian airspace and protection against foreign intervention.
Having Jordan back on track prompted sighs of relief among war planners in Washington.
The provision of bases in Jordan is essential for the occupation of western Iraq and eviction of the Iraqi military presence in the first stage of the anti-Saddam offensive. DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military sources note that the capture of Baghdad and Saddam’s power base of Tikrit would be feasible without the use of bases in Turkey, but extremely difficult without Jordanian forward bases for flushing Iraqi forces out of western Iraq. Iraqi units, especially the ones stationed at the H2 and H3 base complexes, are armed with a large quantity of long-range surface-to-surface missiles, some with chemical or biological warheads. They could inflict grave damage on the American advance on Baghdad and Tikrit if they remained to the rear of that advance, as well as threatening Israel.
From Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, the monarch also received reaffirmation through secret emissaries of Israel’s guarantee to defend Hashemite rule in Jordan, according to DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s sources in Washington and Jerusalem. This guarantee is embodied in the Jordan-Israel 1994 peace treaty and reinforced in secret bilateral military and intelligence pacts.
But Abdullah made an additional, surprising request: Access to Israeli television, as soon as the threat from Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction has passed, for a personal message of peace and conciliation between the Arab nation and the Jewish State. The responses in Jerusalem and Washington are not known, but have probably been deferred until after Israel’s general election next Tuesday, January 28.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s political sources interpret this as a move by the Jordanian monarch to set himself up as the senior Arab arbiter of the destiny of the Palestinians after Saddam’s passing further diminishes his long-time ally, Yasser Arafat. Abdullah cherishes hopes of reclaiming the authority over the West Bank and Arab Jerusalem, which his father, Hussein, forfeited by losing the 1967 war.
Return To Top January 27, 2003
Debka: Saddam’s Sacked Bodyguard: I know where the weapons are…
First part of interview appeared on January 20
Fired four months ago from Saddam Hussein’s inner bodyguard detail, Jassem Abdullah – not his real name, but one of several aliases - lives in Amman in fear of his life. He moves from place to place taking his secrets with him. As a member of the elite trusted group of five to six men sworn to defend the Iraqi ruler with their lives, he claims to know where Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction are hidden – and points to three sites.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly located and interviewed Jassem through intermediaries in a suite we rented at one of Amman’s most luxurious hotels. He was pale and tense
DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence experts who went over the transcript of the interview portrayed Jassem as a typical Middle East VIP bodyguard, essentially a simple man who, for the most part, told the truth. Content that our experts found to be inaccurate has been expunged. In brief, he claimed that Saddam had concealed his prohibited weapons in...
Return To Top January 27, 2003
January 25, 2003 Scale of Iraqi strength is a mystery
No clear sign of military preparations
An article by Robert Collier, writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
Baghdad -- As the Bush administration ratchets up the military pressure
toward a possible decision to invade Iraq, the Baghdad regime has stepped up
its own rhetoric of defiance, threatening that any attack would be "suicide"
for the United States and its allies.
But whether the Iraqis are capable of drawing the American troops into a
protracted campaign, perhaps including guerrilla warfare in the streets of
Baghdad, is far less clear.
Foreign diplomats and aid workers say that although the Iraqis appear
woefully unprepared for a fight, they don't discount the possibility that
significant preparations are taking place behind a deceptive smoke screen.
"Either the Iraqis are completely oblivious and insane and are truly not
preparing for the Americans, or there's much more than meets the eye," said
one European diplomat in Baghdad who asked to remain anonymous. "One
wonders, what is it that the Iraqis want us to think?"
In a speech Friday, Saddam Hussein said Iraq's army, people and leadership
are "fully mobilized" to fight U.S. aggression and that any attackers will
"be defeated at the gates of Baghdad."
The repeated reference to the capital city, rather than Iraq as a whole,
echoed other signals from Iraqi officials that they have learned a lesson
from their humiliating defeat in the 1991 Gulf War. Instead of confronting
the Americans out in the open desert, where U.S. technology and air power
are invincible, the Iraqis appear to realize that their only hope is in the
narrow confines of urban streets, which diminish the attackers' advantage.
NO REAL SIGNS OF PREPARATIONS
But even in Baghdad, as well as in other major cities, there's an eerie lack
of military preparations, at least on the surface. There are no new
fortifications evident, almost no soldiers on the streets, few police other
than traffic cops. There appears to be no major training, no general
military draft, little, in fact, to suggest activity by a regime that might
soon be facing a full-scale invasion by the most powerful nation on Earth.
Meanwhile, construction continues apace on the huge Ba'ath Party
headquarters, which was bombed in 1991 and 1998 and is likely to be
destroyed once again, and city workers are carefully repainting the bridges
over the Tigris River, which also are prime targets for U.S. missiles.
The few mass shows of force have had a tinny, Potemkin-village quality. For
example, a Jan. 7 rally of the so-called Jerusalem Army militia in Baquba, a
town west of Baghdad, featured tens of thousands of would-be fighters waving
Kalashnikov rifles and shouting slogans praising Saddam Hussein. Women
marched in high heels and middle-aged men laughed.
Aside from the rifles, there were no weapons on display that would be useful
in a guerrilla war, such as mortars, bazookas, field artillery and
shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, although the Iraqi military has
large stocks of them.
In the countryside, travelers report seeing towns where large numbers of
civilians appear to be undergoing militia training, and there have been
unconfirmed reports of the positioning of missile launchers in various parts
of the country and the deployment of elite Republican Guard units around
Baghdad.
But these cases appear to be more the exception than the rule.
'A BLACK HOLE'
"I deal a lot with the government's civilian ministries on preparations for
war, and I can tell you they're very well prepared, very well organized and
they know exactly what is coming," said a foreign aid official, referring to
arrangements such as backup power supplies for hospitals, water plants and
other installations. "As far as military preparations, I have absolutely no
idea. It's a black hole. You've seen nothing, right? That's the same that
we've seen."
Speaking privately, some Iraqi officials suggest there is more than meets
the eye, although there is no way of judging their assertions.
"Believe me, the army is ready," said one official. "They've been preparing
for this for a long time. They know how to hide. Just because you don't see
any preparations doesn't mean anything. Even if they went on full alert, you
wouldn't be able to notice the difference."
For the Bush administration and many military analysts, expectations are
that a U.S. triumph would come quickly, with Hussein overthrown by his own
generals or with the Iraqi defenses disintegrating under an overwhelming
U.S. attack.
"The strategy is focused for a very short decisive victory and a house of
cards that crumbles quickly,' said Stephen Baker, a retired Navy rear
admiral and now a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information, a
think tank in Washington.
Baker said he believes that the U.S. military is waging "a massive
multimedia campaign, some of it already under way, to create an environment
in the Iraqi military that promotes surrendering or defecting once an
invasion starts.
"Senior U.S. officials have stated that they know the names of every
division commander in Iraq. Key officers are already being contacted through
clandestine intermediaries, defectors, e-mail or personal phone calls from
former Iraqi military officers to their onetime colleagues."
A U.S. Army officer who is based at American regional headquarters in Qatar
and is involved in Iraq war planning said he didn't think a much-feared
urban war would be required. "We're not going to need to fight inside
Baghdad, because if it comes to war, the Iraqi military will turn on Saddam
to save themselves," he said. "They know they can't win."
The officer, who asked to remain anonymous, said Iraqi army generals "are
waiting, hoping we'll help get rid of him. They just need an excuse."
COUP DOUBTERS
But many Baghdad-based observers warn that the chances of a military coup
against Hussein -- much touted in U.S. media reports in recent days -- are
slim.
"You have to remember two things," said an ambassador from a member of the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries who is a veteran of several
tours of duty in Iraq. "First, the CIA has spent most of the 1990s trying
for a military coup, and it all failed to do anything except allow Saddam to
round up and kill anybody who might possibly be a conspirator then or in the
future.
"Second, nationalism and religion. The Americans are foreigners, and they're
not Muslims. In talking with Iraqi people, from high officials all the way
down to my own gardener, there's a passion, a fire in their eyes because of
these things."
John Arquilla, a professor of defense analysis at the Naval Postgraduate
School in Monterey, says that while the Pentagon overestimated the strength
of the Iraqi military prior to the 1991 Gulf War, it may be underestimating
the potential for resistance now.
"When I was working for CENTCOM (U.S. Central Command) the last time around,
there was a widespread belief -- among many experts, in and out of
uniform -- that the campaign would be very bloody,"' Arquilla recalled.
"Those of us on the inside knew that it would go a lot easier because the
Iraqis would have to fight blind, couldn't move because of our air supremacy
and had deposited their whole field army out in the open where we could
pummel it at will.
"This time, the mis-estimation is in the other direction, I think. The
Iraqis have had a long time to prepare for the kind of campaign they believe
we'll wage, will use their cities for cover and resort to chemical and
biological weapons if they have any."
The Iraqis, whose military capability has been seriously degraded since the
first Gulf War, are unquestionably heavily outgunned by the Americans. But
Iraq, once the fourth most powerful military in the world, still has plenty
of firepower. According to U.S. military estimates released last year, its
hardware includes more than 2,000 battle tanks, 3,500 armored personnel
carriers, 2,000 artillery pieces, 500 truck-mounted anti-aircraft missile
batteries and 1,500 shoulder-fired surface-to-air missile launchers.
Virtually none of these weapons have been seen in public in recent months.
If they were concealed in urban bunkers, warehouses, residential buildings,
mosques or hospitals, they could cause heavy casualties among U.S. forces.
While most of the regular army collapsed quickly during the Gulf War and is
expected to do the same this time, the 100,000 members of the Republican
Guards and other elite corps proved themselves tenacious fighters in 1991.
Regarded as fiercely loyal to the Hussein regime, they are thought likely to
put up a stiff fight once again.
OUTCOME POSSIBLY BLOODY
U.S. troops deployed to the gulf have received training in urban combat and
some are currently conducting urban war exercises in Kuwait. But the result
could still be very bloody, according to a recent Joint Chiefs of Staff
report on urban warfare.
While not mentioning Iraq explicitly, the 151-page study, Doctrine for Joint
Urban Operations, noted: "Cities reduce the advantages of the
technologically superior force. The physical terrain of cities tends to
reduce line of sight, inhibits command, control and communications
capability (and) makes aviation operations more difficult. . . It also
degrades logistics, and often reduces ground operations to the level of
small-unit combat."
The report cites recent examples of urban combat that resulted in major
losses for attacker and defender alike. In the battle for the Vietnamese
city of Hue during the 1968 Tet offensive, for example, U.S. Marines -- who
at one point took one casualty for every yard gained -- suffered more than
1,000 killed or wounded, while causing more than 9,000 Vietnamese casualties
.
More recently, the death of 19 Army Rangers and their subsequent retreat
from the streets of Mogadishu in 1993, also cited in the report, is an
object lesson in what can go wrong when seemingly superior forces find
themselves trapped on hostile foreign streets.
But whether the Iraqis have the will to fight and die in large numbers like
the Viet Cong and Somali militia fighters is an open question.
In scores of interviews with Iraqi officials and ordinary citizens, a
Chronicle reporter found many switching back and forth between expressions
of rebellion and resignation -- often in the same sentence -- and between
talking about guerrilla war against the Americans and speculating on life
after Hussein.
"We will fight the Americans, and many will die," said Tarik Al-Assadi, the
proprietor of a food store in Baghdad's Sadoun neighborhood. "And then they
will do what they want with Iraq. What can we do?"
PENTAGON'S GUIDE TO URBAN COMBAT
The U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff released a comprehensive manual
for urban warfare in September. The 151-page document, Doctrine for Joint
Urban Operations, includes the following warnings:
-- Fighting -- "The nature of urban terrain decentralizes and channelizes
friendly forces, while adversaries engage a variety of targets -- friendly
forces, infrastructure and noncombatants -- behind the shield of the
civilian population."
-- Air control -- "A determined adversary with even rudimentary air defense
weapons can impede movement of aircraft during both operational strike and
logistic support operations."
-- Terrorism -- "Urban areas are the natural battleground for terrorists:
The effects of terrorist acts are greater and more noticeable and the
terrorist groups more difficult to locate and identify."
-- Refugees -- "The potential magnitude of the populace-and-resource-
control task in joint urban operations cannot be overstated. The joint force
commanders could be at least partially responsible for the care and control
of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of civilian noncombatants, no
matter what the original mission."
The document can be viewed on the Internet at:
Doctrine.
Return To Top January 25, 2003
January 24, 2003 From the Daily Jang of Pakistan.
India sees no Kashmir settlement by 2020
NEW DELHI: A government vision paper released on Thursday on what India could look like in 2020 said China may pose a serious challenge to its security, while the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan may still be unresolved.
"The increasing economic and military strength of China may pose a serious challenge to India's security unless adequate measures are taken to fortify our own strengths," said the report, entitled "India Vision: 2020".
The report, outlining broad growth and development parameters for the next two decades, is prepared by India's planning commission. It was released by commission deputy chairman KC Pant, who is also a member of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's top security cabinet.
India and China fought a war in 1962 after India accused China of holding 40,000 square kms of its territory in divided Kashmir. On India-Pakistan relations and the Kashmir dispute, the paper said the relations are likely to remain strained. "The fundamental ideological conflict between Pakistan and India is unlikely to be resolved without a major social-political change in Pakistan," it said.
"Territorial disputes with neighbours that have defied resolution for 50 years may not lend themselves for easy solutions," it added. On the domestic front, the document warned that "religious extremism and radical politics" may continue to adversely impact "our core values". Prime Minister Vajpayee's ruling BJP party, that also rules Gujarat, is also considered a radical Hindu party.
Meanwhile in South Asia
Return To Top January 24, 2003
Czech troops pack up and head home
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay [Abbreviated and partly reworded.]
Spurred by an offer from the visiting Czech Minister of defense than any Czech soldier who wanted could return home, seven Czech troops in Kuwait returned home with him and another 20 are expected to leave. Their ABC unit is deployed till at least May, and the Czech defense ministry says it will replace the returnees with volunteers. While the Czech MOD sees the offer and acceptance as normal, local papers have a different viewpoint.
Military experts greeted the news with amazement.
"It's certainly a unique approach [to troop morale]," said Ian Kemp, news
editor of Jane's Defence Weekly in London.
However, the centre-left government last week had difficulty marshalling the
votes to approve a US request to send 150 extra chemical weapons experts and
support troops to the Gulf.
During a heated debate in parliament, Mr Tvrdik said his family had been
threatened by organised crime groups linked to Iraqi arms procurers.
Fellow ministers said they knew of no such threats.
Return To Top January 24, 2003
Canadian Reservists Out of Training Money
Gordon A. MacKinlay sends us an article by Stephanie Rubec writing in the Edmonton Sun that says Canadian 33rd Brigade Group has told 800 of its 1500 reservists to report every other week instead of weekly because the brigade is running out money and will not be able to afford full training hours till April.
"It would be fiscally irresponsible to go in the red," says a spokesman for the brigade. We at Orbat.com expect this statement will become the basis of many comedy routines. Canada can already barely sustain a battalion group overseas, has almost no available airpower, and is more or less defenseless at sea.
The article says:
Lieut. Bruce Rolston, spokesman for 32 Canadian Brigade Group, which
oversees Toronto-area units, said the Bosnia deployment has sapped many
Ontario reserve units of manpower and cash.
"There's a certain fiscal tightness that there may not have been in previous
years," he said.
"We're looking at a time where there's all kinds of uncertainty of what the
Canadian Forces could be doing from month to month."
Rolston said his brigade cut back on training in past years to avoid a
deficit, but has learned to live within its budget by putting off
specialized training exercises.
"Shutting down services and cutting back on training is a last resort,"
Rolston said. Return To Top January 24, 2003
More on Dr. A.Q Khan, the Pakistan Nuclear program, and Proliferation
Reader Jim Kayne sends the URL for a detailed, lengthy article on the redoubtable Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr. A.Q. Khan, the father of his country’s nuclear program and possibly a godfather to the DPRK nuclear program. Much of the analysis is speculation, because Dr. Khan’s life and times has been surrounded in mystery. He has been ousted from his government position, and while it is quite likely American pressure played a part, its as well to remember that Dr. AQ Khan has many powerful enemies among his own people. The article can be found by clicking here.
Return To Top January 24, 2003
Afghan Army Graduates Fifth Battalion
by Pfc. Christina Carde, US Army News Service, forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
KABUL, Afghanistan -- With weapons in hand and uniforms creased and pressed,
more than 400 new graduates from the 5th Battalion, Afghan National Army,
proudly marched past their officers and dignitaries with a look of fierce
pride in their eyes.
The graduation ceremony Jan. 7 was the fifth since September. The ANA has
graduated more than 1,750 Afghan soldiers with the help of the U.S. Special
Forces and coalition members. Each soldier has completed 10 weeks of basic
training, learned the value of teamwork and is ready to defend Afghanistan,
according to Michael, a Special Forces soldier.
"The training conducted here is much like basic training back in the
states," said Dan, a Special Forces soldier. "The trainees undergo four
weeks of individual movement techniques and basic rifle marksmanship, two
weeks heavy weapons and two weeks collective training including a final
field and live-fire exercise."
Although the training resembles that of the U.S. Army, these soldiers are
much different from a typical American soldier, instructors said. They said
the backgrounds, culture and lifestyles of the Afghan recruits offered many
challenges for the American instructors. The locals had to overcome these
challenges also.
"Because of the close-knit bonds bred by their cultures, most of these
soldiers already knew each other before they got here," said Dan. "This was
a problem at the beginning because many of them are from different tribes
and their initial instinct was to quarrel."
"Getting the trainees to cooperate as a team was difficult because they've
spent their whole lives fighting each other," said Michael. "However, we
tried to show them (that) if two American soldiers of different ethnicities
could get along, so could they. After about four weeks they started to come
together."
"We are very happy to have formed an army where there are no tribes or
ethnicities to set us apart," said Rafillah, squad leader, 3rd Platoon, 3rd
Company, 5th Bn., ANA. "We are all one people now with one common goal - to
defend Afghanistan."
In addition to rival tribes, the people of Afghanistan have suffered from 23
years of war, invasion, and oppression. This was a factor the trainers had
to take into consideration when it came time for weapons training.
"Most American soldiers in basic training have never touched a weapon
before, but most of these trainees have prior combat experience," Michael
said.
They came here with at least a basic knowledge of how to use a weapon," he
explained.
"The trainees range between the ages of 18 and 40 and everyone has seen some
aspect of war," said Dan.
"The older soldiers have fought for warlords and local militia, and the
younger ones grew up around guns and were taught how to use them at a young
age," Dan explained.
Although the trainees had combat experience, they lacked proper guidance and
leadership, instructors said. Along with U.S. Army-style training, the
special forces introduced a U.S. military leader - the noncommissioned
officer.
"Before we took over the training, the only known leaders were officers. In
a combat situation, the officer would be the first to die because he always
placed himself at the front," said Michael. "To solve this problem, we
helped produce NCOs, squad and platoon leaders to handle the soldiers'
training and battle techniques. This way the officers could concentrate on
the big picture."
Even with the American-style training, traditions and uniforms, the familiar
factor of poverty was something the trainees faced on a daily basis.
"The trainees slept in barracks with no heat or running water and used
outdoor latrines made from clay and rock," said Michael.
"They were only issued one gortex jacket to keep warm and a pair of jungle
boots - which are unauthorized on some posts in the states once the
temperatures drop," he added.
With living conditions such as these and daily rigorous training, it may be
easy for a soldier to become discouraged and lack motivation. That wasn't
the case with these trainees.
"Their motivation and drive to succeed was higher than that of American
soldiers I've seen - who live a lot better," said Michael.
After 10 weeks of training, adopting new traditions and making friends with
life-long enemies, the newest soldiers of the ANA proudly marched onto the
graduation field.
Now these Afghan locals are no longer just trainees but soldiers who have
earned respect. In addition, they will earn a salary of $70 U.S. dollars per
month until they advance to officers.
At the end of the ceremony, Rafillah had a few words to say to the people of
Afghanistan.
"I would like to ask the people of Afghanistan, who are in other countries,
to come back home and start their businesses again here to help our economy.
The war is over. It's time to rebuild."
The ANA is presently training its sixth battalion and officials said they
hope to graduate more than 600 within the next two months.
A "Train the Trainer" program is also being implemented to train Afghan
officers and NCOs to completely take over with little U.S. interference. The
overall goal is to create an army over 700,000 strong.
Afghan soldiers know their country is depending on them to fight against
terrorism so Afghanistan can rebuild itself, said Michael. He said the
soldiers consider this as the most important job they can have right now.
(Army News Editor's note: Because of the nature of their work, the full names and
units of the special operations' soldiers have been withheld. Pfc. Christina
Carde is a member of the 11th Public Affairs Detachment.)
Return To Top January 24, 2003
January 23, 2003 Second Attack On Pakistani Gas Pipeline Pakistan’s Daily Jang reports another attack on a gas pipeline, this time disrupting supplies to Baluchistan and Sindh. It says the first attack, which hit two major pipelines to the Punjab and NWFP, was the result of collateral damage during fighting between the Mazari and Bugati tribes, who are traditional rivals. No explanation as yet has been given for the second attack. India Expels 4 Pakistani Diplomatic Staff Pakistan’s Daily Jang says India has expelled four Pakistani diplomatic staffers in the ongoing confrontation between the two countries. Both sides have been alleging harassment of their diplomatic staff. [Neither country pays particular attention to the niceties of the Geneva Convention: even accredited diplomats on both side run the risk of detention and physical beatings and assault during these periodic episodes. Editor] Three Indian Agents Arrested in Karachi Pakistan’s Daily Jang says three Indian agents were arrested in Karachi. They were controlled from the Indian consulate in this important Pakistani city and were preparing to launch terror attacks in the city. Pakistani sources named the controller of the agents and expulsions are anticipated. India acquires Russian-made multi-role helicopters The Press Trust of India reports that India completed induction of 40 Mil-17V helicopters in 2002. This model of the Mil-17 is equipped for attack missions as well as its traditional troop carrier role, and can deliver a variety of weapons including 500 pound bombs. India charges Pakistan Reopens New Terror Camps The Times of India reports that New Delhi alleges Pakistan had reopened terrorist training camps, reversing the shut-down of several camps in 2002 under Indian and US pressure. Special Operations Group in Kashmir Yet to be Disbanded The Indian press reports that the Kashmir Special Operations Group has yet to be disbanded. This group is composed of a mixture of police and former terrorists who were given immunity from normal laws as apply to Indian security forces in internal emergencies. The SOG functioned as bounty hunters, earning cash rewards for hunting terrorists. While their record of eliminating wanted terrorists is impressive, it was achieved amid a considerable abuse of human rights, and disbanding of the group became a priority for the new civilian government in Kashmir.
Return To Top January 23, 2003
N. Korea using China to obtain missile supplies An article by Bill Gertz, writing in the Washington Times, from Military.com. Excerpts. "North Korea also has continued procurement of raw materials and components for its ballistic-missile programs from various foreign sources, especially through North Korean firms based in China," the CIA stated in a recent report to Congress. The public report coincides with other classified intelligence reports obtained in recent weeks indicating that China is also helping North Korea's nuclear program. The issue is a sensitive one for Beijing, as it has publicly called for Pyongyang to cooperate with the international community's demand to freeze its nuclear program. The reports disclosed that a Chinese chemical manufacturer in the seaport of Dalian, near North Korea, supplied Pyongyang with tons of tributyl phosphate, known as TBP. The chemical has civilian purposes, but U.S. intelligence agencies believe it will be used for North Korea's nuclear-arms program. A congressional report on North Korea in 1999 stated that Pyongyang received most of its nuclear infrastructure from countries in the former Soviet Union, "but also has received equipment and know-how from China." The final report of the House Speaker's North Korea Advisory Group said China "remains committed to the survival of the North Korean regime" and would be willing to support Pyongyang's needs for nuclear-power-generating reactor fuel if the United States, South Korea and Japan cut off fuel shipments and stop building two new nuclear reactors, as appears likely to happen. Senior Chinese military leaders in charge of the Chinese military region of Shenyang, located north of the China-North Korea border, continue to have close ties to Pyongyang's military.
Return To Top January 23, 2003
January 22, 2003 Front-line troops disproportionately white, not black
By Dave Moniz and Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY, from Military.com.
WASHINGTON — The American troops likeliest to fight and die in a war against Iraq are disproportionately white, not black, military statistics show — contradicting a belief widely held since the early days of the Vietnam War.
In a little-publicized trend, black recruits have gravitated toward non-combat jobs that provide marketable skills for post-military careers, while white soldiers are over-represented in front-line combat forces.
The tilt toward white combat troops is recognized by many senior commanders and a small group of scholars who study the military.
"If anybody should be complaining about battlefield deaths, it is poor, rural whites," says Charles Moskos, a military sociologist at Northwestern University in Illinois.
When Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., called recently for the return of a military draft, he evoked images of inequality raised during the early years of the Vietnam War, when black soldiers died at rates much greater than their share of the U.S. population.
Though Rangel is right that blacks and lower-income Americans still serve in disproportionate numbers, that fact misses another significant trend. While blacks are 20% of the military — compared with 12% of the U.S. population — they make up a far smaller percentage of troops in combat jobs on the front line.
In a host of high-risk slots — from Army commandos to Navy and Air Force fighter pilots — blacks constitute less than 5% of the force, statistics show.
Blacks, especially in the enlisted ranks, tend to be disproportionately drawn to non-combat fields such as unit administration and communications. They are underrepresented in jobs shooting rifles or dropping bombs.
Examples:
The reasons for the racial divide are unclear, but several theories have emerged, including lingering racism in some quarters of the military and a tendency among black recruits to choose jobs that help them find work in the civilian sector.
Return To Top January 22, 2003
By Mark Thomson of Time Magazine, from Military.com. Excerpts.
High Powered Microwaves, or HPMs, are man-made lightning bolts crammed into cruise missiles. They could be key weapons for targeting Saddam Hussein's stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. HPMs fry the sophisticated computers and electronic gear necessary to produce, protect, store and deliver such agents. The powerful electromagnetic pulses can travel into deeply buried bunkers through ventilation shafts, plumbing and antennas. But unlike conventional explosives, they won't spew deadly agents into the air, where they could poison Iraqi civilians or advancing U.S. troops.
The HPM is a top-secret program, and the Pentagon wants to keep it that way. Senior military officials have dropped hints about a new, classified weapon for Iraq but won't provide details. Still, information about HPMs, first successfully tested in 1999, has trickled out.
HPMs can unleash in a flash as much electrical power—2 billion watts or more—as the Hoover Dam generates in 24 hours. Capacitors aboard the missile discharge an energy pulse—moving at the speed of light and impervious to bad weather—in front of the missile as it nears its target. That pulse can destroy any electronics within 1,000 ft. of the flash by short-circuiting internal electrical connections, thereby wrecking memory chips, ruining computer motherboards and generally screwing up electronic components not built to withstand such powerful surges. It's similar to what can happen to your computer or TV when lightning strikes nearby and a tidal wave of electricity rides in through the wiring.
[The pulses can be calibrated to meet specific needs.] But [HPMs]can cause unintended problems: beyond taking out a tyrant's silicon chips, HPMs could destroy nearby heart pacemakers and other life-critical electrical systems in hospitals or aboard aircraft (that's why the U.S. military is putting them only on long-range cruise missiles). The U.S. used a more primitive form of these weapons—known as soft bombs—against Yugoslavia and in the first Gulf War, when cruise missiles showered miles of thin carbon fibers over electrical facilities, creating massive short circuits that shut down electrical power.
Although the Pentagon prefers not to use experimental weapons on the battlefield, "the world intervenes from time to time," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld says. "And you reach in there and take something out that is still in a developmental stage, and you might use it."
Return To Top January 22, 2003
The Jang of Pakistan reports that a rocket attack against two gas pipelines disrupted supplies to the major province of Punjab and the NWFP. No information is available on the suspects. Officials hope to have the damage repaired within three days.
IRNA of Iran reports from Bhutan that the Thimpu Government is very concerned about Indian seperatists using its territory as sanctuary. Bhutan has been trying to talk the seperatists into leaving. [Bhutan is also expanding its army with assistance and training from India to better deal with the growing ingress of guerilla groups fighting in India's Assam state. Editor]
Even as France hints it will veto any UN resolution authorising force against Iraq, Turkey seems to have relented on the stationing of US troops on its soil. Instead of the 80,000 the US is said to have wanted, Turkey apparently has agreed to 15,000 troops, about a division's worth.
The Washington Post reports that Bin Laden escaped capture at Tora Bora by handing his satellite telephone to a bodyguard who kept making calls as he took a different route. He was captured but it was some time before his importance was recognized. He is at the US detention facility in Cuba and is said not to have broken down, revealing little, and becoming a hero and leader among the other prisoners.
Return To Top January 22, 2003
January 21, 2003 An article by Seymour M. Hersh in the New Yorker of January 20, 2003. Forwarded by Ram Narayanan. Excerpt: please click link for full story.
WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION KNEW ABOUT PAKISTAN AND THE NORTH KOREAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM
Last June, four months before the current crisis over North Korea became public,
the Central Intelligence Agency delivered a comprehensive analysis of North
Korea's nuclear ambitions to President Bush and his top advisers. The document,
known as a National Intelligence Estimate, was classified as Top Secret S.C.I.
(for "sensitive compartmented information"), and its distribution within the
government was tightly restricted. The C.I.A. report made the case that North
Korea had been violating international law—and agreements with South Korea and
the United States—by secretly obtaining the means to produce weapons-grade
uranium.
The document's most politically sensitive information, however, was about
Pakistan. Since 1997, the C.I.A. said, Pakistan had been sharing sophisticated
technology, warhead-design information, and weapons-testing data with the
Pyongyang regime. Pakistan, one of the Bush Administration's important allies in
the war against terrorism, was helping North Korea build the bomb.
In 1985, North Korea signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which led to
the opening of most of its nuclear sites to international inspection. By the
early nineteen-nineties, it became evident to American intelligence agencies and
international inspectors that the North Koreans were reprocessing more spent
fuel than they had declared, and might have separated enough plutonium, a
reactor by-product, to fabricate one or two nuclear weapons. The resulting
diplomatic crisis was resolved when North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, entered
into an agreement with the Clinton Administration to stop the nuclear-weapons
program in return for economic aid and the construction of two light-water
nuclear reactors that, under safeguards, would generate electricity.
