Military

SHAPE News Summary & Analysis

20 February 2003

NATO

• In the wake of the DPC’s agreement on Turkey’s defense, focus has shifted to the actual implementation of protective measures. Based on “the opinion of NATO experts,” Sueddeutsche Zeitung writes that the German government has to expect a request by the Alliance to provide further Patriot air defense systems as well as special units to combat chemical and biological agents “by the end of this week.” It was said that a request by Gen. Jones was “very probable” after the Defense Planning Committee decided last Wednesday to take concrete measures to protect Turkey against possible attacks from Iraq, stresses the newspaper. In government circles, it is expected that NATO will approach Germany both in the field of NBC defense, that is the Fuchs armored NBC reconnaissance vehicles, as well as the Patriot systems, the daily adds. It speculates, however, that for political reasons, the United States might hold back in order not to put pressure on Germany. NATO considers asking Berlin to provide Fuchs reconnaissance vehicles, writes Die Welt, adding: “The DPC has tasked SACEUR to begin the implementation of protection measures for Turkey ‘as a case of urgency.’ That means: asking each nation, who, if capable, will be ready to deliver what and when, as well as to start the deployment…. It was heard in NATO circles that NATO could soon request the provision of further Patriot systems.” A related article in the Financial Times stresses that the agreement on Turkey’s defense means NATO’s military planners can ask some of its 19 member countries to provide Turkey with AWACS, Patriot missiles and special units to withstand chemical or biological attacks. The article adds that the issue still facing NATO is who will provide the chemical and biological defense equipment and the Patriots. Germany has a total of 36 patriots. Two have been sent to Israel and one sent to Turkey via The Netherlands. A Dutch Defense spokesman said Dutch and German Patriots would be placed under NATO command when they arrived in southeastern Turkey next week, stresses the daily. Alliance officials said NATO’s military planners are likely to send AWACS to Turkey to coincide with the arrival of the Patriots, writes the Wall Street Journal, adding: The planes and the antimissile batteries will then be fitted into a single NATO command structure. Within days, Turkey is expected to tell NATO’s military commanders how many units it will need for the protection of strategic installations against chemical and biological weapons. AFP notes that according to a NATO official, the decision to actually deploy the AWACS, as well as their number, will be decided by Gen. Jones.
  
  
• Quoting reports in U.S. and British media, Die Welt writes that “Defense Secretary Rumsfeld has ordered the development of a plan envisioning how Germany could be punished ‘for its betrayal.’” Referring to the recent rift within NATO regarding Turkey’s defense, the newspaper continues: “It seems as if everything is under consideration—from a slight reduction of the U.S. commitment to the closing of all bases, the withdrawal of U.S. soldiers from Germany and their relocation to the ‘new Europe….’ In the Pentagon it was said that an example was to be made of Germany, in order to make other countries aware of what to expect if they oppose the United States.” The daily observes that the U.S. Army is an important economic factor for individual regions such as the Upper Palatinate, Rhineland-Palatinate and the region around Wiesbaden. “It was said that the plans would go far beyond the restructuring of the global strategy of the U.S. military and NATO. The debate was provoked by NATO Supreme Commander Gen. Jones,” the newspaper further says. British Sunday newspaper The Observer, Feb. 16, claimed, under the title, “U.S. to punish German treachery,” that a plan--discussed by Pentagon officials and military chiefs last week--is designed to ‘harm’ the German economy to make an example of … what U.S. officials see as Chancellor Schroeder’s treachery.”
  

IRAQ

• According to inspectors in Iraq, President Saddam Hussein’s government, apparently emboldened by anti-war sentiment at the UN security Council and in worldwide street protests, has not followed through on its promises of increased cooperation with UN arms inspectors, reports the Washington Post. The newspaper quotes UN officials saying no Iraqi scientist involved in biological, chemical or missile technology has consented to a private interview with the inspectors since Feb .7, the day before the two chief UN inspectors arrived in Baghdad for talks with Iraqi officials. The UN also has not received additional documents about past weapons programs, despite the government’s pledge to set up a commission to scour the country for evidence sought by the inspectors. A UN official reportedly warned that if Iraq does not move quickly to arrange more private interviews and provide more evidence, Chief Inspector Hans Blix likely will deliver a more downcast assessment of Iraqi cooperation when he next reports to the Security Council. The newspaper observes that a critical report from Blix could prove instrumental to U.S. and British efforts to build support for a new Security Council resolution authorizing force against Iraq.
  
  
• According to The Independent, British ministers will face questions in Parliament next week over fears that Saddam Hussein could be evading UN inspections by hiding chemical and biological weapons on the high seas. Security experts and senior parliamentarians reportedly expressed alarm Wednesday at the prospect that three giant cargo ships are being tracked by western intelligence agencies because they could be carrying deadly Iraqi weapons. Shipping industry sources said the three vessels set sail three months ago, spending much of their time in the Indian Ocean, notes the article, quoting John Eldridge, the editor of Jane’s Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defence, saying: “It seems an extremely elegant scheme with a view to hiding these things until the heat is off.” The Iraqi regime could easily have smuggled out the weapons in sealed containers through neighboring countries, Eldridge reportedly said.