Military

SHAPE News Summary & Analysis

18 July 2003

IRAQ

• The Washington Post writes that President Bush and Prime Minister Blair, facing sharp criticism for mounting casualties in Iraq, the failure to find weapons of mass destruction and their reliance on disputed intelligence, said history will show they were right in deposing Saddam and confronting global terrorism. “As long as I hold this office I will never risk the lives of American citizens by assuming the goodwill of dangerous enemies. Our people are going to find out the truth. And the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence. There is no doubt in my mind.” President Bush is quoted saying. He also reportedly added: “I take responsibility for making the decision, the tough decision, to put together a coalition to remove Saddam Hussein. He possessed chemical weapons and biological weapons. I strongly believe he was trying to reconstruct his nuclear weapons program… He was a threat. I take responsibility for dealing with that threat.” Prime Minister Blair, according to the paper, continued to stand by the weapons charge, which originated with British intelligence, saying: “I really don’t believe that any responsible leader could ignore the evidence that we see and the threat that we face. The British intelligence that we have we believe is genuine. We stand by that intelligence.”
  
  
• The Financial Times carries Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov saying: “It is necessary for the UN Security Council to adopt new resolutions on the deployment of international security forces or whatever the situation requires. That’s the most likely way of ensuring the participation of a large number of countries.” His comments, notes the paper, followed a conversation on Wednesday with UN Secretary General Annan, in which the Foreign minister reportedly called for a broadening of the UN’s mandate in Iraq which might authorize international help to stabilize the country amid increasingly organized resistance to the U.S.-led occupation. Potential contributors, observes the daily, such as India and Pakistan, have made it clear they will not do so without clearer UN authorization. U.S. Secretary of State Powell reportedly acknowledged those calls and said he had had preliminary talks with foreign ministers.

NATO

• China’s news service Xinhua, July 17, reports that during a brief visit to Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, NATO Secretary General George Robertson urged closer cooperation with the two Central Asian countries to jointly combat terrorism. The agency believes this demonstrates that NATO is accelerating its efforts to expand its military presence in the former Soviet area. Lord Robertson is quoted saying: “The attacks on New York and Washington in 2001…were planned and organized in Central Asia, in Afghanistan. Terrorists confront free society in a way that we have never seen before. We must therefore have a common united front against terrorism.” But the news agency speculates that under the pretext of fixing terrorism following the Sept. 11 terror attacks, the U.S. has deployed its troops in Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, and sent military instructors to Georgia to help train special task forces. Moreover, Lord Robertson reportedly said: “If there is to be security in the world we must have more military cooperation. Central Asia is now going to be very much part of NATO’s agenda.” While meeting with Kyrgyz President Akayev, Lord Robertson allegedly said NATO has “a single mission, tackling the new security challenges of the 21st century…terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction.” Local analysts however, concludes the report, noted that although the Central Asian region has undergone great changes following the Sept. 11 attacks, Lord Robertson’s visit was not enthusiastically covered by the two countries’ media. In a similar vein, China’s newspaper China Daily argues that with the U.S. stepping up its largest military strategic redeployment since World War II, the voices in that country backing the establishment of an Asian version of NATO have become particularly loud. Under the Pentagon’s military program, adds the daily, the U.S. is preparing major shifts in the deployment of its forces in the Asia-Pacific region, including the movement of U.S. marines from bases of Okinawa to Australia, and the use of new facilities in Singapore and the Philippines. But without a definite enemy, it will be very difficult for the idea of an Asian version of NATO to gain extensive support from the international community and even within the U.S. itself, ends the paper.

ISAF

• An AP dispatch, July 17, writes that Canadian Brig. Gen. Peter J. Devlin assumed command of the Kabul Multinational Brigade from Germany’s Brig. Gen. Werner Freers in a ceremony at camp Warehouse, headquarters of the brigade in eastern Kabul. Eventually the Canadian contingent will be 1,800 soldiers, reports the agency, while the German force of 2,600 will be whittled back to 1,500 by mid-August. Germany and the Netherlands jointly command ISAF until next month when NATO will take over international peacekeeping in Kabul, the dispatch reminds. It also comments that, so far, in southern and eastern regions, the reconstruction has faltered because of the hunt for Al-Qaeda and Taliban and the frequent attacks from rebels. Afghan President Karzai has promised changes to try to reduce the dominance of any one ethnic group, but no significant changes have been made causing the UN to delay plans to begin disarming the country. The event was likewise reported by Radio Afghanistan on July 17.

UNITED STATES-TURKEY-GEN. JONES

• According to AP and AFP dispatches, two top U.S. generals were scheduled to hold talks with Turkish military leaders in Ankara on Friday in apparent efforts to smooth tense relations between the two countries over Iraq and discuss future cooperation there. The Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe, Gen. Jones, say the reports, arrived in Turkey late Thursday and was meeting early Friday with top military officials including Turkish Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Ozkok, while Gen. Abizaid, the new head of the U.S. Central Command was due in the city later for separate talks at the start of a tour of the region. Reportedly, the visits follow a row between Turkey and the U.S. over the arrest by U.S. troops in northern Iraq of 11 Turkish special forces, earlier this month. The daily Milliyet is reported writing that Gen. Abizaid was likely to discuss the possibility that Turkey send peacekeepers to serve in Iraq.