Within three years, however, North Korea had begun using a second method to
acquire fissile material. This time, instead of using spent fuel, scientists
were trying to produce weapons-grade uranium from natural uranium—with Pakistani
technology. One American intelligence official, referring to the C.I.A. report,
told me, "It points a clear finger at the Pakistanis. The technical stuff is
crystal clear—not hedged and not ambivalent." Referring to North Korea's
plutonium project in the early nineteen-nineties, he said, "Before, they were
sneaking." Now "it's off the wall. We know they can do a lot more and a lot more
quickly."
Last Paragraph in the Article
One American intelligence official who has attended recent White House meetings
cautioned against relying on the day-to-day Administration statements that
emphasize a quick settlement of the dispute. The public talk of compromise is
being matched by much private talk of high-level vindication. "Bush and Cheney
want that guy's head"—Kim Jong Il's—"on a platter. Don't be distracted by all
this talk about negotiations. There will be negotiations, but they have a plan,
and they are going to get this guy after Iraq. He's their version of Hitler."
Return To Top January 21, 2003
US 4th Infantry [Mechanized] To Deploy
From Globalsecurity.org
Source: III Corps and Fort Hood Press Release
The 4th Infantry Division stationed at Fort Hood and its 3rd Brigade at Fort Carson, Colo., as well as various other supporting units, known collectively as Task Force Ironhorse, have received deployment orders to reposition forces as required to support the President's global war against terrorism.
This repositioning of forces provides increased military capabilities in the ongoing war on terror. Any further employment of those forces deploying in a future combat role is a Presidential decision.
The 4th Infantry Division based at Fort Hood, as well as the various other supporting units have responded to our nation's call from the outset on the war on terror. The units within Task Force Ironhorse have sent units or personnel to such places as Afghanistan, Central Asia, Southwest Asia, Cuba, and Europe. Task Force Ironhorse units are trained and ready to deploy on short notice as required to defend America's interests at home and worldwide.
The 4th Infantry Division, as the headquarters unit for Task Force Ironhorse, is the world's first digitally enhanced heavy division. The division's digital systems add to the warfighting capability of the task force by providing the commander improved situational awareness to employ combat power at the decisive point on the battlefield.
For security reasons, specific numbers of troops deploying and their deployment destination will not be announced at this time, and III Corps and 4th Infantry Division officials will not speculate on future employment of forces.
Return To Top January 21, 2003
Will North Korea Sell Nuclear Weapons?
A Reuters story, abbreviated, with our headline, from Globalsecurity.org
Reuters January 19, 2003
WASHINGTON - North Korea's arms bazaar soon may boast an enticing new product -- a nuclear bomb that U.S. officials fear could be available to the highest bidder.
They say North Korea, through its past arms sales, has shown a willingness to sell just about anything to anyone, and fear that potential customers for a nuclear bomb could include hostile countries or even groups such as al Qaeda.
A U.S. defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: "Is it a potential threat? Yes it is. Is it a likely scenario given where North Korea is now? Probably not. If they crank up production, then the situation changes."
Experts estimate that cash-starved North Korea sells about $500 million annually in weapons to other nations, mostly Scud missiles and Scud missile parts. Its best customers are Iran and Pakistan, experts said, but it also may have sold missiles to Yemen, Egypt, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam.
"Certainly by past experience, we've seen that North Korea has been willing to sell virtually anything that it has produced. It's a country that wants the hard currency. And if they have enough of whatever the (military) system is for their own security, additional ones they'll sell for sure," said Baker Spring, a military analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
Some experts note that while North Korea has sold missiles, there is no evidence that it has sold chemical or biological weapons, which it is thought to have in large quantities.
"I think, to a large degree, they are an arms bazaar," said Joel Wit, a former State Department official who served as the coordinator for the 1994 U.S.-North Korea Agreed Framework, the pact under which North Korea froze and pledged to dismantle its nuclear weapons program in return for receiving 500,000 tons annually of fuel oil and a project to build two nuclear reactors poorly suited for military purposes.
"But it seems even they have drawn a line somewhere, and that has to do with weapons of mass destruction," added Wit, now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
"What will happen over time is that as they accumulate more and more plutonium, maybe more and more weapons in their stockpile, there may be a temptation to sell some of it to others, whether they are countries or even terrorist groups."
North Korea's best-selling items are two versions of the Scud missile: the Scud-B, with a range of about 185 miles, and the Scud-C, with a range of about 340 miles. The Scud is a mobile, ballistic, surface-to-surface missile system originally developed by the Soviets in the mid-1950s. North Korea has sold hundreds of their Scud versions.
Experts said three missiles with longer ranges also are being developed by the North Koreans: the No Dong (about 620 miles); the Taepo Dong-1 (930 miles); and the Taepo Dong-2 (up to about 3,700 miles). Scores of the No Dong and Taepo Dong-1 missiles already may have been deployed by North Korea, and perhaps two dozen No Dongs have been sold to Iran and Pakistan, experts said.
"The big distinction I would draw is, as far as we know, that has all been to state actors. It has not been to the non-state terrorist groups," said Bruce Bennett, military analyst with the RAND Corp. research group.
Return To Top January 21, 2003
January 20, 2003 Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay, an article by Colin Brown and Sean Rayment writing in the Telegraph [Excerpts].
Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, will this week order the full
mobilisation of the 7th Armoured Brigade to the Gulf.
The decision to send another 7,000 troops - on top of the 10,000 already
committed - and more than 120 tanks to the region comes after speculation
about the precise level of Britain's military commitment in the Gulf.
The announcement was expected several weeks ago and the end to the
Government's prevarication is the clearest indication yet that war with Iraq
is now all but inevitable.
The brigade will be composed of two tank regiments, the 2nd Royal Tank
Regiment and the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards, and two armoured infantry
regiments, the Black Watch and the 1st Battalion, the Royal Regiment of
Fusiliers.
It will be supported by artillery, engineers and medics. The Telegraph
understands that about 3,000 forces from the 16 Air Assault Brigade,
composed mainly of paratroopers, will also receive mobilisation orders soon.
It will take about six weeks before the 7th Armoured Brigade is ready to
fight: one week to load the tanks onto ferries, two to three weeks to sail
to the region and another couple of weeks for acclimatisation and in-theatre
training.
"The military now believe that war is inevitable," said one senior officer.
"Very soon Britain will have 20,000 troops in the Gulf and the United States
will have well over 100,000. I can't see them returning to Britain or
America without being involved in some sort of action, whether or not there
is UN backing."
Return To Top January 20, 2003
Are Two of Three US anti-Iraq Warfronts Buckling?
Israel’s defense minister Shaul Mofaz will present to the full cabinet session in Jerusalem his completed plan for meeting the hazards of a US-Iraqi war in the civilian, security and home front sectors. He will tell the ministers that the country is ready for the war.
That is true – as far as the minister’s responsibility goes. However, by the time Israel with American help, wound up its war preparations, two vital bricks showed signs of dropping out of the American war set-up. The damage may turn out to be reparable but, meanwhile, Israel’s war defenses have sprung an unexpected hole.
Jordanian’s monarch Abdullah II has developed cold feet on his armed forces’ role in the US campaign against Iraq, a mere two weeks after Turkey held back permission for US forces to use its bases as staging posts for its invasion of Iraq from the north (as first revealed in DEBKA-Net-Weekly on Jan. 10) – halting the transfer to Turkish bases of American armored divisions,...
[Editor’s Comment: if the US was really planning to send armored divisions through Turkey into Iraq, we may guess that no war till the late fall/early winter was contemplated. There is no infrastructure for heavy US ground forces in Turkey; getting the infrastructure built, the US units established, and the training completed would undoubtedly take many months.]
Saddam’s Pre-War Feints and Maneuvers
Last week’s “discovery” by UN arms inspectors of a dozen empty chemical 122 mm missile warheads at an Iraqi ammunition dump in Ukhaider, 70 miles south of Baghdad, was not the outcome of intelligence but subtle Iraqi manipulation. The UN inspectors were led by the nose to their discovery. DEBKAfile’s military and intelligence sources report this after tracking it down to source.
Wednesday, January 15, US president George W. Bush declared he was sick and tired of Saddam Hussein’s games and deceit – with effect on the US timetable. Hearing this, the Iraqi ruler understood the American president was near his limit and must be calmed down to give Iraq more time to manufacture fresh delays. Iraqi intelligence, a world-class practitioner of deceit, trickery, diversion and disinformation, was instructed to organize 12 empty chemical shells in sealed crates and place them in a military ammunition depot. Double agents planted among the UN arms inspectors’ technical aides, most of them from...
Return To Top January 20, 2003
January 18, 2003 US Military Trainers in Colombia, Hungary
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
US begins training Iraqi opposition in Hungary
By Adam LeBor in Budapest, writing in the London Times [Excerpts].
US ARMY officials have called up the first batch of Iraqi opposition members
in preparation for their arrival at Taszar airbase in southern Hungary.
Hungary, one of Nato's newest members, is allowing up to 3,000 Iraqi
opposition members to be trained at Taszar, a US airbase 200km south of
Budapest. Local officials said that preparations were on course for the
Iraqis to arrive on or after January 25.
Blanketed in snow, buffeted by a freezing winter wind, the small Hungarian
town of Taszar may seem an unlikely base from which to attempt to topple
Saddam. But frantic construction is under way at the base, where 150 US
military police arrived this month. Three huge tents have been put up to
house the Iraqis, while piles of bricks and wood are ready for further
facilities.
The anti-Saddam forces are being screened for pro- Saddam agents.
One senior Hungarian official told The Times: "We are training people that
will help the Allied forces. They will be scouts, guides, liaison officers
and they will go in with US and British troops."
After completing their training in Hungary, the general said that the
volunteers would be taken to an intermediate staging base before possible
deployment in Iraq. Locations were being finalised, he said.
Taszar has been used by the US military since December 1995, when it
transformed the Hungarian army and air force base into a logistics post for
the Nato-led peacekeeping operation in Bosnia.
Allowing the US to use Taszar was a bold decision by the Hungarian
Government, said the local official. "Hungary is making a huge contribution
to the Iraqi operation by saying yes to this training. This is a quality
contribution and not without risks. You cannot be more visible than by
training the opposition so let's not underestimate the magnitude of this."
Debka Says US Chooses Talibani To Head Iraq
One major cause of the breakdown of Turkish-US understandings for the Iraq war is the surprise candidate the Bush team is promoting to rule post-war Baghdad: Jalal Talabani, 69-year old chief of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.
Officials in Washington still declare they have not yet found a suitable Iraqi candidate to rule the country after Saddam Hussein’s ouster. They say they are still looking for a unifying figure of national stature on the Afghan Hamid Karzai model. However, The US president’s adviser on Iraqi affairs, Zalmy, Khalil-Zad, has begun quietly sending messengers out to canvass opinion on the Talabani candidacy for prime minister or head of state in a democratized Iraq, after the interim stabilization period. This period, during which the US military commander together with a civilian official will run government...
U.S. Special Forces Arrive in Colombia
Article by Vanessa Arrington of the Associated Press [Article has been abbreviated].
BOGOTA, Colombia -- Dozens of U.S. Green Berets flew in to a Colombian war
zone this week to train Colombian army troops to protect a key oil pipeline
from rebel attacks, a U.S. official said Thursday.
The arrival of the members of the 7th Special Forces Group marks a turning
point in U.S. involvement in Colombia's civil war. Previously, U.S. military
aid and training was restricted largely to battling cocaine production,
which rebels and rival paramilitary gunmen profit from, fueling the war.
But the Bush administration, with approval from the U.S. Congress, has
decided the U.S. military assistance should expand into helping Colombia
combat the rebels.
About 60 U.S. trainers began arriving earlier this week, joining about 10
others already stationed in Arauca state on Colombia's eastern border with
Venezuela, said the U.S. official, speaking on customary condition of
anonymity.
The troops - who are settling in to military
barracks on Colombian army bases throughout Arauca state - are expected to
begin training at the end of the month, he said.
Leftist rebels are battling the government in Arauca, an area of grassy
plains and oilfields. The rebels regularly bomb the pipeline and have
stepped up their attacks on military and police targets in recent weeks.
The members of U.S. troops, based at Fort Bragg, N.C., are to train two
Colombian army brigades that protect an oil pipeline that carries oil for
Los Angeles-based Occidental Petroleum across northern Colombia to a seaside
depot.
U.S. special forces have already trained a 2,000-member Colombian army
counternarcotics brigade as part of almost US$2 billion in mostly military
aid the United States has given Colombia over the past three years.
Return To Top January 18, 2003
Muslim cleric faces expulsion from UK mosque
LONDON: Firebrand Muslim cleric Abu Hamza faces expulsion from the north London mosque where he is known for preaching a radical brand of anti-Western Islam, a spokesman for Britain's Charity Commission said on Friday.
The commission, which regulates places of worship in Britain, said it had given the 45-year-old cleric until midnight on Monday to refute charges against him. It will then make a decision within several weeks on whether to ban him from preaching at the mosque.
The commission accuses Hamza of giving sermons "of an extreme and political nature" at prayer meetings at the mosque in Finsbury Park. The cleric is also accused of using a place of worship to "facilitate activities organised by a non-charitable political organisation" such as Al-Muhajirun, or the Supporters of Sharia, which is directly linked to Hamza. Egyptian-born Hamza, who intends to go on preaching, told AFP the matter was in the hands of his lawyers. The case was "politically motivated", he said and added "The government is trying to do it through the back door."
Return To Top January 18, 2003
Like al-Qaeda, Lashkar too goes global NEW DELHI: The Pakistan based Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist outfit is going global like the al-Qaeda. According to government sources, like the al-Qaeda, the Lashkar too is setting up cells in several countries, including those in Europe. Intelligence agencies recently discovered the existence of Lashkar units in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and even in some European countries. The presence of the Lashkar in West Asia came to light with the arrest of an Indian expatriate from Kuwait, Shahid Ahmed Bakshi. He hailed from Ahmedabad and was arrested on August 28 last year. He was arrested by the Delhi police with several kg of RDX, some weapons and material for making bombs. At a Lashkar convention held in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (POK) on December 15 and 16, ISI officials, who too participated, suggested the formation of a special squad, in which non-Asians were to be recruited, for carrying out the assassination of some well known political personalities. "This could mean that the squad could enlist a French, British or even a US national for this purpose to avoid suspicion," a senior government official told Times News Network on condition of anonymity. Incidentally, France had recently deported a suspected Lashkar man to Pakistan. The official said the pattern of the Laskar's growth is similar to that of al-Qaeda which spread from Saudi Arabia to become the most dreaded terrorist network with cells all over the world. One of the primary targets of the newly formed Lashkar squad includes Jammu and Kashmir's law and finance minister Muzaffar Beg. The Lashkar sees him as its main enemy in Kashmir because it was Beg who was instrumental in forging the alliance between the Mufti Mohammad Sayeed-led People's Democratic Party (PDP) and the Congress after the elections.
Return To Top January 18, 2003
January 17, 2003 The Reluctant Hawk
The skeptical case for regime change in Iraq
An article by Joshua Micah Marshall in the Washington Monthly, forwarded by Jim Kayne.
[Editor’s note. We like this article because it gives a reasonable argument for why President Saddam Hussein really is dangerous, and why neither deterrence nor containment will work. It answers many questions that non-Americans like your editor tend to raise in discussions with American hard liners. Right now your editor’s view is that the time for discussion has passed, and it has to be “my country right or wrong”. He is quite familiar with all the arguments for why this is an old-fashioned approach, and yes, it did get us into the Vietnam War etc etc and it’s patriotic to dissent if you feel the President is wrong etc etc. But that’s what makes America what it is, no? You can say what you believe and I can say what I believe. We’re free to say it, and we don’t have to kill each other if we don’t agree.]
Late last Spring, I asked one of Washington's more notable Iraq hawks, Danielle Pletka, her opinion of Ken Pollack. "Oh, Ken 'my-mind-has-chang-ed-so-often' Pollack?" she zinged back with satisfied ridicule. Pletka has a flair for the sound bite. But behind that barb lies a tale. From 1992 until earlier this year, Pletka was Jesse Helms's chief senior professional staff member for Near East and South Asia on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. In that role, she was one of the key players using any means necessary to press a deeply reluctant Clinton administration to adopt the policy of "regime change" for Iraq. During the 1990s, Iraq cut through the surface of American political life only at those occasional moments when the Iraqis would buck some demand and the United States would lob over a few cruise missiles to knock them back into line. Behind the scenes, however, especially in the latter part of the decade, Iraq policy became a virtually nonstop foreign policy street fight, pitting hawkish congressional staffers like Pletka and other out-of-government regime-change crusaders against administration officials like Pollack, who was National Security Council director for Persian Gulf affairs from 1999 to 2001.
Through tours at the CIA, the NSC, National Defense University, and back at the NSC again, Pollack developed a reputation as a hawk--by Clinton administration standards--and as a steady opponent of the Iraq hawks' efforts to shove American policy behind Iraqi opposition leaders who would, they claimed, overthrow Saddam through some hybrid of an insurrection and a coup. The target of Pletka's barb was an article Pollack wrote in the March/April 2002 issue of Foreign Affairs in which he announced that the United States should, after all, invade Iraq to settle the Saddam problem once and for all. To the hawks who had been crusading for "regime change" for years, Pollack was simply shifting positions to suit the changing guard in George W.'s Washington. Not a few of his former Clinton administration colleagues agreed. In truth, Pollack's change was not so stark as his critics alleged, since he still strenuously opposed the Bay-of-Pigs-style overthrow that the hawks supported. The calculus of domestic political support, moreover, had changed dramatically after September 11. But the article played a key role in making a military solution to the Iraq problem respectable within the nation's foreign policy establishment.
The Threatening Storm is Pollack's follow-up to and expansion of that article, in which he presents a thoroughgoing case for invading Iraq in the context of a detailed history of U.S.-Iraq relations stretching back some 30 years. Pollack has spent virtually his entire professional life wrestling with the problem of Iraq. (In the summer of 1990, for instance, he was a junior CIA analyst dashing off prescient, but largely disregarded, memos predicting that Saddam Hussein would invade Kuwait.) And he manages to use this personal knowledge without abusing it, resisting the temptation to load the book with too many anecdotes about his own exploits in the D.C.-Iraq wars or to settle too many scores, of which there are no doubt many. Running almost 400 pages, the final product could have done with a more rigorous edit. There is a lot of repetition, and the writing often falls short of elegance. Still, the book is not intended as a work of literary nonfiction, but as an effort to provide a complete treatment of a critical question of national security policy. By that measure, it's an indisputable success. Pollack manages to eschew the cant, stupidity, and obfuscation which are the common currency of much of the current public debate over Iraq policy and has produced one of the key books--probably the key book--for anyone trying to grapple with the Iraq question.
Nuclear Hinter
For Pollack, the "threatening storm" isn't a sudden crisis. He expresses little fear that Saddam will make any serious trouble in the near future or that he'll actually threaten the United States proper for some time to come. This is a different kind of argument. Pollack sketches out a series of intersecting trends that, he argues, will almost certainly make Saddam into a very big threat in the near future. He further argues that there is really no good way to prevent that from happening short of a military overthrow of the current regime. And he makes a pretty convincing case.
The essence of the problem is straightforward. Iraq sits astride the chokepoint of the world economy, the oil-rich Middle East. Saddam has a long history of aggression, brutality, and, most important, ill-considered and reckless actions. So long as he has only conventional weapons we can overawe him with our armed forces and clobber him back into line if he misbehaves. Once he gets nuclear weapons, though, everything will change. And there is little doubt that, left to his own devices, he will acquire them in the not-too-distant future. (One theme running through this book is Pollack's belief--no doubt accurate--that nuclear weapons are the real issue, with chemicals and bioweapons running several laps behind. Frightening as they are, it is simply very difficult to kill large numbers of people with chemical or biological weapons.)
The problem isn't that Saddam will just start tossing off nukes for the hell of it. Readers will find none of the deception and hysteria most Iraq hawks pepper their arguments with in public debate. There's no talk about nuclear blackmail over American cities, and little speculation about al Qaeda-Saddam alliances. The problem, Pollack explains, is Saddam's dangerously dysfunctional relationship with the outside world, one likely to grow infinitely worse if he gets the bomb. Saddam is often portrayed as shrewd and wily--and in certain contexts he is. But he's more of a serial self-deceiver, a strongman from the provinces surrounded by tremulous yes-men who fear giving him bad news. As a result, he has a history of wild miscalculation, of running risks that are likely far greater than even he imagined. In 1980, for instance, he tried to grab some land from Iran, a bigger neighbor. He wound up losing a million troops, and gaining not an inch of new territory. Pollack also reveals that, according to our best intelligence, Saddam assumed that when he invaded Kuwait, America would respond militarily. He just figured he could beat us.
Were he to get his hands on nuclear weapons, Saddam would likely resume his quest to become the hegemon of the Persian Gulf. Only now he'd be operating under his own nuclear umbrella, believing--not without some justification--that his nukes would deter us. Of course, we have more nukes than he would have. So, in theory, this ought to allow us to deter his aggression. Indeed, defenders of this deterrence strategy note that Saddam didn't use chemical or biological weapons during the Gulf War after the Bush administration hinted that were he to do so the United States would respond with nuclear weapons.
It's easy to say that Saddam won't do this or that because if he did we'd "nuke" him, or "exterminate" him, or "annihilate" him, or whatever. But in practice, would we really drop the big one on Iraq? Saddam has some reason to think we might not. Pollack reveals that during the Gulf War the Bush administration also hinted at a nuclear response if Saddam blew up Kuwaiti oil fields. Saddam ignored the threat, torched the fields, and suffered no nuclear retaliation. Say he calls our bluff again and blows up Riyadh or perhaps a few Saudi oil fields. Deterrence theory suggests that we should respond by vaporizing Baghdad. But that city has a population of some 5 million. Will an American president really sign off on an attack that might well kill in a single blow nearly as many men, women, and children as died in the Holocaust? More to the point, do we ever want an American president to face that choice?
Brass Action
If deterrence is unlikely to work against Saddam, what about the alternative policy that many critics of regime change advocate: containment? After all, containment has kept Saddam from any major mischief for a decade. Couldn't we just run out the clock and wait for the guy to die? The answer, Pollack argues--again persuasively--is no. To begin with, no American administration ever chose the containment policy. Its pillars--economic sanctions, inspections, no-fly zones and the rest--were hastily assembled in the immediate aftermath of the Gulf War with the assumption that Saddam's regime could not last long and would in any case abide by U.N. disarmament resolutions. When it became clear that neither assumption was true, bureaucrats and mid-level political appointees--first under Bush senior and then under Clinton--began cob-bling these pieces together into a policy that would keep Iraq on ice until something better came along. Only nothing ever did. And though containment did keep Saddam in the proverbial box for many years, over time it became a running wound, one that Saddam could tolerate far better than we.
Economic sanctions, the noose around Saddam's throat, have been getting looser for years--in part due to progressive adjustments by the United Nations, in part to the increasingly open flouting of the sanctions by Iraq's neighbors. Every year the burden of sanctions weighs lighter on Saddam--the regime gets to sell more oil for humanitarian and other non-military purposes. As the flow of revenue rises, more can be skimmed off for military objectives. And every year the diplomatic capital we must expend to keep the sanctions in place grows. The Muslim world blames us for the civilian deaths, the images of dying babies--even if these tragedies are mainly due to Saddam's manipulation of sanctions rather than the sanctions themselves. Similarly, we pay a heavy price for the garrisons that we maintain in the region to keep Iraq contained. One needn't be an Osama bin Laden appeaser to recognize that the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia has been a major rallying cry for al Qaeda recruitment. All told, if Saddam's in a box, we're in there with him. Yes, war against Iraq would be violent, destructive, and destabilizing. What supporters of containment often ignore is that their policy has quite similar results--just spread out over time. And for all its geopolitical costs, Pollack argues, containment still probably won't keep Saddam from eventually obtaining nuclear warheads. Which of course brings us back to unworkable deterrence.
Saddam and Gomorrah
War hawks in the press have embraced Pollack's book for its thorough dismantling of the policy of equivocation and postponement which the United States long pursued and which he himself once, albeit perhaps grudgingly, endorsed. He actually opposes, for instance, the entire effort to take one more crack at inspections, even if only as a tactical prelude to war. Pollack argues, with some persuasiveness, that inspections are simply a losing game since Saddam can flip back and forth between compliance and obstruction far more quickly than we can mobilize a credible threat to overthrow his regime. If today, for instance, we build up a massive 200,000- to 300,000-man force on his borders Saddam can comply with inspections for, say, six months or a year. But it would be extremely onerous for us in military, diplomatic, and economic terms to keep such a force in place for that long. Probably impossible. Eventually, the United States would have to stand down its forces and at that point the same old cat-and-mouse game would resume--no doubt, only to be followed in turn by more build-ups and more compliance and then more draw downs and more obstruction. Eventually, the United States would have to say, "Time's up," and invade, whether or not Iraq began another period of compliance. So why, Pollack asks, not just do it now?
The answer, as recent weeks seem to have shown, is that we have interests beyond the Middle East which make it worth going through the old cat-and-mouse game one more time. The complexities of getting the U.N. Security Council on board--at least in acquiescence to, if not in support of--U.S. policy, securing the same from our NATO allies, and giving international law its due if not being subservient to it, all argue in favor of giving sanctions one more try even if we know Saddam will just be up to his old tricks.
But if Pollack's endorsement of the necessity of regime change by force is congenial to conservatives, the book also bristles with warnings about, and contempt for, the slapdash and ill-considered way most of the Iraq hawks want to prosecute the coming war. Pollack shares the fears of most of America's uniformed military that the current administration will somehow try to effect regime change on the cheap, winging it with some mix of airpower, special forces, and opposition militias. Doing so, the brass believes, would probably produce more American combat casualties than would be the case if we went in with overwhelming force. Yes, a lighter, faster strike might succeed, as it did in Afghanistan. But it might not. And in the time it took to succeed, or more likely to fail, the violence and commotion might push our allies' governments to the breaking point or beyond.
Most of our moderate Arab allies share that fear. One of Pollack's most noteworthy claims is that they would actually prefer that we invade Iraq and settle the whole matter once and for all--at least after the current round of Israeli-Palestinian bloodletting slows to a tolerable level. Their key concern is that the United States do it quickly, decisively, and without leaving a doubt. (One often hears such things from Middle East experts--what Arab leaders really say to them in private as opposed to what they say publicly. Unless you're one of the select group of people who have frequent heart-to-heart talks with high-ranking Arab government ministers, you just have to take the person's word for it.) Why are the Arabs so keen on our using overwhelming military force to do the job? Because anything less risks failure, or at least a long, more drawn-out conflict, either of which could destabilize their regimes. One issue that never gets quite enough attention in this book is the fact that many of the supporters of war in the current administration don't really care how destabilizing a strike against Iraq would be. They are, at heart, revisionists who would like to roll the dice again and come up with an entirely new Middle East, one in which many of our allies' governments wouldn't exist at all. That's clearly a view Pollack doesn't share.
A test of the current public debate over Iraq will be whether Pollack's book is received as just another endorsement of war or a much more complicated critique of the Bush administration's approach toward this war, the Middle East, and foreign and security policy in general. The current public discussion on Iraq is largely between Iraq-hawks in and outside the administration--many of whom are simply hotheads and borderline cranks--and opponents (mostly Democrats) who are hesitant to openly oppose the war and so instead seem inclined to equivocate--perhaps permanently--in the face of it. Pollack's views represent a realistic, sensible, and tough middle ground. One need not favor war to occupy that position: Pollack provides enough depth of detail and countervailing arguments to construct a case for something other than war, or at least contingent alternatives short of war, like demanding truly unfettered and intensive inspections and removal of prohibited materials under the threat of immediate and overwhelming force. In one revealing passage, Pollack tells readers about his own surprise and momentary disbelief that he is actually endorsing the invasion-first policy he proposes, but says he cannot see another viable alternative. Democrats and others who oppose the course the Bush administration has taken would do well to sit down with this book's hard reasoning and wrestle with it. After reading it, it would be hard for any sensible person not to think to themselves, "There must be some other solution." But, like Pollack, you may be hard-pressed to find one.
Return To Top January 17, 2003
By Christopher Lingle, writing in the Wall Street Journal, forwarded by Ram Narayanan.
Pundits and policy-wallahs in New Delhi engage in a great deal of teeth-gnashing
over the fact that while the economies of India and China were roughly the same
size in the 1950s and 1960s, China's market reforms since the 1970s have pushed
it well out in front. This "India-China gap" reflects Beijing's greater ability
to expand exports and attract direct foreign investments. Measured in terms of
purchasing-power parity, China now ranks as the world's second-largest economy.
India trails at No. 4.
Despite the record of the recent past, there is reason to believe that the
economic gap between these rivals will diminish. On the one hand, India may
advance in relative terms without undertaking serious reforms due to China's
impending failures. China's storied growth is likely to falter under the threat
of a massive default of the banking system or from political pressures brought
about by the restructuring of state enterprises. On the other hand, Indian
leaders can move their own economy forward by undertaking meaningful and
aggressive reform. Even though recent governments have dubious track records on
economic reform, there is hope that a perception of India's numerous advantages
will inspire more timely action. India scores well in the area of macroeconomic
conditions, where restrained monetary expansion has brought inflation to
manageable levels. Meanwhile, China's battle with price instability has seen
swings from high inflation in the mid-1990s to a troubling bout of deflation.
An area that offers great promise for economic growth in India involves
labour-market reforms that would allow companies to use contract labour. And
those with fewer than 300 employees may be able to hire and fire without
consulting government departments -- though the original plan for companies with
up to 1,000 workers would be better.
Although New Delhi has not kept to its schedule for privatizing state-owned
assets, it is beginning to show progress. For example, along with other telecoms
reform, the private Tata group bought a controlling interest in telecoms service
provider VSNL. A quasi-divestment involved sale of 33.6% of IBP, a petrol
retailer with an extensive network of pumping stations, to Indian Oil Corp.,
another public-sector company. After a three-month delay because of objections
from the oil and defence ministries, the planned sale of Hindustan Petroleum and
Bharat Petroleum, the nation's second-and third-biggest oil refiners, is back on
track.
