US planning full invasion if special forces fail

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Wild Wild West : One Thread

US planning full invasion if special forces fail By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent, and Toby Harnden in Washington (Filed: 31/10/2001)

THE Pentagon is considering mounting a ground invasion of Afghanistan if the current bombing and special forces campaign fails to achieve its aims, American defence sources said yesterday.

The allies would carry out sporadic bombing attacks throughout the winter while the opposition Northern Alliance was built up into a workable ally before a full-scale ground invasion in the spring.

The new plan emerged as Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, held talks in Washington with his US counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, amid suggestions of differences between Britain and America over the prosecution of the war.

Mr Rumsfeld originally rejected invasion plans put forward by Gen Tommy Franks, the commander-in-chief of US Central Command, who is running the military operation, telling him to plan for a series of special forces raids.

But the difficulties of gathering intelligence was shown by the rapid aborting of a US special forces mission into Afghanistan 12 days ago. Resistance was far higher than expected and it has made military planners think again.

Gen Franks had now been given his head and told to go off and organise it all, a move that led to his current tour of countries in the region to see what they are prepared to offer in the way of bases, the sources said.

"The plan now is for a long winter of sporadic attacks and the occasional special forces mission," one said. "Meanwhile, we will be getting trained up and organised for a conventional invasion in the spring."

Speaking after yesterday's talks, Mr Rumsfeld said that, while the "modest" numbers of US special forces now on the ground were nowhere near those used in the Second World War or Korea, "we have not ruled that out". Mr Hoon added: "Nor have we."

The idea of a ground invasion was originally seen as too dangerous given the difficulties faced by the Soviet army during its occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.

British planners had suggested the use of the Northern Alliance as a proxy force backed up by special forces operations and a policy of widespread humanitarian aid to win over the "hearts and minds" of the local people.

But with the British contribution increasingly appearing to be little more than decoration, those plans seem to have been shelved.

Adml Sir Michael Boyce, the Chief of the Defence Staff, gave warning last week that the war in Afghanistan was the toughest military operation since the Korean War and could last several years.

Planners are aware that a ground invasion would be hard for the politicians to sell to electorates and to the other members of the coalition but believe that, without an early breakthrough, they have no other option.

Sir Michael and Mr Hoon are said to have clashed over the possible speed of military action and the type of troops used in special forces operations. Sir Michael complained that politicians had been expecting far too much too soon.

There was "quite a lot of pressure" to come up with fast military options, he said. "People say, `How are you getting on? What are you achieving? Can't you do it any faster?' "

At a joint press conference after yesterday's talks, Mr Hoon and Mr Rumsfeld sought to play down the differences.

But speaking earlier, Mr Hoon said it was possible that a Taliban regime could survive, and added that a pause in the bombing during next month's Muslim festival of Ramadan should be considered, though both possibilities have been rejected by Washington.

The war was about keeping up pressure on the Taliban rather than ending its rule, Mr Hoon said. "The ultimate objective is to bring those responsible for the events of September 11 to account.

"There is still a possibility of the Taliban accepting that they would give up Osama bin Laden and their support for terrorism and that's why I talk in terms of pressure on the regime."

The Pentagon has made clear it wants to obliterate the Taliban regime before moving on to consider other terrorist networks and states around the world. Mr Hoon said: "We obviously have to have regard to the sensitivities of Ramadan. It is something that we will consider very carefully."

Mr Rumsfeld has always insisted that military action will not cease during Ramadan. A Capitol Hill source said: "It sounds like the British are having second thoughts."

Brushing aside recent concerns from senior British officers, Mr Hoon insisted there were no differences of views either between British and US politicians or between their military planners.

US planning full invasion if special forces fail

-- Ain't Gonna Happen (Not Here Not@ever.com), October 31, 2001

Answers

Confusion over war's next phase as ground attack stalls

· PM says he will 'neither flinch nor falter' · But military warn of real problems in Afghanistan · US said to be 'desperate' about what to do next

Richard Norton-Taylor, Vikram Dodd and Julian Borger in Washington Wednesday October 31, 2001 The Guardian

British and American troops are being prevented from conducting any meaningful operations on the ground against the Taliban and Osama bin Laden because of a lack of knowledge about conditions in Afghanistan, defence sources admitted yesterday.

With the government showing increasing signs of impatience at the failure to make a breakthrough after three weeks of air strikes in which more than 3,000 bombs have been dropped on the country, the sources said there was an "an intelligence vacuum".

Amid a growing realisation that the lightning attack by US airborne troops into Afghanistan captured on grainy video this month was little more than a public relations exercise, there is also increasing concern and frustration in Washington about the way the military campaign is going. "The Americans are very desperate about what to do next," another well-placed defence source told the Guardian.

"Before you send forces in you have to understand the environment in terms of the terrain, the weather, the lines of sight," a senior defence official said.

"It's all very well having satellite imagery from the sky, but you need people to smell the ground, preparing and understanding the ground before you commit."

Military chiefs want more information on the the Taliban's troops, their locations, numbers and their reconnaissance capabilities.

"Before we commit human beings to a life-threatening situation we have a moral duty to be sure we understand the risks and that we have alternative plans if something goes wrong," the source said.

The military explanation for the perceived lack of progress came as Tony Blair tried to counter the sense of drift in the conduct of the war and as fresh evidence showed that public opinion is moving in favour of a bombing pause.

An ICM poll in yesterday's Guardian showed a cooling in support for the war, with 62% saying they were in favour, a 12-point drop in just over two weeks. But probably more significant was the 54% who wanted a halt to attacks to get aid convoys into Afghanistan.

Mr Blair, in a speech in Cardiff, reaffirmed allied objectives and insisted he would "neither flinch nor falter".

The prime minister acknowledged that people were concerned about civilian casualties and the refugee crisis. "All these concerns deserve to be answered. No one who raises doubts is an appeaser or a faint heart," he said.

He urged the public to "go back to why we are in this conflict", adding: "On September 11, thousands of people were killed in cold blood in the worst terrorist attacks the world has ever seen. That is a fact. Those responsible were the al-Qaida network reared by Osama bin Laden."

He said the Taliban have one hope: "That we are decadent, that we lack the moral fibre or will or courage to take them on; that we might begin but we won't finish. They are wrong. We won't falter. We will not stop until our mission is complete."

Defence sources, who deny there is any rift between Geoff Hoon, the defence secretary, and his military commanders, said 200 marines on standby in the Gulf - along with SAS troops - were ready to move quickly if the opportunity and intelligence fell into place. "It may be we'll have to wait several weeks or longer before we have sufficient confidence to commit," a defence source said.

Mr Hoon - in Washington for talks with his opposite number, Donald Rumsfeld - denied that there was any "disconnect" between British and American approaches to the conduct of the war.

However, Mr Hoon made clear that as far as the British were concerned, Ramadan [starting on November 17] would be a factor, but not a decisive factor in planning military operations. He said: "We would have regard to Ramadan but equally we would have regard to the military necessity of keeping the Taliban regime under pressure."

In another clear difference of tone between London and Washington, Mr Hoon defined the war aims as bringing Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organisation "to account" for the September 11 attacks, and to make sure they were unable to carry out similar attacks in the future.

Mr Rumsfeld and President Bush have defined victory as freeing Americans from fear of terrorism, implying a much more far-reaching campaign against all terrorist groups.

-- (dubya@blew.it), October 31, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