Military

DATE= 9/28/01

TYPE=CORRESPONDENT REPORT

TITLE= PENTAGON/STRATEGY (L ONLY)

NUMBER=2-281128

BYLINE= ALEX BELIDA

DATELINE= PENTAGON

CONTENT=

VOICED AT:

INTRO: U-S forces are reportedly conducting scouting missions inside Afghanistan while American ships, planes and troops mass in the region. But Bush administration officials are downplaying the likelihood of imminent military strikes against terrorist suspect Osama bin Laden and his supporters in Afghanistan. In this [exclusive] report, V-O-A Pentagon Correspondent Alex Belida explains why.

TEXT: A senior Pentagon official dismisses recent published suggestions that a lack of solid intelligence information about Osama bin Laden's whereabouts is holding up U-S military action.

Instead, this official, speaking on condition of anonymity, says the overriding concern of military planners is how to communicate to the Afghan people in particular and the Muslim world in general that U-S forces have no intention of striking out indiscriminately.

"We're only going after the bad guys," this official says, referring to terrorists and their supporters based in Afghanistan.

He says the Iraqi population now knows that when U-S planes patrolling the so-called no-fly zones in the north and south of Iraq launch missiles, they are aimed at precise military targets and civilians can go about their business without fear.

But that is not the case in Afghanistan, leading to the military preoccupation with the communications question. However the official declines to discuss any communications strategies that may be under consideration.

The official concedes there have been benefits from the measured approach taken by the Bush administration to military action.

He says it has helped the United States garner more support from countries that had been initially apprehensive about the American reaction to the September 11th strikes.

///REST OPTIONAL///

Meanwhile, General Henry Shelton, outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of the U-S armed forces, has told reporters quick military retaliation would be easy in a crisis.

But he says it is not necessarily the most effective course of action - especially in pursuing those behind the September 11th suicide terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

///SHELTON ACTUALITY///

From a military standpoint, you know, it is very easy, when you're faced with a crisis, to default automatically to the military, because we can move fast and we can do things that will show up well in the television or in a newspaper. On the other hand, if you really want to be effective, you have to understand that in some situations,

such as the one that this country's faced with now, we have a lot of tools, and we'll be much more effective if we bring it together and apply it at the enemy's center of gravity...

///END ACTUALITY///

Pentagon officials say it is hard to know what the real intent of the attackers was on September 11th.

But they do not rule out the possibility that the bloody terrorist strikes were specifically aimed not only at creating death and destruction but also at provoking the U-S military into hasty actions - actions that would be widely criticized among Muslims and Muslim countries and perhaps lead to even more terrorist strikes. (Signed)

NEB/BEL/MAR