While India suffers from a crumbling physical infrastructure and an inflexible
labour regime, it has numerous (potential and unexploited) advantages over its
constant rival. Plans are well under way to improve upon an established
transportation network, including development of a nationwide motorway system to
connect all of India's commercial centres. By contrast, China must develop much
of its physical infrastructure from scratch. Although impressive gains have been
made in some urban areas, Beijing has not been able to oversee the development
of a national network that connects its far-flung commercial markets.
Perhaps China's biggest disadvantage relative to India is in terms of its
"institutional infrastructure." Although the Indian legal system is far from
perfect, it is commonly understood that the role of laws and the courts is to
protect individuals from abuses of power. Laws in China are generally used as
instruments of state control over individuals and to direct their actions. This
brings up India's putative disadvantage in having a democracy with fractious and
parlous partisanship. Delays in action may come as dirty political laundry is
aired in the lively and free media. As it is, China's excessive authoritarianism
and obsession with state power and control, along with its controlled media,
stifles settlement of contentious issues. Left to simmer unabated, these
problems invite reactions that include widespread economic failure or rioting
and other expressions of civil discord that have become increasingly common.
Beijing has awakened a sleeping dragon and harnessed it to boost China's
economy. But unless the political aspirations of this fire-breathing beast are
fulfilled, it threatens to consume the communist leadership to end its grip on
power. As for India, the tendency of its economy to lag behind is not due to its
vibrant democracy. Instead, India suffers from too little economic liberalism
and too many government interventions based upon misguided socialist precepts.
The good news for Indians is that these ills can be more readily fixed than
Chinas democratic and judicial deficits.
Return To Top January 17, 2003
January 16, 2003 An article by Ralph Peters, a retired US Army officer, in the Wall Street Journal, forwarded by Ram Narayanan.
[Editor’s note. Reading the first few lines of this article, one might think it is yet another case of Pakistan-bashing. Actually, this is the best analysis of Pakistan we’ve read since September 11, 2001. Ralph Peters clearly not just understands the complexity of modern-day Pakistan, he has analyzed, with insight and sympathy, President Musharraf’s constraints in supporting the US. Your editor, for one, is tired of Americans – and Indians, too – who look at Pakistan through a monochrome lens. Your editor has called, over a period of 32 years, for the reunification of India by any means necessary – he does not accept Partition as legal. If, however, one says that Pakistan is a sovereign country – and both Washington and New Delhi say it is – there is no point in beating up Pakistan for its failure to serve Washington’s or Delhi’s interests at the cost of its own interests. Mr. Peter’s explains lucidly what are the points of divergence.]
Whenever a voice on the airwaves generalizes about Pakistan, I want to ask,
"Which Pakistan do you mean?" Beyond the facade of a flag and customs officers
at major airports, there is no integral, unified state behind the name. Does the
pundit mean the feudal territories east of the Indus river, which resemble 15th
century England with electricity? Or the tribal lands to the west, where the
blood feuds and clan rule of medieval Scotland are supercharged by religious
ferocity?
Does the Pentagon spokesperson mean the mega-city of Karachi, which the
government cannot rule firmly, or the frontier settlements where Islamabad does
not even pretend to rule, deferring to tribal elders? Mughal Pakistan yearning
for the "liberation" of Kashmir, or Pathan Pakistan dreaming of a Pukhtunistan
between Kabul and Peshawar? Mohajir or Baluch Pakistan? Or Islamic Pakistan,
blaming unbelievers for its self-inflicted failures?
Today's Pakistan is a military pretending its sponsor is a functioning state.
The government shows little sense of responsibility for the welfare of the man
on the street or the woman in the field. Pakistani identity succumbs when
tribal, family, ethnic or regional rivalries come into play. The adjective
"lawless" often is used to describe the vast Northwest Frontier Province
adjoining Afghanistan. Yet that territory may be the strictest rule-of-law
portion of the country -- although the law is not one of ratified constitutions,
but of Pukhtunwali, of the tribe, based upon religion and cultural traditions
immune to modernity. Any foreign businessman can attest that the "lawless" parts
of Pakistan are those most evidently under control of the government.
The contradictions compound. As a firm believer in democracy and the rule of
law, I nonetheless recognize that military government is the best, if feeble,
hope for keeping Pakistan together and making any progress at all. Even the most
nationalistic Pakistanis will tell you that the civilian politicians pandered to
cancerous extremists and ignored the law whenever they could not exploit it to
family advantage.
Which leaves us with Pervez Musharraf, a Hamlet in khaki, as Pakistan's head of
state.
Gen. Musharraf is, without question, a patriot. Those who know him describe him
as a dutiful soldier, physically brave, conscientious and honest by local
standards -- but a man of limited vision. And that vision focuses obsessively on
the reunification of Kashmir. Since the events of 9/11 returned America's
attentions to Pakistan, Gen. Musharraf consistently has chosen expedient fixes,
opting for the tactical solutions natural to the field soldier. But he has left
Pakistan in a strategic muddle as he and his paladins attempt to placate the
U.S. in its war against terrorism, while hesitating to pursue the bold actions
against fanatics and renegades necessary if the state is ever to grow healthy --
not least because the extremists have been fervent allies on the Kashmir issue.
Gen. Musharraf has tried to have it both ways -- postponing internal and
external confrontations, but moving Pakistan no closer to enduring solutions.
The U.S. is far from blameless. Washington simply turned its back on Pakistan
after the Russians left Afghanistan, exacerbating problems American policies had
deepened: metastasizing extremism, endemic corruption, and a casual availability
of weapons that would make the NRA swoon. Pakistan responded to Washington's
desertion by attempting to create strategic depth for its endless crisis with
India by backing the Taliban regime and its now-notorious consorts in
Afghanistan.
After 9/11, Gen. Musharraf's best chance was to recognize that Islamabad's
Afghan policy had failed dangerously and to turn his back resolutely on those
who had designed it. He and his supporters needed to purge the extremist
elements that had crowded into the Inter Services Intelligence agency and, to a
lesser extent, the military. Instead, Gen. Musharraf played musical chairs at
the top, while leaving the radicalized field structures largely intact. He now
heads an internally divided government, in which some elements cooperate
impressively with American counterparts, while others work to protect violent
extremists and preserve terrorist networks.
Despite his indefatigable sense of duty, the demands of his position have been
too much for Gen. Musharraf. His recent nuclear tantrums vis-à-vis India are not
evidence of a bloodthirsty spirit, but of the pressures of trying to serve too
many demanding constituencies without a coherent strategy -- beyond threatening
an enormous, far-more-powerful neighbor with devastation.
Meanwhile, the military, the ISI, and the rest of the government are torn
between the very human anxiety to back the ultimate winner and loyalties to the
state, to the institutional military, to self-perpetuating bureaucracies, to
friends and allies hunted by America, to family and tribe, and to competing
visions of Islam.
Could the Pakistani government do more in the war against terror? Certainly. But
the military is terrified of breaking the long-standing patterns of doing
business that have allowed the pretences of a state to continue. The military
could move forcefully into the Northwest Frontier Province and Baluchistan, but
it does not see the risk of casualties and bloody rebellion as worth taking just
to please America's passing fancy. Pakistanis remember all too well that the
U.S. walked away from them before.
East of the Indus, the government is willing to pursue known terrorists --
especially if they are not Pakistani nationals. But it has been unwilling to
take a stand against the organized domestic extremists whose avowed goal is to
remake Pakistan as a strict Islamic state and who sponsor violence to achieve
their ends. All the while the mirage of a "liberated" Kashmir blinds Pakistan's
leadership to the country's rational self-interest.
At present, Washington has no choice but to work -- carefully -- with Gen.
Musharraf, a head of state who insists on a sovereignty he cannot enforce over
territory that continues to harbor both international terrorists and Afghan
renegades. There are no better options available to Washington than continuing
to pressure the Pakistani government behind closed doors, while avoiding any
public humiliation of a leader who, however imperfect, remains preferable to any
known alternatives. On the crucial issue of the hot pursuit of terrorists across
the Afghan border into Pakistan, the U.S. must not be deterred, but must go to
all possible lengths to maintain public deniability.
Perhaps the best for which we can hope is that Pakistan will continue to muddle
through, never quite collapsing. Incremental progress against Pakistan-based
terrorists may be the best level of cooperation we realistically can expect,
given the indecisive nature of the Musharraf regime. Increasingly, Pakistan
looks like a problem that can only be contained, not solved. Meanwhile, the
long-term strategic and economic interests of the U.S. lie across the border in
India and we must manage our engagement on the subcontinent artfully. While the
U.S. should endeavor to defuse nuclear confrontations, it must avoid any
involvement in the insoluble Kashmir issue, in which an honest broker would
merely alienate both parties. Finally, Washington must plan for various
scenarios were the current government in Islamabad to fall, if Gen. Musharraf
were to be assassinated, or, the worst case, if hostilities were to break out
between India and Pakistan.
In Gen. Musharraf, the U.S. is bound to a Hamlet, a man torn between action and
inaction. We cannot exit the stage, but we should avoid too close an embrace of
the leading actor.
Return To Top January 16, 2003
An article by Luke Harding, forwarded by Gordon A. McKinlay, original source unknown.
It is Asia's last great forgotten insurgency. For more than half a century,
the Nagas who live in north-east India and Burma have been waging their own
lonely struggle for an independent state. [Editor’s note: well, not really – what about the Karens of Burma/Mayanmar?.]
In the jungles and hills of Nagaland, and in remote green valleys dotted
with traditional stone villages, groups of Naga rebels have fought an on-off
guerrilla war against India.
It has been a doomed campaign. The Naga people were forcibly absorbed into
India in 1947, when the British - who had fought their own colonial battles
with the head-hunting Naga tribes - pulled out. They have been unhappy with
their lot ever since.
Fighting with Indian troops first broke out in 1954. In the long, obscure
and costly guerrilla campaign that followed, more than 200,000 Nagas have
been killed, rebels say.
The world has not really noticed, nor has it cared much. But over the
weekend Naga rebel leaders held peace talks in Delhi with India's prime
minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.
Emerging from the negotiations, the first on Indian soil for 37 years, the
Naga leader Thuingaleng Muivah, declared: "The war is over. We praise the
government of India.
"There is a much better understanding on their part," Mr Muivah added.
There is no doubt that the talks, and the ensuing conciliatory rhetoric,
mark an historic turning point in relations between the Naga leadership and
the Indian state. But several questions remain unanswered: not least whether
a greater Nagaland is now on the cards.
There are some three and a half million Nagas. But they don't all live in
Nagaland, the narrow strip of mountain territory next to the border with
Burma. Instead, large numbers of Nagas are settled in the neighbouring
states of Manipur, Arunachel Pradesh and Assam. They also live in eastern
Burma's Kachin and Sagaing districts, where they are a downtrodden and
persecuted minority.
But it is from Manipur that the fiercest opposition to the idea of a greater
Nagland has come, with widespread riots and strikes last week. The state
does not want any of its territory lopped off.
"There would be more turmoil than peace in the region if Delhi tries to
appease the council by agreeing to a Greater Nagaland," Manipur's chief
minister, Okram Ibobi Singh, warned.
A lasting political solution to the Naga problem faces other obstacles too.
The dominant separatist Naga faction, the National Socialist Council of
Nagaland (NSCM), led by Mr Muivah and Isak Chishi Swu, has clearly given up
on armed struggle. But other Naga militant groups remain opposed to any
peace deal with Delhi, and the movement is horribly split.
Across the north-east, meanwhile, many other different ethnic insurgencies
continue to rage. India's influential Hindu newspaper today welcomed the
Naga peace process, but warned that the prospect of a greater Nagaland could
provoke even more turmoil.
The real test comes in February, when elections in Nagaland are due to be
held. The NSCM has traditionally boycotted the polls, but last week said for
the first time it supported the election.
In the meantime, tourists are now welcome to visit Nagaland. For most of the
past half century, the remote region with its dense but virtually bird-less
jungles (the birds have all been eaten) has been forbidden to foreigners.
Now, though, visitors can go and inspect the tranquil second world war
cemetery in Kohima, where the Japanese invasion of India was halted - at
huge human cost - in April 1944. The British discovered that the Nagas were
invaluable allies who fought ferociously against the Japanese. Since then,
though, the Nagas feel they have been betrayed and forgotten by the former
colonial power. They have been.
Return To Top January 16, 2003
Masters of Suicide Bombing: Tamil Guerrillas
An article by Amy Waldman, forwarded by Gordon A Mackinlay, original source unknown.
Inside the Kantharuban Arivuchcholai orphanage, which
is set in a clearing hacked from the jungle's oppressive vegetation, sits a
small painted hut, a mini-museum of sorts.
Inside it is a picture of Kantharuban, who blew himself up in 1991. There is
a picture of Captain Millar, who blew himself up in 1987. There is a picture
of 12 cadres of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam who swallowed cyanide
capsules after capture by Indian troops in 1987.
Eleven-year-old Rajani, who calls the orphanage home, knows them all. He
knows that Kantharuban, an orphan like him, asked that the home be founded.
Captain Millar, Rajani said, was "the first Black Tiger," a member of the
special suicide unit of the rebels, who have been fighting for a homeland
for the Tamil ethnic minority in Sri Lanka for two decades.
"They go in sea and on land in black robes," he said, proud of his
knowledge. "They will go and jam themselves against anything."
When Captain Millar plowed a truck full of explosives into an army camp in
July 1987, 40 soldiers died, along with the captain, and a culture was born.
It has elevated the suicide attack to the ultimate commitment to the
movement.
The Tigers did not invent the suicide attack, but they proved the tactic to
be so unnerving and effective for a vastly outmanned fighting force that
their methods were studied and copied, notably in the Middle East.
"Of all the suicide-capable terrorist groups we have studied, they are the
most ruthless, the most disciplined," said Rohan Gunaratna, a research
fellow at the Center for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at
the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. He said the group was responsible
for more than half of the suicide attacks carried out worldwide.
In the 15 years since Captain Millar's attack, starting before the tactic
was widely used in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict or by the Al Qaeda
pilots who rammed passenger planes into two of the world's tallest buildings,
the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam became the world's foremost suicide
bombers, sending out about 220 attackers in all.
Until Sept. 11, "they were the deadliest terror organization in the world,"
one American official said. They used men, women, children and animals;
boats, trucks and cars. They mounted suicide attacks on the battlefield as
well as off.
Suicide bombers killed one Sri Lankan president, wounded another and killed
a former Indian prime minister. They took out government ministers, mayors
and moderate Tamil leaders, decimating the country's political and
intellectual leadership.
They attacked naval ships, destroying a third of the Sri Lankan Navy, and
oil tankers; the airport in Colombo, the capital; the Temple of the Tooth,
home to Sri Lanka's most sacred Buddhist relic; and Colombo's own World
Trade Center. They killed certainly hundreds, and possibly thousands, of
civilians, although civilians were never their explicit target.
Their killing innovations were studied.
Mr. Gunaratna said the attack on the American destroyer Cole by Al Qaeda in
2000 had been almost identical to a Tiger attack on a Sri Lankan naval ship
in 1991. The head of the Sea Tigers, Soosai, who organized suicide attacks
on boats, oil tankers and the like, boasted in a recent BBC interview that
the Cole attack had been copied from the Tigers.
The Tigers evolved ever more sophisticated suicide bodysuits, and more
refined surveillance. They skillfully insinuated themselves within striking
distance of their targets. They professionalized, and institutionalized,
suicide bombing.
Today, actions by the Black Tigers and the Sea Tigers are being held in
abeyance.
The Tigers have declared and observed a cease-fire and are at the
negotiating table trying to reach a political settlement with the Sri Lankan
government.
For the first time in years, Tiger territory is easily accessible to the
outside world. Much like the orphanage with its shrine, it has revealed
itself as a place steeped in the notion of self-sacrifice.
Pictures of suicide attackers like Captain Millar are commonplace. The
Tigers sometimes filmed their suicide attacks, and a store in Kilinochchi,
their administrative headquarters, sells CD's with tribute songs to the
Black Tigers and videodiscs of the attack on the airport.
A large billboard along the A-9 road, which runs through Tiger territory on
its way north, shows women how to fully exploit their deaths. If wounded in
battle, colorful graphics demonstrate, they are to play dead until enemy
soldiers approach, and then blow up as many as possible ? and themselves in
the process.
Suicide has long been part of the Tiger culture. Tigers were given cyanide
capsules and told to use them if captured. Many did.
But suicide bombing was an offensive weapon, not a defensive one. It was
devised to make up for the Tamils' numerical disadvantage - their population
is about one-fourth that of the majority Sinhalese, and to flummox the
country's military and political leadership.
The goal, S. Thamilchelvam, the Tigers' political head, said, was "to ensure
maximum damage done with minimum loss of life."
The Tigers have long claimed overt responsibility only for attacks on
military sites. In their graveyard outside Kilinochchi, there are headstones
without bodies for many Black Tigers and Sea Tigers.
But there are none for those whom S. Tamilarasan, a 22-year-old aide in the
political wing, called "the indirect" - those involved in attacks on sites,
like the Colombo airport, or leaders that were too politically sensitive to
claim.
In an interview, Mr. Thamilchelvam said the Tigers had hit only military
targets, but then conceded that political targets had been attacked as well.
The separation of the political and the military makes sense in the Western
context, he said, but not in Sri Lanka, which has largely been governed by
the Sinhalese since independence in 1948.
"In the politics of Sri Lanka the military is only an instrument of a
genocidal policy, of annihilation, of trying to weaken the Tigers," he said.
"You cannot find a distinction between the political hierarchy and a
military soldier. Political decisions, unfortunately, in Sri Lanka become
military policy or action."
For the movement, the Black Tigers acquired more than utilitarian value.
Considered the most heroic of Tiger fighters, they became as well symbols of
the loyalty that the movement for a Tamil state ? and its leader,
Vellupillai Prabhakaran ? commanded.
"Every Tiger is committed to end his or her life for the goal," Mr.
Thamichelvam said.
The Tigers abjure the phrase suicide bombing. Mr. Thamilchelvam cited two
words in Tamil. One, "thatkolai," means to kill yourself. The other,
"thatkodai," means to give yourself. That was the word the Tigers used, and
preferred.
"It is a gift of the self - self-immolation, or self-gift," he said. "The
person gives him or herself in full."
That commitment defined the Tiger fighter, he said. "When one enlists, there
is no remuneration. The only promise is I am prepared to give everything I
have, including my life. It is an oath to the nation."
Cadres applied to be Black Tigers, communicating their desire to Mr.
Prabhakaran, according to Thamilini, the 30-year-old head of the female
cadres. Some 30 to 40 percent of their suicide bombers, including the one
who killed former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India in 1991, have been
women.
A reply would come from Mr. Prabhakaran, she said. Sometimes it was an
outright refusal. More often, she said, this answer came back: "There are
many applicants. Do what duties are sent to you. If the necessity arises
we'll call you."
Those selected to be Black Tigers underwent intense physical and
psychological training and reportedly a last dinner with Mr. Prabhakaran.
That was when Kanthaburan, for whom the orphanage here is named, made his
request that a home be created for parentless children like him, said
Puviavyasan, the Tiger who runs the orphanage.
Those selected, said Thamilini, were strong in spirit and firm in purpose.
She explicitly rejected any comparison to Palestinian suicide bombers, who
she suggested were often dejected in life.
"People dejected in life won't be able to go as Black Tigers," she said.
"There must be a clear conception of why and for what we are fighting. A
deep humanitarianism is very necessary - a love of others, for the people."
Tiger bombings have killed at minimum hundreds of civilians who were caught
near the targets. The bombing of the Central Bank in 1996, done on a working
day, killed at least 90 people; assassinations of political leaders have
usually taken the lives of dozens of other civilians.
But Thamilini drew a distinction of intent. The Tigers' "target is not the
common people, but the army," she said. "In Palestine it is quite
different."
Return To Top January 16, 2003
January 15, 2003 Extract from a paper by Ilan Berman in the Middle East Quarterly, forwarded by Ram Narayanan.
On September 11, as al-Qa‘ida cells prepared to launch their assaults on
Washington and New York, a remarkable event was taking place half a world away.
In New Delhi, Israeli defense and intelligence officials, led by National
Security Advisor Uzi Dayan, were meeting with their Indian counterparts to
discuss the common threats facing their two countries. When pressed on the
issue, a spokesman from India's ministry of external affairs described the talks
as routine, part of a larger, ongoing "strategic dialogue" with Israel on topics
ranging from Afghan terrorism to Iranian missile development.[1]
Yet, the meeting was anything but routine. It reflected the quickening pace of a
strategic partnership that has moved from relative obscurity to the center of
Israel's foreign policy agenda. The ties between New Delhi and Jerusalem may
have evolved largely away from the international spotlight over the past decade.
But they have yielded a strategic dialogue that in many ways mirrors Jerusalem's
extensive—and very public—ties with Turkey.
Both relationships are now poised on the brink of redefinition. Spurred by a
growing consensus on emerging threats and an expanding agenda of shared regional
interests, Israel, India, and Turkey are drifting closer together. The
implications of this growing convergence are profound, both for the countries
themselves and for the United States, whose policy toward the Middle East is
sure to be influenced by what analysts are already describing as a new
"Eurasian" alliance.[2]
Parallel Partnerships
The emerging Israeli-Turkish-Indian connection is hardly unexpected. In many
ways, it marks the logical evolution of a pair of strategic relationships that
have charted remarkably similar trajectories for the better part of the past
decade.
Common origins The new relationships are the product of the end of the Cold
War, which prompted foreign policy reorientations in all three countries.
For Turkey, the Soviet Union's collapse and the Kuwait war have driven an
overall reassessment of Ankara's regional ties. The Middle East now looms large
as a possible source of threats that Turkey might have to face alone, since it
cannot be certain that its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) will come to its aid should Turkey be threatened from the south.
India's about-face has reflected a similar post-Cold War rethink. With the
Soviet collapse, India lost its longtime military supplier and principal
diplomatic crutch. It has also grown increasingly disenchanted with Arab
sympathy for Pakistan on the Kashmir issue—a sympathy that has grown with the
spread of Islamism in Arab countries. The changes have prompted India to revamp
its relations with the United States and with regional states.
Israel, too, has had to reconsider its regional ties. To be sure, while the end
of the Cold War removed one strategic motive from U.S. support for Israel, the
U.S.-Israel alliance has other powerful rationales. But Israel also seized the
opportunity created by the euphoria of the 1993 Oslo agreements to diversify its
strategic relationships, especially with states that reside in the "periphery"
beyond the belt of hostility that still surrounds it.
Shared goals In the musical chairs of regional alignments, the end of the Cold
War has created durable strategic rationales for the new partnerships between
Turkey and Israel, and India and Israel.
In Ankara, early fears of a diminished post-Cold War role were replaced by a
renewed understanding among Turkish policymakers of their country's strategic
importance. As then-foreign minister Hikmet Çetin eloquently argued in 1993, the
retraction of Soviet power from the Middle East had transformed Turkey from a
"flank" state to a "frontline state faced with multiple fronts."[3] In no small
measure, this sober reassessment of regional threats has been responsible for a
retooling of the nation's military strategy toward a substantially broader
conflict scenario in the Persian Gulf and the eastern Mediterranean.[4] Within
the Turkish military—the main driver of Ankara's strategic relationship with
Jerusalem—cooperation with Israel is perceived as essential to fulfilling this
demanding security agenda.
Return To Top January 15, 2003
From Military.com, this article originally appeared in CBS News.
In future wars, robots may drop from the sky by the hundreds from unmanned aircraft, swarming like giant insects over battlefields in coordinated, terrifying assaults. But that is a decades-away scenario. [Editor’s comment: our belief is that we should speak in terms of one decade, not decades.] For now, military planners and robot designers are simply trying to improve devices - some of which could see action soon in Iraq - by incorporating lessons from Afghanistan, where robots saw their first significant military action. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone in the military who says robots will one day replace soldiers. Yet the newest robots being developed by companies including iRobot range farther from their "masters" than did their forebears in Afghanistan. They can navigate terrain and obstacles more deftly, lay down a cover of smoke, test for chemical weapons and extend a "neck" that can peer around corners. The machines are also learning how to right themselves if they flip over as well as how to follow their tracks back home if they lose contact with their base. The Pentagon has no doubts robots can save lives. "I don't have any problem writing to iRobot, saying 'I'm sorry your robot died, can we get another?"' said Col. Bruce Jette, the Army's point man on robot deployment, who accompanied the first, $45,000 iRobot "PackBots" into the field in Afghanistan. "That's a lot easier letter to write than to a father or mother." Prior to Afghanistan, the military was using robots for search-and-rescue and ordnance disposal, but mostly viewed them as long-term research. Airborne drones had proved easier to build than effective land robots. But the new conflict persuaded the military to move faster. At the time, the state-of-the-art means for clearing a cave was to tie a rope around the waist of an infantryman, who would crawl in and toss ahead a grappling hook to probe for mines or booby traps. The Pentagon asked iRobot, a startup that emerged out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's artificial intelligence program, to rig up its latest prototypes of the 42-pound, remote-controlled PackBot. Able to ride on tracks like a small tank, climb stairs and work under 3 meters of water or force of up to 400 times gravity, Packbots made their debut just six weeks later at a cave complex outside the village of Nazaraht, near the Pakistani border. The robots sent video back to the troops, sparing them the risk of being dispatched by booby trap or enemy combatant. "Their first reaction was, 'Where have you been?'" Jette said. Later, they offered advice, complaining that the signal wasn't penetrating the walls of deep caves. So Tom Frost, an iRobot engineer at the scene, built a makeshift network of radio repeaters by scavenging old Soviet trucks that littered Bagram Air Base. And when soldiers asked Frost if PackBot could work with the computers integrated into their clothing, he downloaded the necessary code over a satellite. The soldiers also scribbled a drawing of their idea for an extendable neck. The company was already working on that, but made it a top priority. Now, in the comparative comfort of its lab back home, iRobot is fine-tuning all those adjustments. Another lesson from Afghanistan: One size does not fit all. Sometimes, Jette said, soldiers wanted an 80-pound workhorse like a model built by Foster-Miller of Waltham, which was also tested in Afghanistan. Sometimes, the PackBot was just the right size. And sometimes, especially in towns, what the soldiers really wanted was a "throw bot" they could toss over a wall or through a window. "The question is, can you get three-quarters of the capability of those robots at one-tenth the weight," said Robert Larsen, a program manager at Draper Labs, an MIT spin-off that is developing a military robot that resembles the PackBot but weighs less than 5 pounds. Draper's device, though unlikely to be ready in time for Iraq, is cheap, too. Because it's controlled by an off-the-shelf PDA device, Larsen said, it could cost as little as a few hundred dollars. The small size has its disadvantages, however. "When you get small, everything becomes an obstacle," Larsen said, struggling to drive the device over a reporter's crumpled coat at a recent trade show. The Afghan experience doesn't necessarily mean robots will see widespread action in Iraq. There are only a handful to go around, and so far U.S. soldiers gathering in Kuwait are not training with them, said John Spiller, a civilian who works with Jette. "The best I can say at this point is the Army in general is aggressively looking at applying robots in all future operations," said Jette. "I think it would be useful in an open battle." Planners continue to put a number of robots through their paces at the Army's Military Operations in Urban Terrain center at Fort Benning, Ga., where soldiers train to fight in a mock city. And the kind of urban warfare - peering around corners, clearing buildings - that would likely happen in Iraq is precisely what robots have been designed for. Robots will someday master many of the complex, individual tasks required in combat, experts insist. Then, something even more powerful will follow: robots that work together. It's a prospective weapon whose effectiveness would derive at least partly from the sheer terror it could impose on an enemy. "When you see one robot coming down, it's interesting and even if it has a weapon on it, maybe it's a little scary and you give it a little respect," said Arniss Mangolds, vice president of Foster-Miller's robot division. "But if you're standing somewhere and see 10 robots coming at you, it's scary." Jette says robots will never fully replace soldiers. "None of them," he says, "are as powerful as the 2.5-pound gray blob inside your head."
Return To Top January 15, 2003
January 14, 2003 Debka on Turkey, the US, and Iraq Debka on Turkey, the US, and Iraq
Turkey points its N. Iraq military deployment at… the Kurds
The new Turkish government has performed a spectacular about-face with respect to US war plans for Iraq and its post-Saddam aftermath, a large monkey wrench that is bound to throw off Washington’s timeline for launching its war offensive against Iraq. This partly explains the pressure building up from Britain and other western powers to postpone the assault.
Ankara’s turnaround, as uncovered by DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s military and intelligence sources in Washington, Ankara and Tehran, may be a tactical ploy for a better deal with Washington. But in the meantime, it derails almost two years of painstaking formulation work on complicated political and military arrangements for the conduct of the war in North Iraq’s Kurdistan. (To subscribe to DNW click HERE) .
Before the war begins, and with Saddam looking on in Baghdad, America’s two key partners on its northern front, Turkey and the Kurds, are vying for post-war spoils: control of the government in Baghdad and oil. Bringing them back in line is essential, if the vital northern flank of the American warfront is not to be disabled before and during the conflict. The US will need to keep a weather eye on how its two northern allies are behaving and keep important segments of its army in reserve. Instead of fighting Saddam Hussein, they may be called on to separate the two old enemies.
The US-Turkish deals thrown in disarray by Ankara are:
A. Turkey’s war role, hinging on its commitment to open a second front in northern Iraq and leave the Americans free to focus on their drives from Kuwait in the south and Jordan in the west.
They are also backing away from making Turkish bases available to the US air force as jumping off points.
B. Turkey’s post-war stake in the north Iraq’s oilfields and the oil cities of Mosul and Kirkuk, as well as the share-out of oil revenues among the US, the new federal government in Baghdad, Turkey and the Kurds.
Already, the Turkish army has stepped out of its pre-defined war role. The Turkish 2nd and 3rd Corps, deployed along and across the Iraqi border to take on Iraqi troops, are laying Iraqi Kurdistan to virtual siege, interrupting the flow of imported foodstuffs from Turkey and Kurdish exports going the opposite direction. Travelers to Kurdistan must go round through Syria or Iran.
Turkish armored units have also seized positions along strategic northern highways connecting Zakho to Ammadiyah and those towns’ road links to Dahuk and Aqrah, which lie north of Kirkuk and Mosul. They have thrown up roadblocks and are searching Kurdish vehicles. Any Turkish attempt to block these roads to Kurdish traffic would inevitably provoke outright clashes of arms.
The Kurdish leader Barzani, who arrived in Ankara for talks with Turkish leaders on Wednesday, January 7, was greeted according to our sources with “stony faces and blunt military threats”, such as: “The Kurds had better beware of making enemies,” and “Any wrong move will prompt Turkish military reprisal.”
Turkey is pouring troop reinforcements into northern Iraq all the time. A heavy concentration has been posted on the Turkish-Syrian frontier, to keep Syrian forces from coming to the aid of the Kurds and fend off possible Kurdish terrorist operations in southern Turkey.
High-ranking American officers, who went to Ankara on troubleshooting missions, asked Turkish army chiefs how deep their divisions meant to advance into northern Iraq. The same question was put to Turkish field commanders. They replied that their orders were to keep moving forward - even as far as Baghdad.
British defense minister Geoffrey Hoon received the same answer when he arrived in Ankara Wednesday, January 8 to try and mediate the dispute.
A Turkish government team of experts is rummaging through old Ottoman Empire archives for the deeds and certificates affirming property ownership in the two cities, the oil fields and other parts of northern Iraq. They believe they will find documentation for proving Turkish ownership in the oilfields before World War One and intend pressing their claims.
Last week, Turkish prime minister Abdullah Gul, whose party Justice and Development was elected in a landslide last November, made the rounds of Arab capitals in search of support of Ankara’s latest stance.
Western diplomats, probing for the immediate trigger of the Turkish volte face, reported to Washington on two reasons: The Turks were dismayed by the paramount leadership role the Americans assigned Kurdish representatives at the conference of Iraqi opposition leaders that took place in London last December. They also took note of the political and military preparations for self-rule advancing in Kurdistan. Ankara believes the Kurds are on course for independence, not just autonomy, a development Turkey will never countenance.
Before the crisis is over, Ankara will most probably backtrack on its most extreme demands after gaining some US concessions. But the process will be time-consuming.
Oriental Bazaars in Ankara and Pyongyang
The conversation held by Turkish minister of state Kutsad Tuzmen in Baghdad Sunday with Saddam Hussein went on for two hours and twenty minutes and was described officially as an important and useful development for Turkish-Iraqi relations. Tuzmen was the bearer of a written message to the Iraqi ruler from Turkish prime minister Abdullah Gul.
This was the first top level encounter between the two governments for quite some time. It took place two days after DEBKA-Net-Weekly exposed the Gul government’s sensational decision to back away from its earlier consent to join the American campaign against Iraq by opening a second front in the north and permitting US forces extensive use of its soil and bases to invade Iraq. Turkey had now set a steep price on its consent: control of Iraq’s northern oilfields and oil cities, plus a US guarantee that Iraq’s Kurds would be granted no concessions that might smack of independence or even self rule.
For the rest of the article, please Click Here.
Return To Top January 14, 2003
Background / Givati Brigade carrying out most Gaza missions
KHAN YUNIS - As "Die Hard II" was being aired on Israeli television Sunday evening, Israel Defense Forces troops from the Givati Brigade were embarking on operation "Continuous Effort 4" - a raid lasting several hours deep in the city of Khan Yunis in the central Gaza Strip. It's difficult to hand out prizes for a war in which the Israeli public lost interest some time ago, but the effort the war is extracting from the army deserves our attention. "Continuous Effort 4" is the latest in the series of brigade-level operations in the Strip that began in September last year, which total close to 150 missions during 2002. Sunday's operation, like most before it, was given to Givati: its patrol units - the elite Sayeret as well as engineering and anti-tank companies - from the brigade's Sabar battalion, the Shimshon infantry battalion and armored forces. In the briefing before the mission, engineering company commander, Captain Itzik Cohen, tried to put the operation in a broader context for the soldiers. "Just a week ago, they killed 22 innocent civilians in the heart of Tel Aviv," he told them. "They hit our nerve center. Now we're going into their nerve center in the Strip, in the center of Khan Yunis." Cohen made clear to his soldiers that "unlike the terrorists, we'll take steps to avoid harming innocents," but such arguments are often misunderstood - particularly when one commander uses "vengeance" as part of his code name on the radio communications. But this wasn't the case this time, and someone accompanying the operation could discern much caution by the troops in the use of fire. Still, one Palestinian was killed in the mission - Abbed a-Latif Vadi, 28, an armed activist in the "Popular Resistance Committee" of Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction. According to Palestinian sources, 15 others were wounded, three seriously. Israel's use of helicopter gunships was limited (rockets were fired at two wanted armed men) as was the use of tank fire, which consisted primarily of bullets and not shells. Incidentally, the mission's objective was achieved: troops demolished six workshops containing some 35 lathes that the IDF estimated were being used to produce mortar shells and Kassam rockets. The IDF operation ended with no injuries to troops. The balance between danger and risk in these operations is particluarly delicate; as the depth of the infiltration into Palestinian territory increases, so does the risk of complications. For this reason, the timetable was so strict: Arrival, followed by a brief search, then evacuation of residents in neighboring apartments, tyeh destruction of the lathes and finally quick departure by the soldiers. Much of the responsibility for navigating the force and making proper use of the troops falls on the shoulders of Lieutenant Colonel Ron, commander of the Givati patrol units. Ron is 33, a resident of Tel Aviv and the father of a six-month-old baby girl he rarely sees. With some difficulty, he attended her birth, before being called back to the Gaza Strip just three hours later for an operation in Rafah. Before Sunday's operation, he managed a short telephone conversation with home. From inside Ron's armored personal carrier one can hear the exchange of fire outside, but it is difficult to see. The main hardships fall on the security forces, some of whom are spread out on foot, and on the units scouting out the workshops in a search for signs of weapons production. The neighborhoods of central Khan Yunis are not accustomed to IDF operations of such depth; at the beginning of the raid, they hardly react. A misdirection ploy by Givati brigade commander, Colonel Aymad Paras, succeeds in sending many of the armed Palestinians to the other side of the city. But this ultimately means an increase in the resistance, including light weapons fire, hand grenades and makeshift explosive devices. Now it's time to get out before it's too late: Just as the line organizes itself for a pull out, an RPG rocket is fired, passing just a few meters over the APCs. Two armed Palestinians manage to slip in among the forces, but are repelled by the exchanges of fire. Over the last year, such operations have been the Givati Brigade's daily lot. Brigadier-General Paras has already stopped counting the number of operations in which he has taken his troops. When the operations began, some in the IDF General Staff were concerned about giving the mission to the Givati Brigade. But today, the justification is self-evident. A few weeks ago, for example, the IDF planned to arrest an Islamic Jihad leader in the Gaza town of Rafah. The mission was first offered to an elite unit, but the unit said that it would need two months in order to adequately prepare. The mission was given to the Givati's select Sayeret unit, and the wanted man was arrested after only 60 hours of preparations. At the end of Sunday's mission, at 3:30 A.M., the brigade commander convened his officers for a debriefing. Company commander Cohen and his colleagues listed the successes and mistakes of the operation with a forthrightness that once only characterized Air Force debriefings. On Wednesday, Brigadier-General Yisrael Ziv will have completed two-and-a-half years as IDF commander in the Gaza Strip. Ziv will tell his designated replacement, Brigadier-General Gadi Shamni, that he is leaving the Strip with mixed feelings: A sense that a great weight of responsibility is being lifted coupled with the unease of knowing that the mission is far from over. Two weeks after the ceremony to mark the change of positions, Ziv will assume his new role as Head of Operations Directorate, this time as a major-general and member of the General Staff. On the way, he slept fewer hours than when he was a paratroopers recruit more than 25 years ago. His hair has also changed color, from brown to gray.
Return To Top January 14, 2003
January 13, 2003
News of the Weird
British Army under fire in German media
An article by Roger Boyes, forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay.
BRITAIN yesterday mounted a sturdy defence against German media criticism
which had accused the Army of being poorly equipped, undermanned and
sometimes embarrassingly incompetent.
"Whatever is being written in Germany, it is a well renowned fact that the
British Army is highly valued and respected by other nations,"
Lieutenant-Colonel Harry Scott, an Army spokesman, said.
Even so, the broadside from the Süddeutsche Zeitung looked set to stir up a
new Anglo-German dispute before Tony Blair's private dinner with Gerhard
Schröder, the Chancellor, scheduled for tomorrow night.
"When Tony Blair speaks of the British Armed Forces, a pathetic tremor
enters his voice," the newspaper said.
But is the Army really among the best in the world, as Mr Blair claims? "It
is a powerful myth," the newspaper said, "qualified by a series of
embarrassing mishaps."
The catalogue of British Army shortcomings compiled by the German newspaper
was a long one, and clearly drawn from British press cuttings rather than
original research. The sour, negative tone, however, was new.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung drew attention to "the proud Royal Navy's habit" of
running ships aground, citing incidents involving HMS Nottingham, HMS
Grafton and HMS Brazen. It also claimed that, during the recent desert
exercise, British soldiers found their combat uniforms were ill-suited for
the climate, that their guns and radios failed to work and that the
Challenger II tank was "defeated not by the enemy but by the sand".
Colonel Scott said: "This was an arduous and testing exercise from which we
have learnt some valuable lessons . . . we have found out what we need to
know about adapting tanks to extreme conditions."
Germany is still insisting that it will play no military role in a campaign
against Iraq. It will, however, take the chair in the United Nations
Security Council from next month and will soon have to decide whether, and
on what terms, to vote in favour of a war of which it disapproves.
This lack of clarity is rapidly weakening Germany's foreign policy position.
Much remains unclear and Mr Blair will be looking for some urgent
clarification tomorrow night.
[Editor’s comment: The Germans are criticizing someone else’s armed forces, leave alone the British armed forces?]
Spain honours Parsley Island commandos
By Isambard Wilkinson writing in the Telegraph.
Spanish commandos who recaptured the tiny island of Parsley from six
Moroccan gendarmes last summer have been secretly honoured with
commemorative daggers.
The operation, hailed as Spain's first military success for 60 years,
stirred national sentiment and restored pride to an army short of recent
battle honours.
In a private ceremony at Christmas, 41 boinas verdes, green berets, were
awarded the daggers in the presence of senior officers, including their
commander, Gen Pedro Maria Andreu.
The commandos landed from helicopters at dawn to retake the acre of rock off
the North African coast. They were supported by four frigates, two
submarines and the prayers of Spain's prime minister and defence minister.
The six Moroccans were removed without a shot being fired and several goats
on the island were unharmed.
Return To Top January 13, 2003
Unrest over Pak-US clash may lead to uprising: Report "Complete unrest", which prevails in South Waziristan area along the Pak-Afghan border where clashes occured recently between the US and Pakistani forces, could grow into a major "uprising" against the American troops stationed there, according to the media reports. While the US has some support in the area after it "formally recruited" about 80 Waziri tribesmen to protect their camps, growing "guerilla activities" in neighbouring Khost area of Afghanistan would inevitably lead to the fighters crossing over to Pakistan and US forces chasing them, the reports said.Stating that "now there is complete unrest" in the area due to the US bombing of a madrassa and a mosque, Hong Kong-based journal Asia Times said, "any time this unrest could be translated into a severe uprising". Quoting tribal elders from the area contacted on phone, the journal said it was only a matter of time before further clashes betwen US and Pakistani troops and local tribesmen would occur. It said such an uprising would have the backing of Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) which controls governments in two provinces of Pakistan."Now anti-US forces have political cover in the form of the local MMA party whose power base is in West Pakistan," the Asia Times said, adding it was "inevitable that US forces will pursue these elements into Pakistan in hot pursuit". On similar lines, senior Pakistani scribe Najam Sethi said, "a rising tide of anti-Americanism is threatening to swamp Pakistan" and this would get a boost if the US launches a war against Iraq. In an editorial in The Friday Times, he said while there could be massive protest demonstrations against the US, these were "not likely to lead to an overthrow of the Musharraf regime." "Pakistan will remain in the eye of the gathering storm. The social psyche of Pakistanis is seriously bruised. The country is home to al-Qaeda. It has nuclear weapons. It is accused of trying to export nuclear technology. It has come to the brink of war with India. Its interests in Afghanistan do not always coincide with those of US. The word abroad is that Pakistan is potentially the most dangerous place in the world," The Friday Times edit said. Another article in the weekly said though people had earlier supported Musharraf in siding with the US in the war against terror, this "popular opinion following the incident near the border seems to be shifting .... (and the US) seems to be inching closer to Pakistan's arch rival India".
Return To Top January 13, 2003
Pakistan-North Korea Connection Creates Huge Dilemma for US For a good summary of the relative balance of forces in the Iraq theatre, please visit Strategypage.com. The page’s editorial team is headed by the famous war gamer, Mr. James Dunnigan. [Forwarded by Mr. Gordon A. MacKinlay.]
Pakistan-North Korea Connection Creates Huge Dilemma for US
Forwarded by Ram Narayanan, an analysis by John Carbaugh, Jr. Mr. Carbaugh is a Washington, DC based analyst. His address is: 11th Floor, 1300 N 7th Street, Rosslyn, VA 22209, Tel. [703] 528-3388.
U.S. government officials were taken aback last October when officials in the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) admitted during high level
bilateral talks that the country is pursuing a uranium enrichment nuclear
program—a violation of four international agreements.
Since then, tensions between Washington and Pyongyang have risen steadily, as
the Bush Administration works quietly but decidedly to organize international
pressure on Pyongyang to end its nuclear weapons program.
Given the prominence that North Korea’s nuclear program has achieved in U.S.
foreign policy, it is a little odd that Pakistan—which U.S. intelligence
agencies are convinced supplied North Korea with technology to pursue its
nuclear program—has thus escaped high-level pressure from Washington.
MAJOR DIPLOMATIC HEADACHE
Pakistan has become a major diplomatic headache for the Bush Administration. On
the one hand, Pakistan is a crucial ally in the war against terrorism. Many
analysts suspect Osama Bin Laden is now hiding somewhere in Pakistan;
cooperation from Pakistani security and intelligence officials is needed to
capture Osama and cut the power of Al Qaeda.
On the other hand, Pakistan’s ties to North Korea’s nuclear program have
violated bilateral assurances to the U.S. Pakistan’s actions also have
facilitated a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (North Korea is a
signatory) to violate its commitments.
In the view of some analysts, Pakistan is "double-dealing" with the U.S.,
claiming to work together in the war against terrorism while maintaining ties
with North Korea of the sort that essentially facilitated the current nuclear
tension on the Korea Peninsula.
After the 9/11 terrorist attacks the U.S. invested a lot of political capital to
cultivate improved ties with Pakistan. The U.S. waived all economic sanctions
against Pakistan in return for Pakistani cooperation in the war against
terrorism.
Now President George W. Bush has his hands tied. The U.S. government has
doggedly worked to stem the proliferation of nuclear (as well as chemical and
biological) weapons to hostile and unstable countries.
What should be its priority now: punishing Pakistan for its proliferation
policies or pursuing the war against terrorism?
U.S. officials have a hard time answering a basic question: Why tolerate
Pakistani proliferation and possession of nuclear weapons, yet take such a hard
line against North Korea for following a similar path?
PAKISTAN’S DENIALS
The Pakistanis deny exporting nuclear technology to North Korea.
Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, the Pakistani ambassador to the United States, insists
that Pakistan is innocent. During a trip to Tampa in October he responded to
these allegations in the St. Petersburg Times, "It is simply not true.
[Pakistan] has a track record on nuclear export controls that nobody has
challenged."
But U.S. intelligence officials are fully convinced that Pakistan supplied North
Korea with crucial technology needed to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.
The Bush Administration has been reluctant to release the full facts, both to
protect intelligence sources and to forestall a backlash on Capitol Hill against
the Pakistani regime. But a steady flow of leaks from U.S. intelligence agencies
to the news media have had the effect of giving a warning to Pakistan that it
better back off from its nuclear ties with North Korea.
LONG TERM TIES
Although the extent of Pakistani-North Korean contacts remains somewhat cloudy,
it is clear that they have existed for some time.
The military relationship between North Korea and Pakistan—from which the
nuclear connection eventually emerged—began during the 1970s, when then-Prime
Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto began expanding bilateral ties with Pyongyang.
The relationship got a big boost after a day trip to Pyongyang 20 years later by
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, daughter of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. The 1993
discussions between Bhutto and North Korean officials were ostensibly about
economic relations. Most analysts believe that Ms. Bhutto also went to Pyongyang
to discuss the purchase of ballistic missiles from North Korea, a deal that was
finally signed in 1995.
Pakistan’s motive was to keep pace with India’s development of nuclear weapons.
Pakistan had nuclear warheads at the time but was desperately seeking a delivery
system. Because of its weak economic position and the extended length of time
required to build up a missile program, Pakistan ruled out indigenous
development.
INITIAL HELP FROM CHINA
Initially, it sought help from China, which sold Pakistan 34 M-11 short-range
missiles in the early 1990s. Continued purchase of missiles from China proved
difficult, however, because of strong U.S. opposition. Pakistan was still
determined to obtain longer-range missiles that would enable it to target,
strategically, all of India. So, Pakistan scouted out the potential of North
Korea’s Nodong missile.
Numerous personnel visits are believed to have taken place between North Korea
and Pakistan during the 1990s. In a paper for the Center for Nonproliferation
Studies entitled, "A History of Ballistic Missile Development in the DPRK,"
Joseph Bermudez, Jr. writes that the first of these visits took place in August,
1992, when Pakistani officials journeyed to North Korea to examine the Nodong.
"The DPRK Deputy Premier-Foreign Minister Kim Yong-nam traveled to…Pakistan to
discuss a number of issues, including missile cooperation and DPRK sales of
Hwasong 6 and possibly Nodong missiles. Pakistani and Iranian specialists are
believed to have been present for the DPRK’s May 29-30, 1993, tests," Bermudez
says.
Shortly thereafter, Pakistan established a ballistic missile project to purchase
and manufacture the Nodong missile. Pakistanis called it the Ghauri.
The spring of 1996 saw the delivery of missiles by Changgwang Sinyong
Corp.—North Korea’s marketing arm for missile production facilities—to Pakistan,
most of which went to A.Q. Khan Research Laboratories. Pakistan tested the
Ghauri in April, 1998, for the first time; North Korean observers apparently
were present.
Although Pakistan now admits buying missiles from North Korea, it initially
denied it.
Few analysts were fooled about the missiles’ origin. Gaurav Kampani, a senior
research associate at the Monterey Institute’s Center of Nonproliferation
Studies notes some telling clues: "If you look at the history of missile
development in any country," Kampani says, "it’s really a one or two decade long
process. Pakistan is probably one of the only cases where it has no history of
testing or development and all of a sudden it displays a fully developed
ballistic missile. Then it tests it over an urban center. That degree of
confidence suggests that a tested, reliable weapon system has been procured.
"Second, there is no doubt that the missile is the Nodong in external
appearance, range, and warhead payload," Kampani continues. "Third, North Korean
crews were present during the launch in Pakistan, and there was a lot of air
freight traffic between North Korea and Pakistan before the launch. Fourth, the
U.S. State Department sanctioned the Khan Research Labs and the North Korean
entity from which the missiles were supplied."
According to the Arms Control Association, Pakistan has produced three versions
of the Nodong. The Ghauri-1, with a range of 1,300+ km and a payload of 700kg;
the Ghauri-2, with a much longer range of 2,300 km and a payload of 700kg; and
the Ghauri-3, which is untested, but expected to have a range of 3,000km.
The Nodong is not the only model procured. Bermudez notes, "[The Pakistani
2,000km range Ghaznavi] missile may actually be a Taepodong-1."
NUCLEAR BARTER
That Pakistan obtained ballistic missiles from North Korea is not in question.
U.S., British, and South Korean intelligence officials have long wondered how
Pakistan would repay the debt. The answer seems to be: by providing North Korea
with enrichment technology.
It is unclear whether Pakistan originally agreed to supply nuclear technology in
exchange for ballistic missiles.
Purportedly, the original arrangement was that Pakistan would pay in cash. But
missiles are expensive; by the time they were delivered by North Korea in the
spring of 1996, Pakistan’s economic situation had deteriorated badly. It was
dependent on bailouts by the International Monetary Fund. (As a point of
reference, in 1999 North Korea asked $6 million for Taepodong missiles.)
Intelligence officials now believe that Pakistan decided to transfer nuclear
technology as a means of payment. This barter proved to be a perfect match.
In 1994, the North Koreans signed the Agreed Framework, in which they agreed to
shut down their plutonium-based nuclear program. But North Korean scientists
found Pakistan’s uranium enrichment technology to be a good means of continuing
a covert nuclear program, albeit one that requires time.
"EARLY WARNING TO CONGRESS"
U.S. government officials said recently that they have suspected North Korea has
been pursuing a uranium enrichment program for at least two years. Larry Niksch,
Senior Asia Specialist at the Congressional Research Service and the leading
expert on North Korea in Congress, summarized the clues that led U.S. officials
to make this assessment.
In a briefing to Congress in November, Niksch told Congressional Leaders that
"In March, 2000, President Clinton notified Congress that he could not certify
that North Korea was not acquiring enriched uranium for the production of
nuclear weapons."
The Japanese newspaper, Sankei Shimbun, reported on June 9th, 2000, the contents
of a "detailed report" from Chinese government sources on a secret North Korean
uranium enrichment facility inside North Korea’s Mount Chonma.
"In May, 2002, U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton cited a U.S.
intelligence estimate of December, 2001, in accusing North Korea of operating a
secret nuclear program," Niksch wrote.
U.S. officials say they confirmed beyond doubt the existence of North Korea’s
program last July. "It was like the Rosetta Stone," Niksch said. "Once we had
that, we knew what was going on." President Bush ordered the intelligence
community to review the assessment once again, to make absolutely sure it was
correct. The various U.S. intelligence agencies are in full agreement.
Confirmation of the Pakistan connection apparently emerged at the same time. One
report among intelligence circles is that British Intelligence was able to
obtain from the Pakistani Embassy in London crucial information about the
Pakistan-North Korea connection.
According to Kampani, some big clues have been leaked to the press:
First, some retired Pakistani officials have tracked questionable shipments to
North Korea that may have been centrifuge uranium enrichment technology.
Second, some Indian defense officials have named the private airline associated
with the Pakistani Interservice Intelligence Division that was used to transport
equipment to North Korea.
Third, the centrifuge designs that North Korea is using are startlingly similar
to what is used in Pakistan. How could the North Koreans, who had no experience
or background in uranium centrifuge enrichment, suddenly develop one within four
years? Export regulations are very tight; if a massive clandestine procurement
program were to be undertaken by North Korea, it would be visible to the
international community. Pakistan was the only nuclear power with the means and
the motive to help North Korea.
Despite the apparent evidence, Pakistan’s president, General Pervez Musharraf,
in a discussion with Secretary of State Colin Powell, denied any involvement in
North Korea’s nuclear program.
Powell told reporters, "[Musharraf] said, ‘Four hundred percent assurance that
there is no such interchange taking place now.’" It is telling, however, that
Powell reported that the two had not discussed the past, and he would not
discuss it because it would shed light on how the U.S. government collects
evidence.
ROGUE SCIENTISTS?
Some analysts suspect that the transfer of nuclear technology can be attributed
to rogue elements within Pakistan, in particular one man: Abdul Qadeer Khan, the
founding father of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program.
A household name in Pakistan, A.Q. Khan substantially advanced Pakistan’s
uranium enrichment program in the 1970’s, and thus the capability to build
nuclear weapons. The fissile material for the initial Pakistani nuclear weapons
apparently came from A.Q. Khan’s labs. As head of the A.Q. Khan Research
Laboratories, Khan was always in fierce competition with colleagues at the
Pakistan Atomic Energy Agency. Some analysts believe that the intense rivalry
led Khan to act independently of the Pakistani government to purchase delivery
systems from abroad for nuclear weapons systems.
Thus, if there were a rogue element in Pakistan, Khan would be the likely
suspect.
Khan is often described as a flamboyant, egomaniacal scientist who claims credit
for much more than he deserves. He is also famous for having pilfered from the
Netherlands both the designs used to build Pakistan’s uranium enrichment
gas-centrifuge plants, and also the lists of manufacturers of components of
nuclear technology in the U.S. and Europe. With this knowledge he was able to
exploit export regulations in the early 1970’s and import materials into
Pakistan.
After graduating from school in Karachi, Khan went to Europe in 1961 to continue
his studies, ultimately earning a doctorate in metallurgy. Khan accepted a
position with the Physical Dynamics Research Laboratory (FDO), a subcontractor
for Ultra-Centrifuge Nederland (UCN), the Dutch partner of URENCO, a
tri-national European uranium enrichment centrifuge consortium.
In 1974, Khan was asked to translate highly classified design documents for the
world’s most advanced industrial enrichment technology at that time—something
which he dutifully did while taking copious notes.
In 1976, Khan suddenly left the Netherlands under suspicious circumstances.
Later, Khan turned up in Pakistan, where he founded Engineering Research
Laboratories, subsequently renamed the A.Q. Khan Research Laboratories (KRL).
Then-Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto gave Khan control of the country’s
budding uranium enrichment program. The Dutch government later convicted Khan in
abstentia for stealing classified plans and technology from URENCO.
The Khan Research Laboratory is home to both a missile-development center and an
industrial sized gas-centrifuge plant for enriching uranium. Most of the
ballistic missiles Pakistan purchased from North Korea were delivered to KRL. It
is probably not coincidental, then, that Khan has reportedly made as many as 13
trips to North Korea.
PAKISTANI GOVERNMENT "APPROVAL"
Still, most analysts dismiss the suggestion that Khan acted independently of the
government. Gaurav Kampani said, "On the one hand you have the Pakistani
government reiterating consistently that they have multiple controls of their
nuclear materials and weapons. But then they insinuate that it was done by A.Q.
Khan. Pakistan’s nuclear scientists don’t have the degree of autonomy to make
independent decisions like this; they are subject to Pakistan’s National Command
Authority."
That is not is not to say, however, that Khan can’t make trouble.
Some analysts wonder if there is a story behind his resignation last year. The
High Energy Weapons Archive website reports: "A. Q. Khan’s official career came
to an abrupt end in March, 2001, when he [was] suddenly retired by order of
President Pervez Musharraf. It may be that Musharraf, who was busy mending
fences with the outside world, wished to tie down some loose cannons that were a
source of irritation with India and the United States."
Others suspect that Khan is still involved with North Korea’s nuclear project.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage expressed concern on June 1st, 2001,
in an article which appeared in the Financial Times, stating that, "people who
were employed by the nuclear agency and have retired" may be assisting North
Korea with its nuclear program. Armitage’s comments are believed to refer to
Khan.
Khan is now a "Special Adviser" to the Musharraf on Strategic and KRL Affairs.
The likelihood of a rogue military element is also dubious.
Pakistan’s National Command Authority is comprised of three divisions: the
Weapons Development Control Committee, the Weapons Employment Control Committee,
and the Strategic Plans Division, which acts as a secretariat to the other two.
The Weapons Development Control Committee is comprised of all the top military
brass and the relevant scientific organizations, which includes the nuclear
bureaucracies, while the head of Pakistan’s government is supposed to chair the
Weapons Employment Committee.
"The Pakistani military really calls the shots as far as the nuclear program is
concerned," Kampani said. "But it’s hard to imagine that something could have
happened without the tacit consent of the Prime Minister."
STRATEGIC LEAKS
The clinching evidence—the "Rosetta Stone" referred to earlier—about North
Korea’s enrichment program emerged last summer when U.S. and other intelligence
services found North Korea trying to acquire large amounts of high-strength
aluminum. The metal is used in equipment to enrich uranium to make nuclear
bombs.
This assessment was confirmed when Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly
visited Pyongyang in early October and confronted North Korean officials with
the information. North Korea admitted to the charge.
U.S. officials then fingered Pakistan as a supplier of parts and expertise to
North Korea’s uranium enrichment gas-centrifuge program.
But U.S. suspicions had been around for quite some time. In October, 2001, the
Washington Times reported the contents of a classified 1999 Energy Department
Report which said that North Korea had undertaken a uranium enrichment nuclear
project. It pointed to an attempt by a North Korean company to buy frequency
converters from a Japanese company. According to the report, this equipment is
"almost certainly for use in a gas-centrifuge cascade to enrich uranium."
According to Bill Gertz, the Washington Times correspondent, the report
specifically identifies Pakistan as a possible collaborator in North Korea’s
nuclear development. "Pakistan may well have lent some level of assistance on
uranium enrichment," the report said. It surmises that North Korea is at least
six years from the production of highly-enriched uranium, but warns that "with
significant technical support from other countries, such as Pakistan, the time
frame could be decreased by several years."
STRATEGIC SILENCE
Why is the U.S. going so easy on Pakistan?
The most obvious explanation is that Pakistan is a crucial ally in America’s war
against terrorism. As a neighbor of Afghanistan, Pakistan has been a central
staging area for the Bush Administration’s efforts to overthow the Taliban and
rout out Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaeda ringleaders hiding there.
President Musharraf’s support has been key in pursuing terrorists as they flee
Afghanistan, especially to anti-Western, radical Muslim communities in Pakistan.
The U.S. cannot afford to lose Pakistan’s cooperation.
There are some Bush Administration officials who cite another explanation. It is
simply too dangerous to alienate Pakistan. It is a possessor of nuclear weapons,
but it also is the most politically unstable of all nuclear powers. It is
economically bankrupt, and a home to rising Islamic fundamentalism. Given the
right circumstances, Pakistan could proliferate nuclear weapons to other
entities hostile to the U.S., including international terrorists.
"There is enormous concern that if Pakistan became a failed state it would be a
total disaster," Kampani said. "The U.S. obviously wants to see to it that
Musharraf is able to reform Pakistan. They realize that it was because of its
isolation, economic situation, and sense of strategic paranoia during the 1990s
that Pakistan did what it did with North Korea; it could do it again if faced
with similar situation."
Can Musharaf—"one bullet away from eternity," as one observer described
Musharaf’s current dilema—make such reforms?
Indeed, there are many would-be buyers out there. Saudi Arabia, for one. Saudi
Arabia is believed to have funded part of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program.
Last year the Saudi defense minister was given a tour of the centrifuge uranium
enrichment labs, which raised eyebrows among U.S. officials.
It seems to be the case, then, that the U.S. is protecting Pakistan. The news
leaks suggest that the U.S. government has stumbled upon evidence and is warning
Pakistan publicly. But the leaks stop short of incriminating it to the extent
that Congress and the U.S. public would demand that the U.S. government come
down on Pakistan.
WATCHING CLOSELY
Colin Powell has warned Musharraf that the U.S. will not tolerate any further
exchanges, and that it will be keeping a close eye on Pakistan’s activities
hereafter. Optimists believe—hope—that it now appears likely that Pakistan will
curtail its nuclear trade with North Korea, at least for now.
First, Musharraf’s comments to Powell suggest that this summer’s transfers may
have completed the North Korean-Pakistan nuclear barter arrangement.
Second, if it didn’t before, Pakistan now understands that continuing nuclear
transfers to North Korea (or elsewhere) will bring them into direct
confrontation with the U.S.
Third, Pakistan’s political credibility would be destroyed. This could
compromise crucial international aid, for which, incidentally, Japan is the
second largest donor.
But given Pakistan’s instability, the situation will have to be watched closely.
Return To Top January 12, 2003
From Military.com
Return To Top January 12, 2003
Brookings on North Korea For a good summary of the relative balance of forces in the Iraq theatre, please visit Strategypage.com. The page’s editorial team is headed by the famous war gamer, Mr. James Dunnigan. [Forwarded by Mr. Gordon A. MacKinlay.]
Bargain - But Bargain Tough - With the North Koreans
By Michael O’Hanlon.
The United States, together with regional allies South Korea and Japan as well as China and Russia, needs a new North Korea policy to handle the rapidly intensifying nuclear crisis in Northeast Asia. The current Bush policy, recently described as "tailored containment" by an administration official, stands too great a chance of failing. Tailored containment really means disengaging with Pyongyang and encouraging our regional friends and allies to do the same in the hope that North Korea will either mend its ways or collapse as a country. However, with the possible exception of Japan, our major northeast Asian security partners do not appear inclined to support such a strategy. North Korea has such limited dealings with the outside world that the threat of further economic and diplomatic sanctions may not influence it strongly in any event. Finally, North Korean collapse has been predicted for a decade and hardly seems imminent now.
North Korea probably has a nuclear arsenal of one or two bombs built with plutonium it extracted from its small "research reactor" at Yongbyon in 1989. By extracting additional plutonium from the spent fuel that was used in that reactor up until 1994, North Korea could probably increase the size of its nuclear arsenal to six to eight bombs in 2003. It could have a dozen by mid-decade.
What is North Korea up to? No one knows, but two theories stand out. Either it has decided that it needs a substantial nuclear arsenal to avoid being the next target of President Bush's new policy of preemption, and of regime change in particular. Or it is engaging in brinkmanship—in other words, a game of chicken—because it cannot think of any other way to convince the world community to provide it more aid and diplomatic recognition. Or a mix of the two. Any policy needs to account for all possibilities.
U.S. military options are limited. U.S. and South Korean armed forces could in theory destroy the two larger nuclear reactors still under construction at Yongbyon before they could be finished, an option Secretary of Defense Bill Perry once raised publicly during the Clinton administration. Doing so could prevent North Korea from ultimately developing a dozen or more bombs a year. North Korea might strike back, and the result could be all-out war on the peninsula, with the likelihood of hundreds of thousands of deaths including many thousands of American soldiers. But even if that risk were incurred, those two large reactors are not the immediate issue. The issue today is the plutonium in the spent fuel from the smaller reactor, as well as the possibility that the smaller reactor will soon be restarted and produce even more plutonium. The United States and its allies might slow this process with a military strike against the reprocessing facility or spent fuel rods at Yongbyon, but only at the cost of spewing radioactivity
For rest of the article: Brookings.edu
Try To Engage with Pyongyang
By James E. Goodby.
There was a time when the United States cared very deeply about the acquisition of the ultimate weapon by any other nation, friendly or not. In those now far off days, it cut off technological cooperation with its closest allies to delay their development of the atomic bomb. The Johnson and Nixon administrations persuaded the international community to accept a treaty barring any increase in the number of states possessing nuclear weapons.
Times have changed. North Korea has at least a couple of nuclear weapons, according to the most senior officials of the Bush administration, and has had them for some years. Secretary of State Colin Powell asks, "What are they going to do with another two or three nuclear weapons?" And with a rhetorical shrug of the shoulders he adds, "If they have a few more, they have a few more."
Washington is wise to prefer diplomacy over war in dealing with North Korea. But it is strange that the Bush administration essentially shut down high-level contacts with Pyongyang soon after it took office.
Perhaps it was because Bush, as he has said, loathes Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader. Perhaps it was because North Korea is contained on all sides by powerful neighbors. Or perhaps the contrast with Iraq shows that nuclear deterrence really works, even against a superpower.
For the rest of the article: Brooking.edu
Why the U.S. Is Focusing on Iraq; Can U.S. Engage Pyongyang Without Rewarding It?
by Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay.
A year ago, President Bush stood before Congress and the nation and declared that Iran, Iraq and North Korea constituted "an axis of evil." Warning that "these regimes pose a grave and growing danger," the president vowed: "The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons." He later made clear that the United States would, if necessary, strike pre-emptively to make good on that pledge.
Since then, the White House has sought to convince Americans and the rest of the world that one of the axis-of-evil nations—Saddam Hussein's Iraq—poses a unique and imminent threat. The administration has said repeatedly that it intends to disarm Iraq, by force if necessary. American troops are heading to the Persian Gulf in great numbers. War might begin within the next several weeks.
But while Washington's sights have been fixed on Baghdad, North Korea is actually coming closer to realizing the nightmare Bush warned against last January: a "rogue" state with nuclear weapons, willing, perhaps, to sell them to the highest bidder.
For rest of the article: Brookings.edu
Return To Top January 11, 2003
Afghanistan's Fledgling Army Needs Far More Than a Few Good Men For a good summary of the relative balance of forces in the Iraq theatre, please visit Strategypage.com. The page’s editorial team is headed by the famous war gamer, Mr. James Dunnigan. [Forwarded by Mr. Gordon A. MacKinlay.]
Afghanistan's Fledgling Army Needs Far More Than a Few Good Men
An article by Chris Kraul, writing in the Los Angeles Times, forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay. [Excerpts]
KABUL, Afghanistan -- Good-natured and gung-ho in his crisp green battle
fatigues, Kramatullah Nazari looks every bit the ideal recruit. One of 415
Afghan army soldiers who graduated from basic training Tuesday, the
23-year-old says he's eager to take on Al Qaeda and help bring peace to his
country.
But recruits like Nazari are hardly plentiful -- and that's of increasing
concern to the Afghan government and the U.S. military, which is bankrolling
and helping train the new national force as a cornerstone of this struggling
country's stability.
Some among the U.S. contingent here fear that the fledgling army will fail
to become a credible force by mid-2004, when nationwide elections and a
constitutional loya jirga, or grand council, are scheduled. Such credibility
is considered critical to defend against any domestic malcontents who might
emerge to violently contest the election results or a new set of laws.
Given Afghanistan's violent past, international military experts take that
scenario seriously.
"The idea is, you would like to have a capable force in Kabul to serve as a
deterrent for a spoiler displeased with the results of the election, someone
who might seek to plunge the country back into civil war at the barrel of a
gun," said one Western government official with many years of experience in
Afghanistan.
Simple math indicates that such an army is years away.
Nazari's class, the fifth to graduate since U.S. and French soldiers began
training recruits in May, brought the Afghan army's troop total to about
1,800. That means chances are slim that the army will have the desired 8,000
to 9,000 well-trained troops in place for next year's elections.
"Truthfully, the Afghan army is about getting the warlords under control so
that they aren't disruptive to the national effort," said one retired
military expert in Washington.
Many reasons have been advanced for the disappointingly low troop levels in
the new Afghan army. U.S. sources blame the warlords, who they say are
reluctant to give up men such as Nazari.
The Afghan Defense Ministry, headed by former warlord Mohammed Qassim Fahim,
says it's the international military trainers who are lagging in forming
classes. Enough potential recruits are available now to form 10 battalions,
Defense Ministry spokesman Meer Jan said Monday.
Low pay and ethnic tensions are given as reasons for the share of would-be
soldiers who quit during training -- which is running as high as 25%.
The thinness in the Afghan army ranks has both the U.S. and Afghan
governments considering new approaches. Recently, the salary of soldiers who
have completed their training was raised from $50 a month to $70 to make the
military more attractive.
But Afghan army Col. Sahim Borez said that $70 is still not enough for the
troops.
Return To Top January 10, 2003
Sharon must speak
Editorial from the Daily Haatetz of Israel.
Press reports in recent weeks have placed Likud activists, both associated and related to Prime Minster Ariel Sharon, at the center of scandals that intertwine power and money, politics, and suspicions of criminal activities. Reports in the last few days raise grave questions about Sharon personally. On Tuesday, Ha'aretz reporter Baruch Kra reported on another aspect of Sharon's campaign funding affair, which has already been investigated by the State Comptroller and the police. The new report said a $1.5 million loan was transferred by Cyril Kern, a South African friend of the Sharon family, to the prime minister's sons so that Sharon could obey the State Comptroller's demand to pay back campaign contributions he had received in violation of the campaign financing law. Candidates who break that law to finance their campaigns have an unfair advantage over their competitors; paying back the contributions after their election victory does not repair the damage done to the losers and to the public. When a wealthy person showers funds on an elected official, suspicions grow that the financier will win direct or indirect compensation for his generosity, an action known as giving and receiving a bribe. The alleged violation of the law to pay the price of the original crime makes matters even worse. Failing to provide a full and accurate accounting in a police inquiry, if proved, is also a breach of trust. Sharon was suspected of bribery and breach of trust even before he became prime minister. While serving as national infrastructure minister and foreign minister in the Netanyahu government in 1999, he was investigated in connection to the Russian gas affair. Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein decided to close that case for lack of evidence - as opposed to "lack of guilt" - and to make do with harsh statements about Sharon's behavior. Sharon ran for prime minster and won, leaving a trail of investigations into the "Greek island" affair and his campaign financing. Until early elections were announced early November, the State Attorney's Office behaved as if there was no particular urgency and the investigation could be conducted at a comfortable pace. As soon as elections were advanced, however, the probes dealing with candidates were frozen for fear that any investigation, regardless of its outcome, might influence voters. But meanwhile, a tidal wave of suspicions and reports, some known to the police and prosecution and some new, have smashed up against the dam of public confidence and threatens to bring it down. Sharon and Rubinstein are united on at least one matter - they both have complained about the leaks that led to the publicity. They have been joined by some commentators who want to attribute political motives to the fact the reports were published. This is a contemptible phenomenon. Public reports on the affairs are a public service no less weighty than the interests of the investigators - and the subjects of their investigations - to keep the inquiry in a dark corner. The publicity requires the prime minister, who is also leading the polls in the election race, to explain and justify his behavior, and if it helps to accelerate the investigation then so much for the better. The Israeli public is drowning in the details and the versions, the claims and the denials. Sharon owes the public his version of the affair, and Rubinstein owes the public a complete investigation. There is no justification now to avoid either. On January 29 it will be too late.
Congo rebels are eating pygmies
Daily Mail and Guardian of South Africa [Excerpt].
Marauding rebels are massacring and eating pygmies in the dense forests of north-east Congo, according to UN officials who are investigating allegations of cannibalism in Ituri province, where fighting between several rebel groups has displaced about 150 000 people in the past month.
Many of the displaced tell of rebel fighters capturing and butchering pygmies, Manoddje Mounoubai, representative for the UN ceasefire monitoring mission in Congo, said yesterday.
The UN had sent six officials to investigate the accusation as well as other human rights abuses, he said.
Other UN officials in the capital, Kinshasa, and the eastern city of Goma said that widespread cannibalism had already been established.
"Ituri is completely out of control and cannibalism is just the latest atrocity taking place," said one, who asked not to be named until the investigators deliver their report. "Perhaps this will finally alert the world to what's going on."
Australia Cancels Leave For Special Forces Regiment
Msnbc.com. Excerpt
CANBERRA — Australia, a staunch ally of the United States, said on Thursday it had cancelled all leave for its elite troops as part of a contingency plan in case of war in Iraq, but denied this signaled military action was imminent.
Rebel BritishMPs deliver war ultimatum
Excerpt from the Guardian
The government is facing a hardening mood among Labour backbenchers against an attack on Iraq with predictions that up to 100 MPs are preparing to rebel and junior ministers could resign if war starts without UN backing.
Labour's chief whip, Hilary Armstrong, has passed on to Tony Blair growing demands for evidence of any weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, and a new UN mandate to justify any attack. MPs are warning that the last time Britain went to war divided - over Suez in 1956 - it ended with disaster and Anthony Eden's fall from power.
"The mood has hardened over Christmas. Labour MPs don't trust George Bush and wonder why Tony is so close to him. And the weapons inspectors haven't found anything. With a new UN resolution it [war] is manageable, but if Tony wants to do anything without UN support there will be serious mega-trouble," one influential moderate said yesterday.
The fears of Labour MPs and activists appear to be matched by doubts among the wider public, prompting Mr Blair and Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, to stress that war is not inevitable.
Both No 10 and the Foreign Office yesterday briefed that the weapons inspection team must have "time and space" to search for proof - or lack of it - that Saddam Hussein is concealing weapons of mass destruction, and that January 27 is not a deadline, merely a reporting date for the team's chief, Hans Blix.
That points towards an open-ended inspection rather than the spring military campaign, ahead of the sweltering Iraqi summer, mooted by US military and civilian chiefs.
The Ministry of Defence in London, now making initial deployments in the Gulf, is not thought to be keen on conflict, but eager for clarity. Mr Straw and aides to the defence secretary, Geoff Hoon, denied a split on the issue yesterday, though there is anecdotal evidence that Mr Hoon is resigned to a short war, possibly as soon as February.
Return To Top January 10, 2003
US Marine Corps Harriers in Afghanistan For a good summary of the relative balance of forces in the Iraq theatre, please visit Strategypage.com. The page’s editorial team is headed by the famous war gamer, Mr. James Dunnigan. [Forwarded by Mr. Gordon A. MacKinlay.]
Flying Nightmares Rock the Afghan Skies From Globalsecurity.org, quoting US Marine Corps News, a story by Gunnery Sergeant Shannon Arledge.
BAGRAM, Afghanistan-- The Marines of Marine Attack Squadron 513, from Yuma, Ariz., arrived in Bagram, Afghanistan, in early October 2002. More than 150 Marines, and an undisclosed number of AV-8B Harrier aircraft, deployed to the region in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. The squadron is the first of land-based Harriers serving in direct support of the War on Terrorism. The Harriers provide close-air support; armed escort for other aircraft and vehicle convoys; and provide air cover during helicopter insertions and extractions. According to the unit's commanding officer, Lieutenant Col. Jim A. Dixon, they have had the opportunity to support the ground forces on many occasions.
"Over the course of our first three months our enemy has gained a new appreciation for Marine and other aviation elements. ...although we would all like to drop a great deal of ordnance, we have come to understand that the mere presence of U.S. airpower is sometimes sufficient to keep the enemy at bay. Just knowing the noise of our jets keeps Soldiers safe, and the [Taliban and al Qaida] on the run, has made the trip all worthwhile."
The air base is located about five-thousand feet above sea level and temperatures dip into the low teens in the evening. The Marines had to adjust to a higher altitude and colder temperatures, but the Harrier aircraft has logged in excess of one thousand flight hours.
"The jets are running great. Aside from routine maintenance they are running safely and effectively," said Staff Sgt. Sean E. Sayegh, staff NCOIC of aviation life support systems.
"We are putting the aircraft through the paces and gaining a lot of knowledge for future deployments," added the 31-year-old, Las Vegas, Nev., native.
Also known as the Flying Nightmares, the squadron brings relatively new technology to the global war. They are the first to introduce the Litening II Targetting Pod to the fight.
This targeting system offers pilots the ability to 'see into the night' with infrared imaging. It also gives them the ability to use precision-guided weapons, marking points on the ground [for ground forces] with laser-guided beams. "This precision capability to spot targets, and self designate weapons has put us in high demand," said Dixon. "Coalition and sister service forces often request the 'Litening Pod' which provides an accurate means to locate and identify enemy positions. We have dropped several laser guided bombs and all were direct hits. Other ordnance expended included five inch rockets."
The commanding officer added that the Harrier also has a quick response time to the target, often reaching them in less than ten minutes.
The Marines of VMA-513 work hard at keeping the planes in the air, and each of them gains more experience with each passing day. For many of them this is their first deployment, and serving in a combat environment, at times, can be stressful.
"The Marines' spirits are up and they are looking forward to each day. Many of the Marines are new to the Corps, and squadron, and they are performing great," said Master Sgt. Patrick L. VanDynHoven, maintenance chief from Combined Locks, Wis.
"They are extremely motivated and diligent," said Dixon. He added, "They work hard and look out for each other. They continually demonstrate professionalism in their actions on and off duty."
Dixon, from Columbus, Ga., attributes his squadron's success in the air to the Marines on the ground. "It is a great aircraft and our readiness rate is above normal. The Harriers have been maintained the best ever."
According to Cpl. Christopher P. Duffy, 23, who calls St. Louis, Mo. home, he extended his active-duty contract for this deployment. "A few times we have lent charitable support to local families who really need the help. It feels great personally. This is dangerous duty and we always have to stay on our toes, but serving my country here is an honor."
Just over a year ago, the Taliban and al Qaida roamed freely in this area. It wasn't until the combined efforts of coalition forces rooted them from their homes that they were forced to flee into the mountains; some captured, some killed, but they ran.
The Nightmares of VMA-513 live up to their name, and daily [or nightly] continue to streak the skies over Afghanistan. Although explosions and gunfire from the enemy occasionally ring through the chilled air, the Marines are on a constant attempt to bring peace to this land. They all hope to have given something back to the people who call this region home; something called, 'The Sound of Freedom'.
From Globalsecurity.org.
South Korea is bright, North Korea is dark. This amazing image was made by the orbiting Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) satellite over regions of the world at night. The DMSP is a Department of Defense (DoD) program run by the Air Force Space and Missle Systems Center (SMC). The Defense Meteorological Satellite Program satellites carry the Operational Linescan System (OLS) in low-altitude polar orbits. These satellites record nighttime data. The Operational Linescan System has a unique low-light imaging capability ddeveloped for the detection of clouds using moonlight. In addition to moonlit clouds, the OLS also detects lights from human settlements,fires, gas flares, heavily lit fishing boats, lightning and the aurora. It is possible to distinguish four primary types of lights present at the earth's surface: human settlements, fires, gas flares, and fishing boats.
For the satellite image, please click North Korea: Globalsecurity.org.
For a 1:250000 US NIMA geo map of the Yongbyon Reactor area, with an overlay, please click Yongbyon Reactor 1: Globalsecurity.org
For an image taken from the US Tactical Pilotage Chart series, 1:500,000, of the Yongbyon Reactor area, please click Yongbyon Reactor 2: Globalsecurity.org
French military suffers shortage of funds For a good summary of the relative balance of forces in the Iraq theatre, please visit Strategypage.com. The page’s editorial team is headed by the famous war gamer, Mr. James Dunnigan. [Forwarded by Mr. Gordon A. MacKinlay.]
French Military suffers shortage of funds
By Andrew Borowiec writing in THE WASHINGTON TIMES, forwarded by Mr. Gordon A. MacKinlay.
PARIS - France has taken stock of its military cababilities in case of
war with Iraq and found them suffering from years of budgetary restrictions.
Particularly affected are technological warfare, logistics and the
strength of available manpower, say officials of the conservative Cabinet of
Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, who blame the situation on "political
neglect" by their Socialist predecessors.
Officials stress, however, that all military preparations have been
tentative and that any French involvement in armed action depends strictly
on the final assessment of Iraq's cooperation with arms inspectors from the
United Nations.
Government sources said that if the French join any U.S.-led military
action, it would have to be in consultation with other members of the
European Union, particularly Germany.
Germany and France form a 40-year-old partnership and consider
themselves the spearhead of European unity. However, in recent months the
strength of their leadership has been eroded by Germany's economic
difficulties.
Diplomatic sources say the French government basically agrees with the
United States that Iraq has failed to "cooperate fully" with the arms
inspectors and that it issued a "false statement" on its weapons programs.
This is a major departure from France's initial criticism of U.S.
statements on Iraq but still falls far short of the support shown by France
during preparations for Operation Desert Storm in 1991.
At that time, France contributed a combined army division in addition
to air force and naval units, a commitment that caused the resignation of
Jean-Pierre Chevenement, the Socialist defense minister.
After their sweeping electoral victory in June, the conservatives put
modernization of the French armed forces among the government's priorities.
They found that the military, which has been transformed into an
all-volunteer force, had considerably reduced facilities for intelligence
and long-distance transport.
After the last drafted forces left their barracks in November 2001, the
strength of the ground forces was diminished from 236,000 to just 136,000
professionals.
An estimated 37,000 men and women of the three services - army, air
force and navy - serve outside France, in such areas as Africa and the
Caribbean. In recent weeks, a French contingent has been involved in a
high-profile operation in war-torn Ivory Coast.
Critics say the new professional army has "distanced itself from the
nation," becoming little more than mercenaries. A recent Defense Ministry
report said that at the time of the Socialist electoral defeat six months
ago, the army "was suffering from the indifference, if not disdain,
demonstrated by the political powers."
Gen. Jean-Pierre Kelche, the armed forces' chief of staff, has since
said that military reforms have prepared the country to face such
contingencies as the international war on terrorism or rescue operations in
limited regional conflicts.
Although promising "revolutionary equipment by the year 2006," he
acknowledged that time was needed to "close the gap between the requirements
and the means available" at present.
The 6-month-old conservative government has adopted the theory that "no
credible foreign policy could be pursued without a strong army."
Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie, the first woman to hold that
post in French history, said the military's morale has suffered from a lack
of means and contact with society.
Indo US Defense Talks May Focus on Arrow Indo US Defense Talks May Focus on Arrow
By Chidanand Rajghatta, writing in the Times of India, forwarded by Ram Narayanan.
WASHINGTON: In the much-ballyhooed defence relationship that is said to be
emerging between the United States and India, the flow of items and technology
has been but a trickle.
A few fire-finding radars there and some night vision goggles here. Some sensors
there and a few jet engines here. Even these items have come after Washington
gave New Delhi a painful runaround, as it is still doing, for instance, with the
supply of its submarine rescue kit.
In so far as big ticket items go, it has so far been Zilch, Zipher, Nada.
Just how serious the United States is in sharing critical technology with India
will become evident next week when an Indian team led by its Joint Secretary
(disarmament) Sheelkant Sharma, arrives here for talks on missile defence
systems.
The talks are set to take place at a crucial time. India believes that it has
been threatened by a Pakistani nuclear first strike as part of a continuing
blackmail and sabre-rattling by Islamabad to advance its terrorism agenda. In
response, New Delhi has just elaborated on its nuclear command structure and its
threshold.
While this was taking place in the subcontinent, Israel has just tested this
weekend its Arrow-2 system, described as the world's first antiballistic missile
system designed to destroy or intercept medium or short-range missiles in the
stratosphere.
The new updated system of the Arrow is supposed to detect and track missiles as
far away as 300 miles and intercept an incoming missile up to 55 miles away,
according to military experts.
Although Israel has announced the test was successful, the salience of the Arrow
system in a war situation – let alone in a nuclear environment — is yet to be
fully established. But India has already evinced a deep interest in the system
because of the danger it perceives from Pakistan.
However, the $2-billion Israeli project is largely bankrolled by Washington,
which has nixed any move by Tel Aviv to share or sell such advanced technology
with other countries. The US itself has its less successful Patriot missile
defence system (which is designed to shoot down incoming missiles at even closer
range but which performed dismally during the Gulf War) to peddle.
In recent weeks, the US had also pressurised Israel not to sell advanced
technology to China for fear it may use it against Taiwan. Washington and Tel
Aviv may not feel the same affection for Pakistan, but for now at least, US
wants no overt military sales to India.
However, defence industry sources say news of India’s bid to acquire the Arrow
and US attempt to thwart it are both premature. In the first place, Israel and
the United States themselves are still sizing up and evolving the system and the
first batteries are only now being inducted in Israel with the immediate and
urgent purpose of meeting any missile challenges from Iraq in the likely event
of a US attack.
More importantly, the system is prohibitively expensive and India may need a
combination of both the Arrow 2, the improved Patriot, and other systems to meet
its needs.
"Does India have the billions it might end up costing? Does it needs to spend
the billions? Wouldn’t peace with Pakistan be a cheaper option?" a defence
official who reviewed the situation with the correspondent asked.
For now though, the Indian team arriving in Washington next week will be
interested in knowing just how sensitive the United States is to the nuclear
bluster New Delhi is facing.
From Debka
)
Large American contingents, airborne and heavy mechanized divisions, Marine task forces, aircraft carriers, helicopter fleets and hospital ships are speeding to jumping-off positions around Baghdad.
The US is expected to launch the coming war against Iraq with parachute drops on Baghdad, together with commando landings in the city from the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers.
A large-scale force will meanwhile encircle the Iraqi capital, while a mighty tank force dashes north from Kuwait and Qatar, bypassing the southern Iraqi Shiite cities of Najef and Karbala and circumventing the Iraqi army defending Baghdad. Those tanks will join the encircling force.
The object of this colossal movement of military strength is to lay Baghdad to siege.
This tactic and the consistency of the strength for its execution, DEBKAfile’s military sources report, have been taken from the Israeli doctrine of besieging Palestinian West Bank cities in order to lower the level of terror. The doctrine was initiated by defense minister Shaul Mofaz in his last job as IDF chief of staff and has been carried on by his successor, Lt. General Moshe Yaalon.
For over four months, American military officers have been observing Israeli units at first hand, as they operate against terrorists in Nablus, Jenin, Tulkarm, Bethlehem and Ramallah, watching also the IDF method of isolating Yasser Arafat in his Ramallah headquarters.
According to our sources, American military planners are transposing the anti-terror tactics they have witnessed on the West Bank as battle plans for the 101st Airborne Division fighters destined for Baghdad. Israeli tank maneuvers under helicopter cover have been studied in Jenin as a model for the 3rd US division’s M1 Abrams main battle tanks to follow, in the streets of the Iraqi capital.
In effect, American war planners have adopted sections of the IDF’s combat strategy against Palestinian terrorist strongholds. This strategy consists essentially of pouring with stunning speed into targeted urban districts large-scale tanks columns armed with heavy firepower, together with armored units under helicopter and drone air cover, as well as crack fighting units, such as paratroops.
This onslaught leaves the forces under attack too overwhelmed to put up more than token resistance. They soon discover that any attempt to hit the iron giants roaming their streets results in their firing positions, bunkers or rooftops, being pulverized by the attacker’s superior firepower.
This strategy has so far kept Israeli and local casualties in Nablus, Ramallah, Hebron and Jenin to a minimum, while cutting down the volume of terrorism.
According to DEBKAfile’s military sources, the American strategists were also interested in the second half of the Israeli doctrine, namely the way in which Arafat has been corralled in his Ramallah administration and terror headquarters for more than 10 months, together with 20 to 30 Palestinian terror chieftains who dare not come out from under his protection.
US war leaders are planning to use tanks, drones and crack troops in a similar fashion to beleaguer Saddam Hussein, his family and top staff in the palace or bunker in Baghdad or Tikrit in which they are holed up – for as long as it takes. They see no need to break in and capture him, only to wait patiently outside his gates until he surrenders or agrees to leave the country.
The road of departure is also open to Arafat.
With this tactic accepted in Washington – a source of no little pride in Sharon’s circle – the Israeli prime minister and his inner defense cabinet – Mofaz, foreign minister Binyamin Netanyahu and public security minister Uzzi Landau – agreed Sunday night, January 5, not to deport Arafat from Ramallah, despite the cruel provocation of the terror massacre perpetrated a few hours earlier in Tel Aviv.
Two suicide bombers from Nablus, activists of the military wing of Arafat’s Fatah, the al Aasa Martyrs’ Brigades, blew themselves up in a poor Tel Aviv district frequented by migrant workers from East Europe, Thailand, China and West Africa and bus commuters. The killers held their 15-kilo charges, packed with nuts, ball-bearings and shrapnel, high in the air to wreak maximal carnage. Some injured illegal workers were too frightened of expulsion to go to hospital for treatment until two Israeli ministers promised publicly to suspend any action against them.
Even after the deadliest Palestinian massacre since 29 Israelis were murdered last Passover in Netanya, Sharon’s inner cabinet decided once again not to expel Arafat.
This decision was not the result of any pressure from Washington, the fear of inflaming the masses in the streets of Cairo and Damascus, or lack of courage. It had one rationale: Sharon’s iron determination to operate in perfect sync with President George W. Bush. He is convinced that by spring, two Middle East terror masters, Saddam and Arafat, will be caged respectively by US and Israeli forces. His siege doctrine will then be vindicated as the only key capable of opening the door to a real settlement with the Palestinians and a genuinely revamped Middle East. As Sharon sees it, regimes and frontiers will be redrawn and new rulers rise after the Iraqi and Palestinian dictators, wielders of terror and weapons of mass destruction, are overthrown.
In pursuit of this goal, Israelis are being called upon to pay a terrible price. The 23 deaths from the Tel Aviv bombings Sunday night, January 5, have raised the Israeli death toll from terrorism – only since Sharon became prime minister in February 2001 - to nearly 700. Sharon remains convinced, as he told injured victims of the Tel Aviv attack whom he visited in hospital Monday, January 5, that though the struggle is protracted and savage, Israel is bound to vanquish the terrorists in the end.
Defense minister Mofaz, coming earlier out from briefing the Knesset foreign affairs and defense committee, predicted that Arafat would step down, an action that would make way for Israel and the Palestinians to go back to the negotiating table. The dictates of reality, he said, are bringing the moment for a new Palestinian leadership to take over ever closer.
The human price for this strategy is being paid by the ordinary Israeli. As voters in the general election due on January 28, Israelis will have a say on whether the price is worth paying – unless of course the poll is postponed by the Iraq War
[Editor’s Comment. We have no doubt the US has carefully studied Israel’s tactics used in Palestinian built-up areas, but the US carefully studies tactics from many countries. The option for simply blockading Baghdad is hardly new or a result of Israel’s tactics; moreover, if and when the Americans find Mr. Hussein, they will not wait for him to surrender, they will simply kill him.
Regarding Arrow, we’re a bit confused. We always thought it was an Israeli-US system, so if it works, the credit will have to be jointly shared. The US has worked on Arrow as an alternate track to its own systems. Further, judged from the size of the missile, Arrow is in a different class from Patriot, so why are comparisons being drawn? Particularly why are comparisons being drawn between 1991 Patriot and 2003 Arrow? Still further, wasn’t part of the 1991 problem that incoming Scuds broke up and Patriot was unable to tell which fragment was the warhead? Has Arrow really sorted out this problem? ]
A National Security Doctrine for India
A National Security Doctrine for India
By B. Raman, forwarded by Ram Narayanan.
Editor’s Note: Mr. Raman is a former high ranking official in India’s Research and Analysis Wing, the rather oddly named Indian intelligence agency.
1. Any national security doctrine (NSD) of India has to cater to the possibility of
threats from two sources--- China and Pakistan.
2. The threat from China was rated high till 1988 because of the unresolved
border dispute between the two countries, the clandestine military and nuclear
assistance given by the Chinese Government to the Pakistani Armed Forces in
order to keep the Indian Security Forces preoccupied on two fronts and the
support extended by the Chinese intelligence agencies to the tribal insurgent
groups of India's North-East. The border dispute had led to a war between the
two countries in 1962.Between 1967 and 1979, many of these insurgent groups went
to Yunnan in China vis North Burma and were trained and armed by the Chinese
intelligence.
3. The visit of Rajiv Gandhi, the then Indian Prime Minister, to China in 1988
and his meeting with Deng Xiao-peng set in motion the process of improving the
bilateral relations.In 1988 and thereafter, the two countries agreed on a number
of confidence-building measures, set up a joint working group to discuss the
border problem on a sustained basis and decided not to let the pending border
dispute come in the way of an improvement in the relations in the economic,
cultural and other fields. The Chinese intelligence, which had already started
reducing its clandestine assistance to the tribal insurgent groups from 1979,
totally stopped it after 1988.
4. Despite this, China continues to pre-occupy the attention of India's national
security managers due to the following reasons:
The very slow progress of the talks on the border issue giving rise to
misgivings that it probably wants to keep this issue alive till it has totally
pacified Tibet to its satisfaction. Though there is no more unrest in Tibet,
which has been developing economically, the Dalai Lama still enjoys a large
following there. The Chinese are determined that when the present Dalai Lama
dies, his successor would be a man of their choice. They apprehend that this
could give rise to serious unrest, which could be exploited by theTibetan
diaspora in India and elsewhere. By keeping the border issue alive, China wants
to retain a pressure point which it can exploit should India show reluctance to
keep the Tibetan refugees under control. In national security matters, the
Chinese, unlike the Indians, work on a long-term basis and try to develop today
options which they may need years hence should circumstances so warrant.
China's continued clandestine assistance to Pakistan in the military nuclear
field and in the acquisition of a missile-based delivery capability.Even as
Beijing was entering into an agreement with Rajiv Gandhi on improving bilateral
relations, it was secretly entering an agreement with Islamabad for assistance
in the missile field.
China's decision in 2001 to assist Pakistan in the construction of the Gwadar
port on the Balochistan coast, which would reduce Pakistan's present dependence
on the Karachi port, which is within easy reach of the Indian Navy, and give the
Pakistani Navy a greater operational flexibility.
5. The threat from Pakistan has always remained and will continue to remain of a
very high order due to the following reasons:
Pakistan's inability to reconcile itself to the loss of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K)
and its obsessive urge to gain control of this territory by hook or by crook.
Its equally obsessive urge to avenge its defeat at the hands of India in 1971
and its loss of the then East Pakistan.
The predominant role of the revenge-seeking Pakistani Army in its national
security management, with practically no role for an elected political
leadership in this matter.
Its refusal to work for a reduction of tension and for the improvement of
relations in other fields till a negotiated solution could be found to the
Kashmir question.
The complexes and the feelings of insecurity from which the Pakistan Army
suffers vis-a-vis its Indian counterpart.
The role of the pan-Islamic extremist elements in moulding perceptions towards
India, whether in the civil society or in the national security apparatus.
6. Its 1971 defeat at the hands of India brought home to Pakistan the ground
reality that it could never hope to achieve its territorial objective through a
conventional war on India. It, therefore, embarked upon a policy of waging a
proxy war through the use of terrorism as a weapon against the Indian State.
Pakistan had been using terrorism against the Indian State since 1956 when the
Naga insurgency broke out. Whereas its use of terrorism against India before
1971 was a defensive measure to keep the Indian Security Forces preoccupied with
internal security duties so that they could not pose a threat to it, its use
after 1971 was an agressive measure having the dual objective of continuing to
keep the Indian Security Forces bleeding and preoccupied with internal security
duties and achieving its strategic objective of annexing J&K without the direct
use of its Army in a conventional war.
7. Till Pakistan achieved a military nuclear capability in the late 1980s, which
was subsequently openly demonstrated in the Chagai nuclear tests of 1998, it
kept its proxy war restricted to the training and arming of Indian separatist
groups, whether in Punjab or J&K, which had taken to arms against the Govt. of
India due to various grievances. The acquisition of the military nuclear
capability made the Pakistani military leadership conclude that the possibility
of an Indian-imposed conventional war in retaliation for its proxy war had been
reduced considerably, if not largely eliminated, and hence it could further
escalate its proxy war by training, arming and infiltrating into India its own
nationals under the guise of jihadi volunteers from different pan-Islamic
organisations to intensify the jihad against India. Till 1995, the role of these
mercenaries was largely confined to J&K, but since then Pakistan's
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) has been using them in other parts of India
too.
8. Pakistan looks upon its nuclear arsenal and its missile delivery capability
not as a weapon of deterrence to deter India from using its nuclear capability
against it, but as a weapon of intimidation to prevent India from retaliating
against it through its armed forces for its proxy war and as a weapon of
psychological pressure by creating fears of a possible nuclear holocaust and
thereby moving the rest of the world, particularly the US, to exercise pressure
on India on the J&K issue. Its consistent refusal to subscribe to the no first
use of nuclear weapons declaration and its repeated reiteration of its readiness
to make first use of its nuclear weapons to prevent the Indian Army from
over-running its large cities and crushing its Army are part of its intimidatory
tactics.
9. The nuclear threat from Pakistan is compounded by the presence of pan-Islamic
jihadi elements which justify the use of the weapons of mass destruction to
protect Islam, if necessary. The possibility of the nuclearisation of terrorism
originating from the terrorist hub of Pakistan is a matter of great concern not
only to India, but also to the international community as a whole, confronted
with the threat of pan-Islamic jihadi terrorism.
10. Since Gen.Pervez Musharraf seized power on October 12,1999,Pakistan has
embarked on a policy of over-projecting its nuclear and missile capability in
order to reassure its own population of the adequacy of its capability and to
intimidate India and prevent a retaliatory conventional strike against its proxy
war.
11.The objectives of India's NSD vis-a-vis China are two-fold and simple:
How to prevent a repeat of 1962, by maintaining an adequate level of
conventional military capability to deter any Chinese temptation to enforce its
territorial claims against India by force?
How to maintain a credible nucleat deterrent against it?
12. The NSD objectives vis-a-vis Pakistan are manifold and much more complex:
How to find a controlled retaliatory response to Pakistan's proxy war without
allowing the response to degenerate into a war involving the use of nuclear
weapons?
How to neutralise the Pakistani attempts to intimidate and demoralise the Indian
population through over-projection of its nuclear and missile capability and
irresponsible nuclear rhetoric?
Whereas any war with China will most probably be fought in Indian territory, any
war with Pakistan will be in Pakistani territory. How to prevent India's
overwhelming conventional superiority from pressing the panic button in
Pakistan's military leadership and triggering off a nuclear response ?
How to achieve India's military objectives in the shortest time possible before
international intervention comes in the way of the further conduct of the war?
13. In response to these questions, a number of possible options had figured in
the debate on national security in recent months. Amongst the various options
suggested/considered were:
Greater transparency about India's nuclear and missile capabilities to reassure
our own population and to have a sobering effect on Pakistan's adventurist
Generals.
A public announcement of India's nuclear command and control mechanism.
Discarding India's no first use of nuclear weapons policy.
India's readiness and ability to fight a limited conventional war without
allowing it to escalate into a nuclear confrontation.
A counter-terrorism doctrine to exploit Pakistan's vulnerabilities through
covert action to make it pay an increasingly prohibitive price for its proxy
war.
Co-operative action through other concerned powers to prevent Pakistan's weapons
of mass destruction capabilities from falling into the hands of its terrorists.
14. The announcement by the Govt. of India of India's nuclear command and
control mechanism and the contours of its nuclear doctrine on January 4,2002,
was the necessary first step in this direction. The no first use policy has been
reiterated, but in a nuanced form by underlining that India's nuclear capability
is meant to deter not only a nuclear strike, but also a strike with chemical or
biological weapons. India's capability and determination for a massive
retaliatory response has been reiterated.
15. However, the nuclear doctrine by itself will not complete the national
security doctrine unless it is supplemented by a counter-terrorism doctrine to
enable India exercise its right of active defence against the Pakistani use of
terrorism as a weapon to achieve its strategic objectives.Such a doctrine should
have a mix of carefully-controlled overt and extensive, sustained and deniable
covert actions. The national security managers should now devote themselves to
this task. It brooks no delay.
[Editor’s comment. Some of Mr. Raman’s questions are easily answered. India no longer has the conventional capability to defend itself against China because it lacks the political will to do so and has dismantled or dispersed its military capability. It has done this at a time when China has, and continued to, keep building its conventional capability.
China has completely outmaneuvered India on the Indian peripheries; its construction of Gwader point is simple yet another step to reduce India to irrelevance in the world and to neutralize it in its own neighborhood.
Whatever India may believe, Pakistan believes it has successfully used nuclear threats to deter India from responding to cross-border terrorism. It believes it defeated the Indian threats of war in January and June 2002. So Pakistan will not be deterred just by the threat of Indian retaliation. Though the great majority of the Indian national security establishment refuses to see the point, short of a prolonged, all-out war India has no options to stop Pakistan from continuing with cross-border terrorism.
Thanks to the inevitable backlash from Hindu fundamentalists – inevitable because India has been under severe and sustained threat from Islamic fundamentalism for close on two decades – Pakistan will have fertile ground in which to sow the seeds of new insurgencies. Gujarat is a case in point.
In short, India has neither the vision nor the courage to adequately safeguard its national security. So it has been for thirteen centuries, when the first Islamic waves lapped at India’s boundaries, and given the way India functions, so it will be for the next thirteen centuries.
India will never disappear, because India is an idea, a concept, a belief, more than it is a geographical entity. But it will not become the kind of hard state that Mr. Raman’s National Security Doctrine requires. It will not because should it become so, it will no longer be India. Instead of fighting this paradox, as India’s post-colonial elite – including your editor - has been doing for 55 years, it is best to accept reality. The modern nation-state, as it exists in 2003, cannot be overlaid across India. Mr. Raman’s ideas – and your editor’s – never had any relevance to India. They are the products of our western educations and our desire to mimic the west. This is why we have not succeeded, and will never succeed.]
Letter From Major AH Amin & United States Operational Strategy: Full Article
British Forces In Countdown To War Editor’s Note: We owe Major Amin a big apology: unintentionally we failed to print his article in full, an omission we rectify. Major Amin sends a letter, which we also print.
From Major A.H. Amin
Sir,
I must take issue with your editorial comments on my article published yesterday.
1-Saudi Arabia will not be touched by USA since the USA already controls it and without US help the present regime cannot last. Further the UAE and Oman are already US vassals.
2-Iran is Shia and non Arab but any American attack on Iraq will not be welcomed in Iran and let me tell you the pro American group's strength in Iran is a USA propaganda gimmick.
3-If I am in Bush's place strictly leaving religion aside I would knock out Iranian oil fields and ensure that Iran's financial potential is destroyed......although that is a purely hypothetical statement. Iran's nuclear program is far more advanced than that of Iraq.
4-Although Musharraf is a US ally or vassal, the Pakistani nuclear capability is intact and Musharraf is only an individual, if one thinks in the long term their is no doubt that the Americans would dispense 1 million Musharrafs and prefer knocking out Pakistan's Nuclear program .They are experts in political assassinations whether it is their own President Kennedy or Pakistan's Zia .They would in this case , I say it is purely hypothetical , use an accidental death of Musharraf or assassination as an excuse to destroy Pakistan's Nuclear program. Capturing Iraq I again say is the cover plan, with Iraqi oil fields destroyed or given over to Turkey and a Shia Republic in the south what is Iraq with Baghdad.
5- I again say Iraq is only a smoke screen.
6- Further I state with conviction that if Bush starts this business at some stage China and Russia or either would step in. China will not tolerate any US attack on North Korea.
Yours etc.
USA’S STRATEGY FOR 2003
The transition from triumph to decline or victory to defeat is far more subtle in todays warfare than in the pre 1990 world. The transition from a bipolar to a unipolar world could not be predicted in 1979 when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.Similarly the 9/11 attacks ,arguments about their moral justification aside represent a revolution in warfare when unconventional forces struck at a superpowers economic and military nerve centre.
The so called unipolar world order dates from 1990-91 when the USA staged the Second Gulf War with a long term strategic design to dominate the Middle East and its oil. Fear of casualties however stopped Bush Senior from going on with an all out military solution and in the strategic sense the Second Gulf War was an unfinished strategic business.
As in the Crusades during the Afghan War many Muslims from diverse nationalities converged into Afghanistan to fight a holy war .Their governments were happy to be rid of them.The Middle East Islamic Forces had received their baptism of fire in Afghanistan during the period 1979-89 when the country was the military academy of Islamic Jihadis fighting a CIA funded war with USA’s enemies.
This was followed by a volte face by USA when it branded its pre 1989 allies in Afghanistan as terrorists and replaced the Red Threat by a Green Threat. In strategic terms the 9/11 attack was a counter attack by Middle East Islamic Forces in response to the war the USA initiated against the Muslim militants which it had earlier utilised in Afghanistan. However the 9/11 affair was turned into a spring board by the Bush regime to finish the unfinished job of the Second Gulf War.
The USA seeks to execute its present offensive strategy by using two pretexts. One is to destroy regimes leading states holding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). These states are all non West European, Muslim or from the Yellow Race. The second category consists of states, which provide safe sanctuary to so called terrorists either by design or by chance.
To implement this agenda the USA relies on sanctions, high altitude aerial bombing and regime change. In addition since the religious card Islam in this case is now being played against the USA the US intends to use the ethnic card to counter act it. Thus the Tajik-Uzbek Pashtun divide in Afghanistan. Possibly a north south divide in Pakistan at some stage, its first stage being the recent political developments in Sindh and the emergence of MMA which by and large is religious by manifesto and Pathan by birth. The MQM that is now an alliance of Mohajirs and Sindhis. Iran which has significant Kurdish, Baloch and Arab minorities.
From 2003 all the above states would be brought to the hook. Iraq would be balkanised and subjected to regime change. Iran would be the next North Korea, subjected to a blockade, a likely war of secession in Iranian Balochistan and forced to an oil tfor food programme. Pakistan would be number three, stripped of its nuclear programme, politically altered from a federal structure to a confederal structure. Forced to acknowledge India as the elder brother. Forced to distance itself from China. All these are not distant or utopian possibilities but things which may happen in 2002 or 2004 , unless big accidents take place. Unless the friction of war brings the US machine to a halt. Unless Russia and China so far behaving like nicely dressed damsels witnessing a bull fight in terms of international relations step into the arena.
Ironically most states in danger of regime change or forced disarmament think that the USA needs them or that other powers would come to their help. Faulty premises at best and wishful thinking at its worst. Once the USA spins the web to trap a small fly it first creates attractions for larger flies to circle around. A share in Iraqi oil promised to Russia. Trade concessions promised to China. Foreign policies built on premises that a bigger power needs a minor state are fallacious. Neutrality in habits may be a virtue but neutrality in principles is a vice.
We first saw the Afghan War of 2001-2 in which the USA once again entered Afghanistan, to crush terrorism and to dominate the West Asian Heartland in classic geopolitical terms. In this case “Regime Change” was achieved and a South Vietnam type collaborator regime was installed at Kabul. This was a finer repeat of what the USSR did once its forces crossed the Oxus in December 1979 and installed Babrak Karmal at Kabul. There was a Karmal at Kabul in 1979 and today we have a Karzai at Kabul. The former was USSR sponsored and the latter is USA sponsored. Both owe their survival to USSR or US military power. In both cases Pakistan’s military regime benefited. However the comparison stops here.
In 1979 Afghanistan was the ultimate objective and the USSR only hesitatingly entered the country. Today Afghanistan is only the stepping stone. May be like the Saudi Arabia in 1990 was a jump off point into Iraq , Afghanistan may be a jump off point for US forces launching an offensive into Pakistan or Iran. There was a great deal of propaganda in the Western Press in 1979 –88 that Russia wanted to reach warm waters while the fact that the USA is about to dominate warm waters as well as Black Gold is today being depicted as an angel like effort to defend a spinster against scoundrels.
Now the strategic situation. The question is whether 2003 would be the finest hour of USA. Iraq humbled in February 2003. Balkanised with a Kurdish autonomous region in the North under Turkish mandate. A pro USA Shia Republic at Najaf or Karbala. A Karzai type Iraqi Arab ruling a truncated landlocked Iraq. US companies skimming all the black cream from Iraqi oil wells.
Would this be the end? No, this would be the beginning. Hitler started with Poland, then gobbled Scandinavia and Denmark and then went to France and Belgium. In grand strategy one war is only one part of the grand strategic plan.
Bush would not rest with Iraq. The second phase may be Iran or Pakistan. Death of a military or political leader. The danger that nuclear arms may fall into irresponsible hands. Another Iraq would be created since Oil is only a means to world domination, not the end. In order to dominate the world the USA needs to cut China to size and to further disintegrate Russia. China cannot be cut to size as long as it has a border with Oil Rich Central Asia and Indo Pak .Thus a future US sponsored Jihad in Chinese Singkiang or a guerrilla war in Chinese Tibet.
How would Pakistan react? Unfortunately Pakistan’s ruling junta consists of collaborators and families of collaborators. Pakistan’s first prime ministers grandfather was protecting British lines of communication at Karnal when the British were crushing India’s first war of independence, which was led by Muslims. Pakistan’s first president’s ancestors sold Bengal to the British Pakistan’s last democratic prime minister of 1958’s ancestors fought as cavalryman for the British in 1857. Lasbela was ruled by the Jam family once the British were here. Even today the chief minister of Baluchistan is from the same family. God forbid tomorrow if history changes even then Baluchistan would be ruled by the same family. Those who resisted like Nawab Marri in First World War were on the wrong side of the British in 1915 and are even today on the wrong side. Ayub told the Americans in 1950s that Our army can be your army. This holds true even today. There is no doubt that Pakistan’s ruling elite whether civil or military, whether sitting in the secretariat or the assembly would collaborate with any foreign power once it comes to their survival. This country has no tradition of political or military martyrs at the highest level. For a state led by leaders who would surrender at one phone call the USA need not have much strategic thinking to do. God forbid if there is a regime change in Pakistan the new assembly would still have the old faces.
Iran remains high on the US list of terrorist states. In all logic Iran and Pakistan represent the next hard nuts to be cracked. Technically Pakistan is a US ally and Musharraf is a loyal statesman, but there is no denial of the fact that Musharraf heads a regime in which certain factors have been institutionalised. The Pakistani Nuclear programme is a national asset and no man , even Musharraf can bargain on it or cut it to size. Similarly Pakistan’s support to the war of liberation in Kashmir has become a sacred policy, which cannot be altered. Thus one man, however loyal cannot serve US interests. Thus the need for another war against weapons of mass destruction.
The fact that the stated US aim in the forthcoming war against Iraq is removal of a regime holding or having the potential to manufacture weapons of mass destruction means that the US juggernaut will not stop at Iraq. It will roll on to Iran and Pakistan. Anyone who thinks that the February 2003 Third Gulf War is the last war of 2003 lives in a fool’s paradise. The Iraq War is only a first phase of the US War against Non Christian WMD States. Whatever appeasement Pakistan practices it will not escape the fate of Czechoslovakia or Austria. Iran’s case is an even worse scenario. The country has oil. It dominates the entire Oil Lanes of Persian Gulf from Kuwait till Oman. It is the transit route for any oil pipeline from Central Asia or Caucasus that has to bypass turbulent Afghanistan. It has a nuclear programme. It has ethnic nationalities and can be balkanised.
Pakistan represents a more serious threat scenario than Iran. The only qualification it has is that it is headed by a collaborator regime whose economic survival lies in US aid. Yet this does not reduce its threat potential. The Musharraf Regime represents a transitional stage in Pakistan’s political history. Not getting into arguments about Musharraf’s policies there is no doubt that by aligning with USA in 2001 Musharraf has only obtained a short term tactical breathing space. Due to short term operational expediencies the USA used Pakistan as a subsidiary ally for airfields, intelligence cooperation etc . In the process they made firm inroads in the country’s political and military hierarchy. The so called war on terror enabled the CIA and FBI to achieve greater penetration while ostensibly carrying out hot pursuit of terrorists. The centre of gravity however is Pakistan’s Nuclear Programme. Unless and until this programme is dismantled US strategic objectives would not be achieved. Musharraf is only a mortal; how long can he perform sentry duty and stop this nuclear arsenal from falling into wrong hands. It is an irrefutable historical fact that superpowers do not trust individuals in the long-term strategic dimension when it is a question of guarding fixed tangible strategic assets. Thus somwhere in 2003 or 2004 there would be a 2 minutes over Kahuta or Sargodha as there was a 2 minutes over Baghdad in 1981 when the Iraqi Nuclear Reactor was destroyed. Sooner or later Pakistan would be an Iraq. Those who think that this would not happen need to study a little world history.
Now the role of China and Russia. These countries so far have played the role of innocent bystanders since 1991 once Iraq was attacked and Afghanistan occupied in 2001. The more they do it the more they would expose their soft under bellies to a later attack. A Pakistan and Iran cut quartered and Balkanised would threaten both Russia and Iran while India works as a junior partner of USA to deal with Tibet, Myanmar and South East Asia.
Sooner or later the China or Russia would have to step in and fight the global game or they would be reduced to neutral Switzerland or Sweden cut to size and militarily defanged. So far the so-called threat of Islamic Extremism has kept the Russians and Chinese away from the conflict. However now the conflict is being transformed from one against Islamic Terror to one against WMD holding states who are non Christian, non West European ,non Asian or from the Yellow race. Sooner or later China and Russia will suffer the state of being vassals of USA if they sit on the fence and watch while one state after another is bombarded from the air and destroyed. If Russia and China do not play a role and do not jump into the field they will be remembered in history as states whose leadership failed to penetrate through the fog of global grand strategic deception.
Lastly a question whether 2003 would be USA’s finest or worst hour. The answer lies in how fast or how slowly would Bush proceed with the war .How much would be the gap between the War on Iraq and the War on Iran and the War on Pakistan. How ably would the Middle East Arab Regimes who tow the US line survive the Gulf War. What would be the Russian and Chinese response to the US War on Iraq. These are intangible questions and in them lies the riddle of history.
Strategic thought in order to be effective cannot place reliance on precedent alone. The precedent from which the present Bush Strategy stems is the triumph of Adolf Hitler in the period 1938-40. He sees that in this case there is no USA or USSR to restrain Hitler since USA alone is the superpower. This is a big misconception. The USA is the only superpower only as long as Putin and Zhiao remain indecisive and irresolute. The day both or either of them starts supporting an anti US insurgency in any of the belligerent countries USA will no longer be the sole superpower. The logical outcome of a US attack on North Korea would be a Chinese attack on Taiwan. If yesterday USA was supporting Hikmatyar , there is a possibility that China may support Hikmatyar .China must because if it does not do it tommorrow the USA would support a Chinese Muslim Hikmatyar in Singkiang. A Chechen leader in Grozny. While Iraq, Iran ,Pakistan and North Korea are the apples in Phase One the bigger melons in USA’s phase two are China and Russia. Its better that both realise it now rather at a time when the knife is already slicing them.
Military force has its limitations. A Daisy Cutter can cut the flesh and bone but it cannot destroy the spirit of man. USSR disintegrated not because of NATO but because of the spirit of defiance in the citizens and because of the flame of defiance lit by dissidents. New York was attacked for the first time in America’s post 1783 history not by USSR or Japan or Germany but by a group of hitherto unknown young men. While Third World leaders, politicians or generals can be brought the Third World masses are no longer the sheep or cattle that they were before 9/11.No one nowhere is safe today and if Vietnam can be napalmed so can New York.
At the moment while outwardly at its strongest the USA is most vulnerable in an indirect subtle way. It is fighting against forces that have no fixed centre of gravity. The Al Qaeda or its variants are a global organisation. They are bound by ideology not by national boundaries. The US cannot simply cross the Rhine as in 1945 and destroy the so called Terrorists. The enemy is every where and nowhere. This is the beauty of low intensity war. In pursuit of its so called war against terror it has annoyed many of its allies and friends not only in Middle East but even in Europe.
2003 may prove to be the culminating point of US power or a short term sunshine period of glory for USA followed by a long period of serious global crisis and use of weapons of WMD. Appearances are deceiving. Human perception has its limitations and as per Tolstoy the role of individual leaders in history is limited. In the final outcome war remains intangible, unpredictable and sublime. In this lies the hope for survival of smaller nations. Man is irrational and does not decide rationally. Freud came to this conclusion long ago.
British forces in countdown to war
By Michael Smith of the London Telegraph [the article has been shortened].
Jan 7-14: Government orders deployment of forces to Gulf and mobilisation of
reservists to increase pressure on Saddam to give up weapons of mass
destruction. Units from 1 (UK) Armoured Division carry out training in
preparation for Gulf deployment.
Jan 14-21: Royal Navy task force led by aircraft carrier Ark Royal sails for
Gulf, includes helicopter carrier Ocean, destroyer Liverpool and frigate
Marlborough. Ro-Ro ferries begin loading up tanks, vehicles and equipment
from 1 UK Armoured Division at Bremerhaven in Germany and from two
mechanised infantry regiments at Marchwood, near Southampton. British
officers take part in Victory Scrimmage, command post exercise led by US
Army's 5th Corps, which will lead any ground war. Exercise will specifically
"flesh out invasion plans for Iraq".
Jan 27: UN weapons inspectors report back on Iraqi compliance with UN
Security Council Resolution 1441. But President Bush has already declared
Iraq to be in "material breach" of the resolution and America is expected to
go back to the Security Council and ask for another resolution authorising
force.
Feb 1-15: RAF and US aircraft escalate attacks on Iraq as part of final
warning to Saddam to comply with UN resolution. US troop build-up in the
Gulf increases. Royal Navy task force carries out exercises on way to the
Gulf.
Feb 16-Mar 8: British armour and troops begin arriving in Kuwait and
preparing for action, including acclimatisation and fitting of desertisation
equipment. Royal Navy task force arrives in Gulf to join the destroyer
Cardiff, the frigate Cumberland and the mine countermeasures vessels
Sandown, Bangor, Blyth and Brocklesby.
British troops ordered to Gulf
The Government will order more than 20,000 troops to the Gulf and the
mobilisation of around 7,000 reservists next week in preparation for a war
in Iraq.
It follows a spate of announcements of American preparations, which are part
of a deliberately phased build-up, named Force on Mind by British planners,
and intended to avert war if possible.
But with Saddam apparently determined not to back down, there is acceptance
on both sides of the Atlantic that war is beginning to look inevitable.
The pressure will begin with the departure of the Royal Navy force in about
two weeks. At the same time, roll-on roll-off ferries will start loading
tanks and other armoured vehicles at Bremerhaven in Germany and Southampton.
Units from 1 (UK) Armoured Division will be training in preparation for
their roles in any invasion, with much of the emphasis placed on operating
in areas contaminated by chemical or biological weapons.
British officers will also take part in Victory Scrimmage, an American
command post exercise under Gen William Wallace, the commander of America's
5th Corps, which will lead any ground operation in Iraq.
The Ministry of Defence has spent the past month talking to employers to
ensure that reservists are ready for mobilisation. The Army alone needs to
call up 6,500 reservists, including more than 2,000 doctors and nursing
staff.
The naval force will include a commando battle group made up of 40 Commando,
Royal Marine, plus a commando artillery battery and a commando engineer
squadron, which will embark on board the helicopter carrier Ocean.
That, and attempts by the ministry to rent a semi-submersible ship that
would be needed to take landing craft to the Gulf, suggest the involvement
of British commandos in an amphibious assault on southern Iraq.
The commandos would operate alongside American marines from the 1st Marine
Expeditionary Force, which was ordered to the Gulf this week.
The US air force and the RAF, which already has 1,100 men and women in the
region involved in patrolling the no-fly zones, are expected to double the
number of aircraft deployed in the Gulf.
They have stepped up their attacks on Iraqi air defences and communications
as part of no-fly zone patrols and the first phase of any war will begin
with a major intensification of allied air raids.
Israel sharpens Arrows for Iraq war
By Alan Phillps writing in the London Telegraph.
Israel announced plans yesterday for a final test of its new missile
interceptor, a key element in its preparations to defend the country against
a feared attack by Iraqi Scuds.
The joint test of the Arrow system with Patriot anti-missile batteries,
involving 1,000 US soldiers who will stay for the duration of the expected
war in Iraq, will be the biggest and most sophisticated anti-missile
deployment seen in peacetime.
The Arrow system, developed with America at a cost of £1.3 billion, has been
test-launched nine times, but not in battlefield conditions.
Shaul Mofaz, the Israeli defence minister, said the next trial would involve
multiple launches. "Sometimes there are technical problems," he said. "If it
doesn't succeed, we will have time to fix it and act accordingly."
The key test of Israeli defences will be the first joint deployment of
Patriot anti-missile batteries - which performed poorly in the last Gulf War
in 1991 - with the new Arrow system, untried in combat.
War in Iraq has been predicted next month and Israel is marshalling a
sizeable air defence system and civilian measures, including gas-mask
training for schoolchildren and 20,000 inoculations for military and medical
personnel against smallpox.
Two Arrow batteries are already deployed in Israel. Their giant radar
arrays, as big as a double-decker bus, are visible from afar to reassure the
population that the army is ready.
America is supplying two batteries of the latest version of the Patriot, to
work with the older systems that Israel already holds. "The US is storing
ammunition and military equipment in Israel in a big way. There will be
tests to make the two systems work together and establish which missile will
be the most appropriate for the target," said a western military official.
Both systems have a range of more than 60 miles, raising the prospect that
incoming missiles could be shot down well before they reach Israeli
population centres.
The deployment will be carefully watched abroad, with foreign armies keen to
see if the systems do their job on the battlefield, rather than in the
imagination of the military, as happened in 1991.
In the first Gulf war, the Patriot was oversold. The Israelis said then it
had a 90 per cent strike rate against incoming Scuds. The American military
later admitted a hit rate of "less than 25 per cent" and an Israeli expert
concluded that only one Israeli missile hit its target.
Only one element is missing from the scenario: the Scuds. Britain estimates
that Saddam has only 15 left and that they may have been sawn up, hidden and
then welded together. An Israeli official said yesterday Iraq has up to 60
missiles, together with six launchers - giant articulated lorries which must
trundle to western Iraq to be within range of Israel.
The Israeli military is keen to maximise the threat to justify the expense
of the Arrow and its request to America for £2.7 billion to help pay for
home-front protection. But senior military officers admit that the chances
of a Scud getting through the upgraded defences are low.
As part of efforts to keep Israel out of the war, America and Britain are
expected to take control of western Iraq as a priority to stop the mobile
launchers getting within range of Israel. Even if they are moved at night,
special forces troops are likely to be watching the roads.
The Scuds fired in 1991 were unreliable. Some broke up in the atmosphere,
confusing the Patriots' radar. After 10 years of storage, their state can
only be guessed at.
All Israelis have gas masks at home in case of chemical or gas attack and
they are renewed regularly. There are no signs of panic at the gas mask
depots yet, reflecting the fact that most Israelis think their chances of
being blown up in a bus are greater than falling victim to a Scud. The
authorities hold regular drills to cope with chemical or gas attack, all
designed to reassure Israelis that they are in control.
If Scuds do not get through, military planners are ready for other forms of
attack such as kamikaze Iraqi bombers streaking at twice the speed of sound
towards Tel Aviv, crop-sprayers loaded with chemical agents flying over the
Lebanese border, or an old Soviet-made long-range bomber using a civilian
air corridor near Israel and then dashing for the nearest city. The most
dangerous threat might be hidden from radars, spy planes and satellites, for
example anthrax spores, or poisons in the water supply.
The government has warned Israelis to keep a three-day supply of bottled
water - the time required to clean a polluted system.
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3
By A.H. Amin
[Editor’s Note: Major [Retired] A.H. Amin is an iconoclastic historian and military analyst who is quite familiar to South Asian readers. To our western readers his views often appear extreme. They nonetheless represent the views of many South Asian and Muslim intellectuals and are worth reading, whether we agree with the views or not. As always, we will be happy to carry any dissenting opinions.]
Operational strategy has been described in the standard German General Staff terminology as the art of transforming paper plans into execution against the pressure of friction of war. Thus the true gauge of greatness of a general is operational strategy. A plan may be brilliant in conception but may fail in execution because of poor operational strategy as happened at Gallipoli or even in 1965 in the Pakistani offensive at Khem Karan or even as recently as at Kargil in 1999 .
The present US strategy is aimed at castrating non West European, non Christian and Yellow race regimes of their nuclear deterrent power so that they can be made real vassals of USA like Japan, South Korea and the South American Banana Republics . Oil is an added price, an added advantage, but the aim is world domination, the creation of a White Anglo Saxon First Reich. Russia is too coarse to be European; China too yellow to be a superpower; the Arabs too dirty to have oil; Turks and Indians and some Uzbeks and Tajiks good for gutter cleaning .
The true worth of USA 's war plans would be seen in how they execute them in 2003. Historically US generalship apart from Lee and Stonewall Jackson in the US Civil War has been mediocre at best. Patton, Macarthur etc all relied on superior technology, airpower and even weight of numbers . The Second Gulf War of 1990 was another case of triumph of overwhelming forces against heavily outnumbered ones, at least technically. While the Germans literally brought France to its knees within two weeks the USA and its allies took many months to recapture France. Even in Afghanistan a Fourth Rate country by military standards the US performance so far has been pathetic despite collaborator regimes on both sides of Durand Line .
The important part of the affair is that in one go Bush intends to take care of Iraq followed by Iran and Pakistan thus dominating the entire area from Istanbul to Karachi, making the Indian Ocean a US fief. The important fact is that Iraq would be a jumping board for destroying Iranian oil fields which can be conveniently destroyed within 48 hours by concentrated airpower coupled with commando strikes from US controlled Basra area where the US intends proclaiming a Shia Republic, A pro USA Shia Republic. Pakistani nuclear installations can be conveniently dealt with from Kandahar and Bagram airbases.
The 2003 War if it starts in February would have two objectives: firstly to remove Saddam and secondly to capture Iraq's Southern area from where US forces can launch initially air attacks to destroy Iranian oil installations and then create a safe no fly zone for Khuaestan's Iranian Arabs. With Iranian Oil knocked out Iran's financial potential would be knocked out. This would be followed by a long air war against Iranian capital Tehran and interdicting Iran's lines of communications with Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to ensure that no Russian aid reaches Iran. In addition sudden out break of insurrection in Iranian Baluchistan would block the Chah Bahar naval supply route while other ports like Bandar Abbas would be bombed and blocked.
With Iran knocked out and castrated the Pakistani regime would be brought to its knees and submit to US terms. In case there is a resolute man in Islamabad who defies dictation the Indians would mobilize their forces and force Pakistan to concentrate on its western borders. With this done two scenarios are likely . This is how the scenario may develop. An extremist take over in Pakistan. US fears that WMD may fall in hands of extremist elements. The resultant US air and commando strikes against Pakistani nuclear installations in area Sargodha-Mianwali-Attock-Baluchistan. Karachi blockaded by Indian navy and Gwadar port captured by a US sponsored Omani force which would be a signal for secessionist forces in Pakistani and Iranian Baluchistan to start a war of liberation. With Pakistan stripped of its nuclear deterrent India can dictate terms to Pakistan since militarily Pakistan's position would become as weak as it was in 1971.
With Iraq balkanized, its oil installations either destroyed or in Turkish-Kurd control, Iran's entire oil fields destroyed, Tehran reduced to rubble, Pakistan's Nuclear installations destroyed the whole equation would be changed.
Iran without oil would be a Somalia. Pakistan without its nuclear deterrent would be at the mercy of India’s much larger conventional forces and without a war Pakistan's ruling junta would agree to a Versailles like peace with India.
China and Russia would look on with wide open mouths astounded at their supreme inaction .The US juggernaut 's first aim is Iraq but that is only a stepping stone, the attack will go on until Kahuta is destroyed.
Mr Bush must be stopped from executing this Genghis Khan type plan. In operational strategy such things look simple on paper but are difficult to execute. Maybe the US gets bogged down in Iraq. Maybe China mobilizes for an attack on Taiwan. May be the Russians enter into a military alliance with Iran.
Iraq may start World War Three just as Belgium started World War One, and Poland started World War Two. Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread.
[Editor’s Opinion: We think that Russia and China’s fear of Islamic fundamentalism is sufficiently great that they will refrain from hindering any US effort to assert hegemony over Southwest Asia. As for Pakistan, Major Amin has, in the last year, repeatedly said in other forums that his country’s leadership has already sold out to the United States. In our opinion, the US has already neutralized Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, or more accurately, its proto nuclear weapons. For fifty years there was no nuclear threat to stop the Indians from overrunning Pakistan. Luckily for Pakistan, the Indians are so adept at shooting themselves in the head there has been no need for the Pakistanis to do it. So we see no reason to worry on India’s account. Iran is an interesting case because some believe it is cooperating with the United States to bring Iraq down and it is only a matter of time before Iran opens up to the capitalist west. Iranians are Muslims but not Arab. Their natural destiny lies with the west. We find intriguing the omission of Saudi Arabia in the US list of targets. Many, including ourselves, believe that Saudi Arabia and Egypt are the real objectives.]
British Military Units for Iraq
This is a hurried note from our editor Johann Price, sent a week ago.
Total British contribution will be in the region of ~ 25,000. You've probably also already heard of the RN task force (Naval Task Group 2003) sailing in January with the carrier HMS Ark Royal, frigate HMS Marlborough, destroyer HMS Liverpool, supply ship RFA Fort Victoria and tanker RFA Orangeleaf and of course an SSN. HMS Ocean with 3 Cdo Bde HQ and a full RM Commando embarked will most likely accompany them. Already in the region are the minesweepers Blyth, Brocklesby, Bangor and Sandown, accompanied by RFA landing ship Sir Bedivere, which can have another RM Commando embarked while in port (such as Al-Jubayl). As I understand it the RN will carry responsibilities for the Northern Persian Gulf, and projecting RM and supporting airpower around Basra.
The British ground contribution is going to be built around 1(UK) Armored Division and the usual Special Forces. 7 Armd Bde is going for sure, but there are some questions regarding 4 Armd Bde given the timetable and available strategic lift. For diplomatic reasons Blair has delayed the meat of the deployment, and the available time for intensive exercises and desertification trials will be dangerously low. Inexplicably 4 Armd Bde was the unit that deployed in ex Saif Sareea II and which gained a great deal of knowledge in regards to desert operations (in Oman dust was a much bigger problem than heat).
US Forces to SWA and Operation Southern Watch Strikes US Forces To South West Asia; Operation Southern Watch
Orbat.com has not yet begun to compile its own list for Operation Bold Viper. Here is a partial listing from our friends, www.globalsecurity.org to tide our readers over. The site has many more details, but may prove difficult for non-US readers as the level of detail is high.
V Corps Soldiers Receive Deployment Orders HEIDELBERG, Germany – Approximately 800 soldiers from the U.S. Army’s V Corps received orders this week to deploy to the Central Command area of responsibility.
The soldiers, from the 130th Engineer Brigade, 205th Military Intelligence Brigade, 22nd Signal Brigade, and 3rd Corps Support Command, will deploy between now and the middle of February. The tailored package of engineer and intelligence assets will provide unique capabilities to the CENTCOM commander.
The duration of the deployment has not been determined.
Sixth Strike in 8 Days: Coalition Forces Target Air defense Communications Facilities
MACDILL AFB, FL -- In response to Iraqi hostile acts against Coalition aircraft monitoring the Southern No-Fly Zone, Operation SOUTHERN WATCH Coalition aircraft used precision-guided weapons today to target four Iraqi air defense cable repeaters. The facilities were located southeast of Al Kut, approximately 100 miles southeast of Baghdad. The strikes occurred at approximately 3 p.m. EST.
Target battle damage assessment is ongoing.
Coalition strikes in the No-Fly Zones are executed as a self-defense measure in response to Iraqi hostile threats and acts against Coalition forces and their aircraft. Today’s strike came after Iraqi forces fired anti-aircraft artillery at Coalition aircraft in the Southern No-Fly Zone.
The last Coalition strike in the Southern No-Fly Zone was January 1, 2003, against an Iraqi military air defense radar near Al Qurnah.
Coalition aircraft never target civilian populations or infrastructure and go to painstaking lengths to avoid injury to civilians and damage to civilian facilities.
More Ground Troops to SWA
A report in the Stars and Stripes dated January 2, 2003 indicates that elements of the 1st Infantry, 1st Armored, 1st Cavalry and 101st Airborne Divisions will be gathering in Germany in mid-January under exercise Victory Scrimmage, where they will flesh out the ground strategy against Iraq. Editor’s Note: the addition of 1st Armored Division to Bold Viper is news to us; possibly some units will go but not the whole division.
Patriots to Israel
Debka reports that three Patriot missile batteries have deployed to Israel. The report below confirms the Debka story.
1,000 soldiers from the 69th Air Defense Artillery Brigade have deployed to Israel recently. This deployment is part of Operation Shining Presence, a series of annual exercises involving United States and Israeli forces. This is not, however, a routine deployment as US forces are scheduled to remain in the area following the conclusion of the exercise.
Reservist Combat Units Start Activating
the 2nd and 3rd Battalions of the Florida National Guard’s 53rd Brigade have mobilized and are getting ready for additional training. This brigade is an enhanced readiness unit, capable of deploying to combat within 90 days after mobilization. Globalsecurity.org says it does not know what mission is envisaged: it could be homeland security, security for European bases, or a deployment to SW Asia. The brigade is listed as a roundout unit for the 24th Mechanized Division, which is essentially a division HQ maintained in the active army but without any permanent active units. The division will have to be activated to replace the 3rd Infantry Division which is the process of shipping out.
The 53rd is one of 15 enhanced brigades that are tasked to enable the US 2-front war strategy. Like other enhanced brigades, it requires 35 days training before deployment. Periscope, the military information service Globalsecurity.org uses, estimates that four brigades can be trained at a time.
Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail Forwarded by Ram Narayanan, an article by C. Raja Mohan from the The Hindu. NEW DELHI Dec. 31. If there were any doubts that the development of missiledefences was one of India's most important national security imperatives, theyshould be removed once and for all by the latest statements of the PakistanPresident, Pervez Musharraf, on his country's nuclear posture. Gen. Musharraf's refusal to end cross-border terrorism and his threat to usenuclear weapons in the very first stages of a military conflict should make theearly deployment of missile defences an urgent national priority for India. The central lesson from Gen. Musharraf's nuclear blackmail is simple. Withoutneutralising Pakistan's nuclear calculus based on the first use of nuclearweapons, New Delhi will not be able to bring effective military pressure onIslamabad to give up cross-border terrorism. Intuitively, India has already been engaged in an effort to acquire missiledefences. It has been negotiating with Israel for the purchase of the Arrowmissile, which has some capability to intercept an incoming missile with anuclear warhead. India has also been looking at advanced air defence systemsfrom Russia, besides trying to develop some of its own. There has also been some talk here on considering the purchase of the moreadvanced Patriot system from the United States. The Bush Administration,sections of which have been sympathetic to India's strategic requirements, hasoffered to make a preliminary assessment of India's missile defence needs.Senior officials from India and the U.S. will meet later this month for asubstantive discussion on the subject. The time has come for India to move beyond this tentative exploration of missiledefence options to a more robust effort that would involve early acquisition ofsystems from abroad as well as the initiation of a substantive national researchand development effort to create indigenous capabilities in missile defencetechnology. Two national security considerations must guide India. One is the organic linkbetween Pakistan's nuclear posture and its support to cross-border terrorism.Once it acquired nuclear weapons in the late 1980s, Pakistan deliberately chosecross-border terrorism as its national strategy against India. Pakistan was confident that it had neutralised India's conventional militarysuperiority with its nuclear weapons. It believed that New Delhi had no optionsto threaten military action against Islamabad's provocative support tocross-border terrorism. India's coercive diplomacy after the attack on the Parliament in December 2001was a serious attempt to get out of this difficult corner. Although India'sthreat to launch an all-out war against Pakistan produced some diplomaticdividends, it could not, in the end, compel Gen. Musharraf to give upcross-border terrorism. But the challenge remains. One of the few options available for India is to find ways to blunt the nuclearblackmail of Pakistan. While the immediate effectiveness of missile defence maybe limited, technologies are beginning to evolve and even the available ones cancertainly complicate the nuclear calculations of Pakistan. Uncertainty over the long-term evolution of Pakistan is another reason why Indiashould be investing in missile defences. The prospect of the state failing inPakistan and the nuclear weapons falling into the hands of extremists is not onethat India should be scoffing at. Missile defences would be a huge hedge againstsuch a development. Although India boldly supported the missile defence initiative of the BushAdministration in May 2001, apprehensions about Russian and Chinese reactionstended to dampen that initial enthusiasm. Russia is now on-board the missiledefence bandwagon and it is only a matter of time before China begins to developits own capabilities in the area. In any case, the task of Indian diplomacy should be to promote India's nationalsecurity interests. The immediate diplomatic challenge is to overcome the residual resistance inWashington against Indo-U.S. cooperation in missile defences and the oppositionthere to Israeli sale of Arrow system to India. The U.S. State Department, which has been unable to get Gen. Musharraf todeliver on his promises to end cross-border terrorism, has little credibility inopposing the transfer of missile defence technologies to India. In fact, every argument that has been used by Washington to justify its missiledefence project applies with greater urgency to New Delhi. Besides the U.S., India must also begin to engage Japan, South Korea and otherAsian countries who are threatened by the proliferation of weapons of massdestruction and missile technology to irresponsible regimes like those inPakistan and North Korea.
Bangladeshi women fit to fight
Forwarded by Gordon A. MacKinlay, an article by Alastair Lawson of the BBC.
History has been made in Bangladesh with the commissioning of the first
batch of women officers into the 100,000-strong army. Twenty women were
commissioned in a ceremony held in the southern city of Chittagong. Their
passing out parade follows a tough selection process and two years of
intensive training alongside their male counterparts.
The occasion means that Bangladesh now becomes one of the few Muslim
countries to have female soldiers.
The passing out ceremony was especially significant for the women cadets as
it was presided over by Khaleda Zia, the female prime minister of
Bangladesh.
The women who graduated are the cream of the cream from 30,000 applicants
who applied to become officers in the Bangladesh Army. Only a handful were
selected to do the course and of those about a third dropped out.
The successful women join an army which over the years has earned a sound
reputation as a regular contributor to UN peacekeeping missions. They say
that while the course was tough, they succeeded in keeping up with their
male counterparts. "Ladies in Bangladesh are not doing physical activity too
much so in the physical aspect we had some problems," admits one female
soldier.
"But nowadays we have coped with the training and I don't find any problems
and I want to prove that the Bangladeshi girls, they can do anything."
Another woman says that at first it was difficult as each day they had less
and less time to rest.
"Every moment we have to be busy with various type of trainings like assault
course and drill PT, academic exams.
"So it was hard but we have cope up with that and now it is not too hard for
us."
The idea is to introduce women as officers first and then put them in the
ranks of active service soldiers. Previously, women were restricted to the
medical corps.
At present, there are no plans to put women in combat roles - even though
senior officers say that male soldiers would have no problems accepting
orders from a woman.
Growth momentum hinges on stability in 2003 Jang of Pakistan.
By Nadeem Malik
ISLAMABAD: After crumbling under the twin burdens of large budget and current account deficits for years, Pakistan's economy breathed a sigh of relief during 2002.
Pakistani stock market was up by almost 110 percent, with KSE 11-Share Index closing at 2701.4 on the last trading session of 2002, from 1273.1 of the corresponding session of 2001. Market capitalization almost doubled, with a new record turnover. Stocks offered almost 12 percent dividends.
This performance made Karachi Stock Exchange best among the Asian region, where share prices were wiped out during the year. Many analysts believe that it was one-off correction, as the country had seen dramatic developments on the external sector of the economy since 9/11 incident.
Pakistan's official foreign exchange reserves crossed $9 billion mark, with every possibility of adding a couple of billions more during next six months of the year, provided it generally remained unscathed during the Gulf crisis. Rupee had been rising high against the dollar, as the inflow of remittances had touched about $2 billion mark during first two quarters of the year 2002-03.
However, newly inducted Commerce Minister Hamayun Akhtar Khan faces a gigantic challenge of jacking up export numbers to higher levels, which saw signs of recovery only on the back of market access provided by the European Union. He had to seek some concessions from the reluctant US officials, or he would need to search new markets and go for diversification of the product range.
Tax revenues were showing healthy signs. There were possibilities that the Central Board of Revenue (CBR) may show positive results by striking the targets for the first time in its history, as imports were rising.
However, failure of all the past governments to correct the operations of the state-owned power utilities was likely to pose a major threat in the near future. The Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) and Karachi Electric Supply Corporation (KESC) were as bad today as ever before. In fact, cash shortfalls were on the higher side, due to rising amount of the bills receivable from the public sector and FATA.
The petroleum sector was all set to come under large price adjustments in the near future, particularly if the Gulf crisis erupts into an outright war. In this regard, Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali's Saudi trip could be of great help for the state, if he succeeded in improving the tenure of the Saudi Oil Facility (SOF). People might not be eligible for the benefits, but budget would get a huge cushion.
Efforts to privatize large state-owned enterprises could be dashed by the outcome of US-Iraq tension. Major potential buyers of Pakistani assets were likely to come out of the Gulf region. Any adverse situation could derail the early divestiture of large state enterprises.
The financial sector performance had remained lack lustre during the year 2002. Despite sharp reduction in the T-Bills rates by the central bank, commercial banks were not able to pass through the benefit. This could be the order of the day for the banking sector in 2003 to bring down the lending rates to single digit. However, this development may precede with a further reduction in the rate of return on the savings schemes, following similar reduction in the Pakistan Investment Bonds (PIBs).
Overall economic growth had also decelerated in recent years, with average GDP growth of 3.3 percent. This, coupled with strong demand management, considerably increased unemployment in the country. Though inflation had remained low, largely due to strength of rupee during last 15-months.
The beginning of 2003 could set a road of recovery, particularly if Pakistan could ensure smooth relations with the International Financial Institutions (IFIs), political situation remains stable and peace overtures make room in the region. Above all, Pakistan's relations with the United States would get added significance, as there were skepticism over the future objectives of the so-called new world order. The last day of 2002, saw US B-52 bombing a Pakistani outpost.
There were indications that the United States may attack Iraq soon after January 27, 2002, when Hans Blix appears at the UN Security Council for the last rituals. Next policy thrust of the United States south in the Asian region would continue to be main focus.
Pakistan's efforts to achieve higher rates of growth to dent poverty at the gross roots level would largely hinge from the regional peace, and internal political stability. The growth rate could pick up if investment climate remains conducive, following recovery of the external sector. Though, the Economic Affairs Division (EAD) had sought extension from the Paris Club secretariat to complete the debt re-profiling process, it appears that debt issue would not threaten the external balances in the short-run.
In case, regional situation aggravates, or the political instability surfaces, growth momentum would be under threat once again. Without higher and sustainable levels of growth, no poverty alleviation effort could succeed.
[Editor’s comment. At time of writing, US authorities say as many as 19 Pakistani men may have clandestinely entered the United States in the last few days. New York City is under a massive security alert for New Year’s Eve, indicating US law enforcement believes their target is New York. Halfway across the world, Taliban and pro-Taliban fighters based in Baluchistan and the NWFP have been attacking US forces in Afghanistan and calling for a holy war. Now, Pakistan has quite successfully kicked India around over Kashmir for the last fifteen years. The United States, however, is not India. Americans are proud, quick to anger, and possessed of the most frightening means of violence in the history of humankind. Tempers in Washington are already running high. Unless Pakistan decides clearly and quickly on which side it belongs in the war against terror, a lone B-52 attacking an outpost on Pakistan territory is going to be the least of Islamabad’s problems in the year 2003. ]
Debka on the Israeli Economy
Israeli economy marks 2002 as worst year since 1953: Negative growth of 1pc, unemployment at 10.4pc, GNP dropped by 3pc, wages eroded by 5pc, investment and living standards plummeted.
Planners warn more of the same in 2003 without policy reforms.
The Jerusalem Post adds: Gross domestic product (GDP) dropped a preliminary 1 percent in 2002, to NIS 485.6 billion in current prices, following a 0.9% drop in 2001, and a record 7.4% growth in 2000, the Central Bureau of Statistics reported on Tuesday.
US 3rd Infantry Division [Mechanized] alerted for Gulf
As expected, the US 3rd Infantry Division [Mechanized] was ordered on New Year’s Eve to the Gulf from Ft. Stewart, Georgiaa.com] The Abraham Lincoln carrier battlegroup has been ordered to remain in the Gulf region instead of heading home as earlier planned. Two carrier battle groups and two amphibious ready groups are on 96 hours sailing notice. Five USAF Air Expeditionary Forces may already be in the Gulf or in the process of deploying. The US 1st Marine Division at Camp Pendleton, California, is awaiting its orders to ship out. [Various sources.] We have had a list of US ground forces to be used for the Iraq operation for some time, and believe it is no longer any real secret. Nonetheless, we do not feel comfortable publishing the list.
The UK Guardian’s Comment on Pakistani Infiltrators in the US
America: Hyper-alert, but for what?
For complete story click here.
There were five of them, or maybe, according to earlier reports, as many as 19. They crossed the border from Canada on Christmas Eve, slipping unseen into the mountainous northern reaches of New York state - or perhaps it was from the south, across the New Mexican desert. They may be Islamic extremists, taking their positions for a co-ordinated terrorist assault on America in the coming days, but, then again, they may not.
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- In sharp differences with Washington, South Korea said North Korea does not have nuclear weapons and the United States should open direct talks with Pyongyang on the crisis.
South Korean Prime Minister Kim Suk-soo told parliament Monday there is no proof the North has produced nuclear weapons despite U.S. assertions that Pyongyang has one or two atomic bombs.
"North Korea is believed to have extracted enough plutonium to make one or two bombs before 1994," Kim said. "Since there has been no confirmation that it actually has produced nuclear weapons, we believe that they do not have any."
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said Sunday in Germany that most intelligence services know the North Koreans have "one or two nuclear weapons" and "they may have enough nuclear material to make an additional six to eight nuclear weapons" by May or June.
North Korea has said it has the right to develop nuclear weapons and wants bilateral talks with the United States. The United States says the North must meet its international obligations, including an accord with South Korea that the peninsula would be kept free of nuclear weapons.
South Korea, too, wants direct U.S.-Pyongyang discussions. Returning from a visit to the United States on Sunday, Chyung Dai-chul, an envoy of South Korea's President-elect Roh Moo-hyun, said he "asked Washington to open direct U.S.-North Korea talks soon without condition."
But in Washington, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Washington would eventually talk with North Korea but it should be within a "multilateral setting."
"We should not let North Korea dictate the terms under which these conversations take place. I think there will ultimately be conversations, but I think other nations have a role to play," Powell said on Fox Sunday News.
Powell cited China's possible role in defusing the tension. China, a traditional ally of North Korea, wants the Korean Peninsula to be free of nuclear weapons.
"Half their foreign aid goes to North Korea," Powell said. "Eighty percent of North Korea's wherewithal, with respect to energy and economic activity, comes from China. China has a role to play, and I hope China will play that role."
However, China's ties with North Korea have waned over the years. Also, China likely is mindful that economic pressure on North Korea could send more destitute North Koreans across the border, leading to a humanitarian crisis on Chinese soil.
In other developments, U.S. Ambassador Howard H. Baker warned in Tokyo of a possible North Korean missile test over Japan in what could be an effort to increase tension over the North's nuclear programs. North Korea alarmed the region by firing a rocket over Japan and into the Pacific in 1998.
The crisis over North Korea's nuclear programs began in October when U.S. officials said North Korean officials admitted they had a clandestine nuclear weapons program.
Washington and its allies then suspended oil shipments, and North Korea responded by taking steps to reactivate nuclear facilities frozen under a 1994 energy deal with the United States.
The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency is likely to refer the dispute to the U.N. Security Council at a board meeting Wednesday, agency spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said. The council could consider economic and political sanctions.
"It seems like that is the most likely scenario," Fleming said.
North Korea has criticized efforts to bring the nuclear dispute to the U.N. Security Council, saying the standoff over Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions is between the North and the United States only.
President George W. Bush believes the standoff can be resolved peacefully, but he said Friday that "all options are on the table," suggesting that Washington would consider military action.
North Korea accuses the United States of inciting the current nuclear tension as a pretext to invade the communist country.
Despite the nuclear crisis, a North Korean delegation was to arrive in Seoul Tuesday for talks on economic exchanges.
AMMAN, JORDAN – Gambling yet again with his rule, his life, and the fate of one of the most powerful nations in the Middle East, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein appears unfazed by the rising pressure brought to bear by the United States.
Almost nightly on Iraqi television Mr. Hussein calmly waves a Cuban cigar, exhorts his generals to prepare for war, and denies the existence of weapons of mass destruction.
Hussein is an inveterate survivor. Longtime Hussein watchers say hopeless odds to him are simply an opportunity to seal his place in history. "You could make the case that [Hussein] thinks he is protected by Providence, and to some extent there is evidence for that," says Andrew Krepinevich, a former US Army strategic planner who heads the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington. "Saddam feels that he is a man on a mission, and that somehow he will be allowed to complete it."
Such a mind-set is posing problems for US war planners trying to conflict. When will the rational, diplomatic response - now in evidence, even as pressure builds - give way to the violent lashing out of a man with his back to the wall? How might chemical and biological weapons, if Iraq has any, come into play?
Those secrets may rest in Hussein's brass-knuckled - and sometimes white-knuckled - history. Born dirt-poor and unwanted in a Tikrit backwater village, Hussein was able to violently claw his way out of an abused childhood to the top of the ruling Baath Party.
He has survived numerous coup and assassination attempts, a devastating war with Iran in the 1980s, and then took on the US and UN in the 1991 Gulf War. He further survived a widespread, postwar rebellion, followed by more than a decade of sanctions that have impoverished his oil-rich nation.
"We may look at [the current US build-up] and say they odds are really long, and Saddam's answer would be: 'I've been doing this all my life,' says Mr. Krepinevich.
In his first television interview since 1990, which aired on the BBC Tuesday, Hussein said that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction nor any link to Al Qaeda. The CIA assessed last fall, in fact, that Iraq posed little threat if unprovoked. But the agency determined that any conflict that sought regime change was likely to result in Hussein's use of any remaining chemical or biological weapons against US forces and Israel.
Hussein is "not a martyr," and "has this funny kind of optimism," says Jerrold Post, a political psychologist and former US government analyst at George Washington University, who has focused on profiling Hussein for some 15 years.
A formative moment was the 1991 war, which was widely cast in the West as a decisive defeat for Iraq. For Hussein, surviving meant a coveted international role. Palestinians cheered from rooftops as Iraqi Scud missiles struck the Israeli capital; an Arab leader was standing up to the US and its close Jewish ally.
"He was filled with dreams of glory, to follow in the path of Saladin and liberate Jerusalem from the Crusaders ... to be a hero of the Arab world," says Mr. Post. "This was an explosion of narcissism for him. Kuwait quickly went off the screen, and he was a major world leader."
Such grandiose views and Hussein's rule over a deeply ingrained, all-seeing police state are coupled with unreliable information about how aware or isolated Hussein and his people are from the outside world. Iraq is "where you imposed East European knowledge and discipline on Arab wile," says Said Aburish, author of "Saddam Hussein: The Politics of Revenge," who once worked for the Iraqi leader.
"The fact that people can't gather to conspire, combined with the fact that Iraqis have been let down by the US on more than one occasion, means you reach an unknown: Will the Iraqi people respond to an American invasion, and how?" Mr. Aburish says.
Before that moment, few Iraqis will raise their heads above the parapet. Aburish notes that Shiite Muslim opponents of the regime killed a stand-in for Hussein in the early 1980s, and the leader "jumped in his car and ran to the television station to say: 'I'm still around.' " Today "not a trace" exists of that village of 10,000 people north of Baghdad, says Aburish.
Ruthlessness and patience have served Saddam well, so far. "I don't see him as a chess player, which is anticipating moves ahead," says Simon Henderson, a biographer of Hussein in England. "I always see him playing a long game, because he thinks things will work out for him."
As he stalls, the ball has already bounced several times in Hussein's favor - a new crisis has emerged with North Korea, European leaders are divided over war, and antiwar protests have gathered pace worldwide. "A statistician should tell him that the next few bounces are going to be away from him," Henderson says.
The moment it is clear to Hussein that the game has changed could be a dangerous one. "When does he begin to shift to conflict mode, and out of diplomatic mode? asks Krepinevich. "Once that occurs, the restrictions on his actions become almost nil. He has very little incentive to hold back on anything."
The risks of that moment are high, since they will almost certainly come when Hussein's manifestly strong pressure cooker is at bursting point.
"The more stress he is under, the more we can expect to see him becoming more paranoid, more ready to strike out at enemies, real and imagined, while unwinding and disillusioning those around him," says political psychologist Post.
Hussein's personality, Post says, is marked by extreme self-absorption, grandiosity, paranoia - "not crazy, but ready to be attacked, and to attack" - with no constraints on conscience, and a willingness to use "whatever aggression is necessary without a backward look."
"It's sane, but it is the most dangerous combination," says Post. "This is not a man who will go gently into that good night."
February 11, 2003
Debka Argues The Old World Order Is Ending
Editorial from Arabnews.com: Back to 1914?
Pakistan Says Its Nuclear Program In Safe Hands
15 Nations Order Diplomats Back From Kuwait
Iraq February 10
Pakistan, India Expel Top Diplomats February 9
Mega-terror Menaces on Three Continents February 9
What To Expect from Iraq Military February 9
Qatar, al-Qaeda and Iraq February 8
Pakistan diplomat named in FIR for funding militants February 8
Pakistan Says Its Nuclear program In Safe Hands
February 10, 2003
Iraq
Pakistan, India Expel Top Diplomats February 9
Mega-terror Menaces on Three Continents February 9
What To Expect from Iraq Military February 9
Qatar, al-Qaeda and Iraq February 8
Pakistan diplomat named in FIR for funding militants February 8
Pakistan lodges strong protest February 8
British Troops Will Stay in Iraq For 3 Years February 7
Briefs February 7
Afghan National Army Doing Well in the Field February 7
Korean Developments February 6
Cave-Clearing Ops Proceed in Spin Boldak Area February 6
February 9, 2003
Pakistan, India Expel Top Diplomats
Mega-terror Menaces on Three Continents
What To Expect from Iraq Military
Qatar, al-Qaeda and Iraq February 8
Pakistan diplomat named in FIR for funding militants February 8
Pakistan lodges strong protest February 8
British Troops Will Stay in Iraq For 3 Years February 7
Briefs February 7
Afghan National Army Doing Well in the Field February 7
Korean Developments February 6
Cave-Clearing Ops Proceed in Spin Boldak Area February 6
US Reserve Mobilization as of February 5, 2003 February 6
Russia willing to sell missiles, planes to Pakistan February 5
2. Al Qaeda’s top men.
3. Iraqi and Al Qaeda sleeper cells planted in the United States, Europe, the Persian Gulf and Israel.
4. Palestinian terrorists operating on West Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestinian terror groups and militias based in Damascus.
5. Hizballah security and intelligence bodies working in harness with al Qaeda.
6. Hizballah leaders and high officers under...
February 8, 2003
Qatar, al-Qaeda and Iraq
Pakistan diplomat named in FIR for funding militants
Pakistan lodges strong protest
British Troops Will Stay in Iraq For 3 Years February 7
Briefs February 7
Afghan National Army Doing Well in the Field February 7
Korean Developments February 6
Cave-Clearing Ops Proceed in Spin Boldak Area February 6
US Reserve Mobilization as of February 5, 2003 February 6
Russia willing to sell missiles, planes to Pakistan February 5
Afghan troops, Taliban clash near Kandahar February 5
Saddam's Iron Fist Keeps Army in Line February 5
Stratfor On Al Qaeda’s Renewed Campaign February 5
Pakistan diplomat named in FIR for funding militants]
February 7, 2003
British Troops Will Stay in Iraq For 3 Years
Briefs
Afghan National Army Doing Well in the Field
Korean Developments February 6
Cave-Clearing Ops Proceed in Spin Boldak Area February 6
US Reserve Mobilization as of February 5, 2003 February 6
Russia willing to sell missiles, planes to Pakistan February 5
Afghan troops, Taliban clash near Kandahar February 5
Saddam's Iron Fist Keeps Army in Line February 5
Stratfor On Al Qaeda’s Renewed Campaign February 5
John Pike's Assessment on Russians as a Savior for Space Station February 4
India in demand for arms deals February 4
India offered F-16s, transport aircraft February 4
Pakistan Prime Minister Orders Crackdown on Baluch Tribes February 4
Iraq is building a two-ring defense of Baghdad. The Iraqis also are erecting an extensive structure of barriers and other defenses in other key cities, he wrote.
February 6, 2003
Korean Developments
Cave-Clearing Ops Proceed in Spin Boldak Area
US Reserve Mobilization as of February 5, 2003
Russia willing to sell missiles, planes to Pakistan February 5
Afghan troops, Taliban clash near Kandahar February 5
Saddam's Iron Fist Keeps Army in Line February 5
Stratfor On Al Qaeda’s Renewed Campaign February 5
John Pike's Assessment on Russians as a Savior for Space Station February 4
India in demand for arms deals February 4
India offered F-16s, transport aircraft February 4
Pakistan Prime Minister Orders Crackdown on Baluch Tribes February 4
Briefs From the BBC February 3
UN Assessment of Afghanistan Situation February 3
US Troops Wont Be ready Till mid-March February 3
Briefs February 1
February 6, 2003
Orbat.com summary & commentary
Feb. 5, 2003 – As most of our readers are aware, as things come to a head over Iraq the US is desperately trying to keep a lid on Iraq. The (subsequently confirmed) leak from the New York Times earlier this week was that twelve B-52 and another twelve B-1 bombers had been put on alert for deployment to Guam, in response to earlier force requests from Admiral Fargo, Commander in Chief, US Pacific Command. Clearly, the Bush administration wishes to be able to intimidate the North Koreans that it has the striking capability to destroy the nuclear facility at Yongbyon. However with the North Koreans intentions, not means are a the ultimate deterrent than .
Here are three recent articles that provide a little insight in to the US administration’s immediate policy concerns and military constraints.
Washington Post:
U.S. Believes N. Korea Rapidly Seeking Stockpile
North Korea Said to See Opportunity in Iraq Crisis
USA Today: Gulf buildup limits options on Korea, officials say
In the long term of course there are other concerns, given that N.Korea’s history as one of the world’s leading proliferators of WMD and WMD delivery technology. The following articles are based largely on Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
International Herald Tribune: North Korean sale to terrorists feared
Financial Times: Washington issues grim warning on N Korea
So what is the administration’s game plan? Once again we must look at the statements from senior administration officials.
Senators Question Bush Approach To North Korea
Rumsfeld: Bombers not signal to N. Korea
The Committee is right to be skeptical. Given both the paranoid fatalism as well the propensity for audacious risk-taking among totalitarian N. Korea’s leadership it is likely that the mere threat of deployment will only further speed up North Korean efforts. It is likely that the only thing more preferable than risking conventional confrontation with a US military whose resources are divided, would be to present their nuclear arsenal as a fait accompli at negotiations with an administration finally able to divert energy and resources away from Iraq. However the news of deployment is far less damaging than the Rumsfeld’s semi-apologetic denial of threat.
The only thing that will convince the North Koreans to slow down would be the knowledge of the assured destruction Yongbyon and other valuable WMD related facilities if they proceed, and certain rewards if they do not. Negotiations alone will be long and tiresome given the North Koreans expertise at disruptive behaviour. The USS Pueblo incident and the experience of the 1994 framework agreement should be proof enough of that. The North Koreans through sheer intimidation have consistently managed to successfully transform their willingness to use terrorism, proliferation and the threat of war in to bargaining advantages rather than international liabilities. The only negotiating tactic that they truly respect is an uncompromising will that refuses to be cowed by the threat of escalation, and backed up by overwhelming offensive force. Given the shortage of conventional forces in the theatre at this time, that might call for communication of the sort since we haven’t seen since the worst days of the Cold War superpower confrontation.
From American Forces Press Service, by Jim Garamone
WASHINGTON, Feb. 5, 2003 -- Coalition soldiers continue to clear caves in the Spin Boldak area, U.S. officials said in Afghanistan.
Between 300 and 350 soldiers are involved in Operation Mongoose, said Army Maj. Bob Hepner, a spokesman with Combined Joint Task Force–180.
He said 75 caves that could hide men or equipment were identified in the area. To date, 46 have been cleared. Soldiers and European-ally F-16 fighter pilots destroyed another 15 caves -- the soldiers marked them with lasers and the pilots sealed them with bombs.
The operations started Jan. 28 when U.S. Special Forces soldiers, 82nd Airborne Division troopers and Afghan militia went into the Adi Gahr Mountains after local Afghans reported that followers of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar were holed up there. Heavy fighting ensued; U.S. officials reported 18 enemy fighters were killed in the engagement.
Hekmatyar, a former prime minister, had been generally thought to be an unaligned, renegade guerrilla leader. Flyers distributed last year in Afghan refugee camps in Pakistan, however, claimed Hekmatyar had joined forces with al Qaeda terrorists.
Following the mountain battle, coalition soldiers found arms caches, intelligence information and animals in the caves. "Some of the caves were used for a long time," officials in Afghanistan said.
They said Operation Mongoose will continue "until it's done."
[Orbat.com note: Almost since they began early last year this editor believed that the rocket attacks on Coalition forces and facilities within Afghanistan were the work of fundamentalist faction leader Gulbuddin Hikmatyar rather than Al-Qaeda. The latter’s degree of commitment as well as desire for psychological impact and substantial casualties drive them to seek closely engage with the enemy. This lot seemed far more typically Afghan in their unwillingness to expose themselves to undue risk, even at the cost of the attack’s reduced effectiveness. Hikmatyar, his personal ambitions thwarted, chose to break with the interim government and bombard Kabul with thousands of rockets in the long years of chaos between the collapse of the communist government and the emergence of the Taleban. Hikmatyar also has a deep dislike of Americans which he was unafraid to demonstrate even at the height of the war with the Soviets, public refusing to meet President Reagan during a 1985 visit to New York. This was despite the fact that Pakistani ISI distribution policy favoured his group with the largest share of CIA delivered arms. Today there may be reasons to believe that Iran is offering him assistance. ]
Extracts from AP United States Department of Defense News Release
This week the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps each announce an increase of reservists on active duty in support of the partial mobilization. The Air Force announces a decrease. The net collective result is 16,979 more reservists than last week.
The total number of reserve personnel currently on active duty in support of the partial mobilization for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve is 80,002; Naval Reserve, 5,604; Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve, 11,729; Marine Corps Reserve, 12,283; and the Coast Guard Reserve, 1,985. This brings the total Reserve and National Guard on active duty to 111,603 including both units and individual augmentees.
At any given time, services may mobilize some units and individuals while demobilizing others, making it possible for these figures to either increase or decrease.
A cumulative roster of all National Guard and Reserve who are currently on active duty can be found at < a href=http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2003/d20030205ngr.pdf”>http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2003/d20030205ngr.pdf
February 5, 2003
Russia willing to sell missiles, planes to Pakistan
Afghan troops, Taliban clash near Kandahar
Saddam's Iron Fist Keeps Army in Line
Stratfor On Al Qaeda’s Renewed Campaign
John Pike's Assessment on Russians as a Savior for Space Station February 4
India in demand for arms deals February 4
India offered F-16s, transport aircraft February 4
Pakistan Prime Minister Orders Crackdown on Baluch Tribes February 4
Briefs From the BBC February 3
UN Assessment of Afghanistan Situation February 3
US Troops Wont Be ready Till mid-March February 3
Briefs February 1
28 Pakistan Government its Nationals Arrested in Italy Have Al-Qaeda Links February 1
Iraq January 31
Final Israeli Parliament Tally January 31
Division on Turkey shield bid January 31
John Pike's Assessment on Russians as a Savior for Space Station
India in demand for arms deals
India offered F-16s, transport aircraft
Pakistan Prime Minister Orders Crackdown on Baluch Tribes
Briefs From the BBC February 3
UN Assessment of Afghanistan Situation February 3
US Troops Wont Be ready Till mid-March February 3
Briefs February 1
28 Pakistan Government its Nationals Arrested in Italy Have Al-Qaeda Links February 1
Iraq January 31
Final Israeli Parliament Tally January 31
Division on Turkey shield bid January 31
Pakistan plans to strip Pakistani Kashmir Government of all powers January 31
Attack Bangladesh: Indian Fundamentalist Leader January 30
Pakistan January 30
Bush Sets His Military Three Conditions for Late February Offensive January 30
John Pike’s Assessment of Russia as a Savior for the Space Station
February 3, 2003
UN Assessment of Afghanistan Situation
US Troops Wont Be ready Till mid-March
Briefs February 1
28 Pakistan Government its Nationals Arrested in Italy Have Al-Qaeda Links February 1
Iraq January 31
Final Israeli Parliament Tally January 31
Division on Turkey shield bid January 31
Pakistan plans to strip Pakistani Kashmir Government of all powers January 31
Attack Bangladesh: Indian Fundamentalist Leader January 30
Pakistan January 30
Bush Sets His Military Three Conditions for Late February Offensive January 30
Afghanistan January 29
From the Brookings Institute January 29
Letter to the Editor from Keith Loescher January 28
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times January 28
Briefs
28 Pakistani Nationals Arrested For Al-Qaeda Links in Italy; Pakistan Government Denies Charges Against Them
Iraq January 31
Final Israeli Parliament Tally January 31
Division on Turkey shield bid January 31
Pakistan plans to strip Pakistani Kashmir Government of all powers January 31
Attack Bangladesh: Indian Fundamentalist Leader January 30
Pakistan January 30
Bush Sets His Military Three Conditions for Late February Offensive January 30
Afghanistan January 29
From the Brookings Institute January 29
Letter to the Editor from Keith Loescher January 28
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times January 28
German troops to protect U.S. bases January 28
Israel's Daily Haaretz on the New Mossad Chief January 28
Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment January 27
Final Israeli Parliament Tally
Division on Turkey shield bid
Pakistan plans to strip Pakistani Kashmir Government of all powers
Attack Bangladesh: Indian Fundamentalist Leader January 30
Pakistan January 30
Bush Sets His Military Three Conditions for Late February Offensive January 30
Afghanistan January 29
From the Brookings Institute January 29
Letter to the Editor from Keith Loescher January 28
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times January 28
German troops to protect U.S. bases January 28
Israel's Daily Haaretz on the New Mossad Chief January 28
Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment January 27
Attack Bangladesh: Indian Fundamentalist Leader
Pakistan
Bush Sets His Military Three Conditions for Late February Offensive
Afghanistan January 29
Sharon’s Likud crushes Labor in Israel Election January 29
From the Brookings Institute January 29
Letter to the Editor from Keith Loescher January 28
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times January 28
German troops to protect U.S. bases January 28
Israel's Daily Haaretz on the New Mossad Chief January 28
Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment January 27
Army hats too floppy for war, say British troops January 27
Afghanistan
Sharon’s Likud crushes Labor in Israel Election
From the Brookings Institute
Letter to the Editor from Keith Loescher January 28
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times January 28
German troops to protect U.S. bases January 28
Israel's Daily Haaretz on the New Mossad Chief January 28
Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment January 27
Army hats too floppy for war, say British troops January 27
New Weapons Demonstrated at India's January 26th Parade January 27
Turkey, Jordan Compromise on Stationing US troops for Iraq War January 26
Debka Interviews Saddam Bodyguard January 27
Scale of Iraqi strength is a mystery
No clear sign of military preparations January 25
Letter to the Editor from Kewith Loescher
Iraq Buildup: Extracts from the London Times
German troops to protect U.S. bases
Israel's Daily Haaretz on the New Mossad Chief
Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment January 27
Army hats too floppy for war, say British troops January 27
New Weapons Demonstrated at India's January 26th Parade January 27
Turkey, Jordan Compromise on Stationing US troops for Iraq War January 26
Debka Interviews Saddam Bodyguard January 27
Scale of Iraqi strength is a mystery
No clear sign of military preparations January 25
In your comments on the US buildup for Iraq you’ve said that the 1st Cavalry Division had been mentioned for the theatre but not the 4th Infantry (Mechanized) Division. In fact, both the 1st Infantry (Mechanized) and 4th Divisions are armored divisions in structure, and mechanized divisions only in name. The 4th Infantry Division is the reflagged 2nd Armored Division, and like the 1st Division, has a 5 tank/4 mechanized battalion structure. So the Iraq theatre is indeed getting an armored division from III Corps, just not the 1st Cavalry Division.
Canadian troops join Iraq buildup
Soldiers could be at front under British deployment
Army hats too floppy for war, say British troops
New Weapons Demonstrated at India's January 26th Parade
Turkey, Jordan Compromise on Stationing US troops for Iraq War
Debka Interviews Saddam Bodyguard
Scale of Iraqi strength is a mystery
No clear sign of military preparations January 25
Indian Official 2020 Planning Paper Sees Potential China Threat, no Kashmir Settlement January 24
Czech troops pack up and head home January 24
Canadian Reservists Out of Training Money January 24
More on Dr. A.Q Khan, the Pakistan Nuclear program, and Proliferation January 24
Scale of Iraqi strength is a mystery
No clear sign of military preparations
Indian Official 2020 Planning Paper Sees Potential China Threat, no Kashmir Settlement January 24
Czech troops pack up and head home January 24
Canadian Reservists Out of Training Money January 24
More on Dr. A.Q Khan, the Pakistan Nuclear program, and Proliferation January 24
Afghan Army Graduates Fifth Battalion January 24
South Asia News January 23
North Korean Companies Using China To Aid Missile Program January 23
Front-line troops disproportionately white, not black January 22
America's Ultra-Secret Weapon January 22
News Briefs
Indian Official 2020 Planning Paper Sees Potential China Threat, no Kashmir Settlement
Czech troops pack up and head home
Canadian Reservists Out of Training Money
More on Dr. A.Q Khan, the Pakistan Nuclear program, and Proliferation
Afghan Army Graduates Fifth Battalion
South Asia News January 23
North Korean Companies Using China To Aid Missile Program January 23
Front-line troops disproportionately white, not black January 22
America's Ultra-Secret Weapon January 22
News Briefs
The Cold Test: North Korea's Nuclear Program and Pakistan January 21
US 4th Infantry Division [Mechanized] To Deploy January 21
Indian Official 2020 Planning Paper Sees Potential China Threat, no Kashmir Settlement
"Czech soldiers crumble, head for home," said the newspaper Lidove Noviny on
Tuesday. "The threat of war with neighbouring Iraq and the imminent danger that
weapons of mass destruction could be used has put a great deal of pressure
on people," the unit's commander, Colonel Jan Weiser, told the newspaper.
The Canadian Forces increasingly depends on its reserves to pad out foreign
deployments, and the last rotation of troops into Bosnia was exclusively
comprised of reserves.
South Asia News
North Korean Companies Using China To Aid Missile Program
Front-line troops disproportionately white, not black January 22
America's Ultra-Secret Weapon January 22
News Briefs
The Cold Test: North Korea's Nuclear Program and Pakistan January 21
US 4th Infantry Division [Mechanized] To Deploy January 21
Will North Korea Sell Nuclear Weapons? January 21
UK Mobilizes tanks in Fresh Gulf Build-Up January 20
Debka on Iraq January 20
US Military Trainers in Colombia, Hungary January 18
South Asia News
Front-line troops disproportionately white, not black
America's Ultra-Secret Weapon
News Briefs
The Cold Test: North Korea"s Nuclear Program and Pakistan January 21
US 4th Infantry Division [Mechanized] To Deploy January 21
Will North Korea Sell Nuclear Weapons? January 21
UK Mobilizes tanks in Fresh Gulf Build-Up January 20
Debka on Iraq January 20
US Military Trainers in Colombia, Hungary January 18
Muslim cleric faces expulsion from UK mosque January 18
Like al-Qaeda, Lashkar too goes global January 18
Of the Army's 45,586 enlisted combat infantryman, 10.6% are black.
Of the Air Force's 12,000 pilots, 245, or about 2%, are black.
In the Navy, 2.5% of the pilots are black.
The Army's enlisted Green Berets are among the least diverse groups in the military. Only 196 of the Army's 4,278 enlisted Green Berets — fewer than 5% — are black.
The Cold Test: North Korea"s Nuclear Program and Pakistan
US 4th Infantry Division [Mechanized] To Deploy
Will North Korea Sell Nuclear Weapons?
UK Mobilizes tanks in Fresh Gulf Build-Up January 20
Debka on Iraq January 20
US Military Trainers in Colombia, Hungary January 18
Muslim cleric faces expulsion from UK mosque January 18
Like al-Qaeda, Lashkar too goes global January 18
The Reluctant Hawk: The skeptical case for regime change in Iraq January 17
Closing the India-China Gap January 17
Hamlet of the Indus January 16
UKMobilizes tanks in Fresh Gulf Build-Up
Debka on Iraq
US Military Trainers in Colombia, Hungary January 18
Muslim cleric faces expulsion from UK mosque January 18
Like al-Qaeda, Lashkar too goes global January 18
The Reluctant Hawk: The skeptical case for regime change in Iraq January 17
Closing the India-China Gap January 17
Hamlet of the Indus January 16
The Forgotten War January 16
Masters of Suicide Bombing: Tamil Guerillas January 16
UK mobilises tanks in fresh Gulf build-up
US Military Trainers in Colombia, Hungary
Muslim cleric faces expulsion from UK mosque
Like al-Qaeda, Lashkar too goes global
The Reluctant Hawk: The skeptical case for regime change in Iraq January 17
Closing the India-China Gap January 17
Hamlet of the Indus January 16
The Forgotten War January 16
Masters of Suicide Bombing: Tamil Guerillas January 16
Israel, India, and Turkey: Triple Entente? January 15
Readying Robots For War January 15
The Reluctant Hawk: The skeptical case for regime change in Iraq
Closing the India-China Gap
Hamlet of the Indus January 16
The Forgotten War
Master's of Suicide Bombing: Tamil Guerillas January 16
Israel, India, and Turkey: Triple Entente? January 15
Readying Robots For War January 15
Debka on Turkey, the US, and Iraq January 14
Background / Givati Brigade carrying out most Gaza missions January 14
Hamlet of the Indus
The Forgotten War
Master's of Suicide Bombing: Tamil Guerillas
Israel, India, and Turkey: Triple Entente? January 15
Readying Robots For War January 15
Debka on Turkey, the US, and Iraq January 14
Background / Givati Brigade carrying out most Gaza missions January 14
News of the Weird January 13
Unrest over Pak-US clash may lead to uprising: Report January 13
Israel, India, and Turkey: Triple Entente?
Readying Robots For War
Debka on Turkey, the US, and Iraq January 14
Background / Givati Brigade carrying out most Gaza missions January 14
News of the Weird January 13
Unrest over Pak-US clash may lead to uprising: Report January 13
Debka on Turkey, the US, and Iraq
Background / Givati Brigade carrying out most Gaza missions
News of the Weird January 13
Unrest over Pak-US clash may lead to uprising: Report January 13
Pakistan-North Korea Connection Creates Huge Dilemma for US January 12
US-Iraq Briefs January 12
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea January 9
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Israel, India, and Turkey: Triple Entente?
Background / Givati Brigade carrying out most Gaza missions
News of the Weird January 13
Unrest over Pak-US clash may lead to uprising: Report January 13
Pakistan-North Korea Connection Creates Huge Dilemma for US January 12
US-Iraq Briefs January 12
Brookings on North Korea January 11
Afghanistan's Fledgling Army Needs Far More Than a Few Good Men January 10
The World January 10
US Marine Corps Harriers in Afghanistan January 9
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea January 9
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Unrest over Pak-US clash may lead to uprising: Report
Pakistan-North Korea Connection Creates Huge Dilemma for US January 12
US-Iraq Briefs January 12
Brookings on North Korea January 11
Afghanistan's Fledgling Army Needs Far More Than a Few Good Men January 10
The World January 10
US Marine Corps Harriers in Afghanistan January 9
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea January 9
French military suffers shortage of funds January 8
Pakistan News January 8
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
US-Iraq Briefs
Brookings on North Korea January 11
Afghanistan's Fledgling Army Needs Far More Than a Few Good Men January 10
The World January 10
US Marine Corps Harriers in Afghanistan January 9
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea January 9
French military suffers shortage of funds January 8
Pakistan News January 8
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Afghanistan's Fledgling Army Needs Far More Than a Few Good Men January 10
The World January 10
US Marine Corps Harriers in Afghanistan January 9
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea January 9
French military suffers shortage of funds January 8
Pakistan News January 8
Indo US Defense Talks May Focus on Arrow January 7
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows January 5
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
The World
US Marine Corps Harriers in Afghanistan January 9
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea January 9
French military suffers shortage of funds January 8
Pakistan News January 8
Indo US Defense Talks May Focus on Arrow January 7
The Road to Baghdad Lies Through Tel Aviv January 7
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows January 5
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 January 4
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Globalsecurity.org pictures/maps on North Korea
French military suffers shortage of funds January 8
Pakistan News January 8
Indo US Defense Talks May Focus on Arrow January 7
The Road to Baghdad Lies Through Tel Aviv January 7
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
Letter From Major AH Amin & United States Operational Strategy: Full Article January 5
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows January 5
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 January 4
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Pakistan News
Indo US Defense Talks May Focus on Arrow January 7
The Road to Baghdad Lies Through Tel Aviv January 7
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
Letter From Major AH Amin & United States Operational Strategy: Full Article January 5
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows January 5
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 January 4
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
The Road to Baghdad Lies Through Tel Aviv
A National Security Doctrine for India January 6
Letter From Major AH Amin & United States Operational Strategy: Full Article January 5
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows January 5
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 January 4
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
US Forces to SWA and Operation Southern Watch Strikes January 3
Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail January 2
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Road to Baghdad Goes Through Tel Aviv
Letter From Major AH Amin & United States Operational Strategy: Full Article January 5
British Forces In Countdown To War January 5
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows January 5
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 January 4
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
US Forces to SWA and Operation Southern Watch Strikes January 3
Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail January 2
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Israel Sharpens Its Arrows
United States Operational Strategy: Gulf 3 January 4
British Military Units for Iraq January 4
US Forces to SWA and Operation Southern Watch Strikes January 3
Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail January 2
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
British Military Units for Iraq
US Forces to SWA and Operation Southern Watch Strikes January 3
Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail January 2
Bangladeshi Women Fight to Fight January 2
Growth momentum hinges on stability in 2003 January 1
Briefs January 1
Hizballah misfires first missile of Iraqi shipment December 31
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Countering Pakistan’s Nuclear Blackmail January 2
Bangladeshi Women Fight to Fight January 2
Growth momentum hinges on stability in 2003 January 1
Briefs January 1
Hizballah misfires first missile of Iraqi shipment December 31
India all set to set up nuclear forces command December 31
India was warned of unconventional war December 31
France bolsters its Ivory Coast troops December 30
Twin Towers steel set for US warship December 30
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
Bangladeshi Women Fight to Fight
Growth momentum hinges on stability in 2003 January 1
Briefs January 1
Hizballah misfires first missile of Iraqi shipment December 31
India all set to set up nuclear forces command December 31
India was warned of unconventional war December 31
France bolsters its Ivory Coast troops December 30
Twin Towers steel set for US warship December 30
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
THE HINDU, JANUARY 01, 2003
Briefs
Hizballah misfires first missile of Iraqi shipment December 31
Assad carries last Bush ultimatum to Saddam December 31
India all set to set up nuclear forces command December 31
India was warned of unconventional war December 31
France bolsters its Ivory Coast troops December 30
Twin Towers steel set for US warship December 30
Update: Kashmir, Indian Missile, North Korea Nuclear, US Plans for Korean Contingency December 29
Indian Defense and Security News December 28
India Today's Account of the India-Pakistan Mobilization Crisis, January and June 2002 December 19
Rebuttal: The Phoney war December 19