THE FOLLOWING CLIPPINGS ARE FROM THE 18 July 2003, News Summary and Analysis:

THE WASHINGTON POST, July 18, 2003

Bush, Blair Defend Motives of Iraq War

Leaders Insist Evidence Justified March Invasion advertisement

By Jim Vande Hei and Mike Allen

President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who jointly defied international opposition to oust Saddam Hussein, yesterday stood side by side and vigorously defended their military campaign in Iraq and the intelligence they presented to justify it.
With both leaders facing sharp criticism for mounting casualties in Iraq, the failure to find weapons of mass destruction and their reliance on disputed intelligence, Bush and Blair said history will show they were right in deposing Hussein and confronting global terrorism.
"As long as I hold this office I will never risk the lives of American citizens by assuming the goodwill of dangerous enemies," Bush said at a 26-minute White House news conference with Blair.
"Our people are going to find out the truth. And the truth will say that this intelligence was good intelligence," Bush said. "There's no doubt in my mind."
Bush said he and Blair based their decision on "good, sound intelligence."
Asked about the possibility that he would be proved wrong about the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, Bush said defiantly, "We won't be proven wrong."
In a speech to Congress an hour earlier, however, Blair said, "history will forgive" the two leaders if links between terrorism and weapons of mass destruction never materialize. "If we are wrong, we will have destroyed a threat that, at its least, is responsible for inhumane carnage and suffering," he said.
The comment echoed Bush's recent claims that evidence of Hussein's cruelty justifies the war, even if his administration had pressed a different justification -- Hussein's alleged imminent threat of using biological or chemical weapons -- before the allied invasion in March. But while Blair expressed a hint of skepticism about those weapons yesterday, Bush did not.
"We will bring the information forward on the weapons when they find them," the president said. Bush said that will "end all this speculation."
With their joint appearance, the two leaders sought to prop each other up politically. U.S. and British polls show support for Blair and Bush slipping at home amid growing concerns about the war's aftermath and the veracity of intelligence claims that preceded it.
Blair's visit allowed the two men to portray unity on a world stage at a time they face a cacophony of criticism in their own countries and elsewhere. Pressure is mounting on them to prove that Hussein had the dangerous weapons -- chemical, biological and perhaps nuclear -- they described during the buildup to the war, and to verify that the intelligence they relied on was accurate.
Most countries are refusing overtures to help relieve U.S. and British soldiers in Iraq, as calls for greater United Nations involvement intensify.
In particular, Bush and Blair are struggling to explain whether a key allegation -- that Iraq tried to buy uranium ore in Africa to build nuclear weapons -- is reliable and verifiable. The Bush administration has offered different and sometimes contradictory explanations for why the president repeated the charge in his Jan. 28 State of the Union speech, even after some CIA officials made clear they thought it was unverifiable and perhaps untrue.
Bush sidestepped a question yesterday on whether he would take responsibility for making the allegation, which the White House recently has said should have been deleted from the speech.
"I take responsibility for making the decision, the tough decision, to put together a coalition to remove Saddam Hussein," Bush said sternly. "He possessed chemical weapons and biological weapons. I strongly believe he was trying to reconstruct his nuclear weapons program. . . . He was a threat. I take responsibility for dealing with that threat."
Blair continued to stand by the weapons charge, which originated with British intelligence. "I really don't believe that any responsible leader could ignore the evidence that we see and the threat that we face," he said at the news conference. "The British intelligence that we have we believe is genuine. We stand by that intelligence."
The comments failed to satisfy some Democratic lawmakers.
"Right now, with American and British soldiers in the line of fire, families in Idaho, Nevada or Massachusetts find very unsatisfying a call for unquestioned faith in a vision of world leaders who apparently rely on shoddy intelligence," Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) said after Blair's speech. "So far, both sides of our transatlantic alliance appear unwilling to tell the whole truth about how little we really knew when the order for war was given."
Bush and Blair looked beyond the flap over intelligence to other hurdles ahead: bringing stability to Iraq, seeking peace in the Middle East and confronting terrorists in other regions of the world.
The rising number of deadly attacks on U.S. and British troops in Iraq has fueled questions on both sides of the Atlantic about the war's success and duration. As many U.S. troops have died since Bush declared the end of major combat on May 1 as died beforehand. "Our enemies are looking for signs of hesitation," Bush said. "They're looking for signs of weakness. They will find none."
Before the news conference, Blair, mixing self-effacing humor with broad oratory, won a warm, bipartisan reception from a Congress that otherwise is deeply divided over the situation in Iraq. The first British prime minister since Margaret Thatcher to address the House and Senate, he implored lawmakers to stand strong, warning of dangerous times ahead.
"I feel a most urgent sense of mission about today's world," Blair said. "September 11 [2001] was not an isolated event, but a tragic prologue. Many further struggles will be set upon this stage before it's over." He accused North Korea of "letting its people starve while spending billions of dollars on developing nuclear weapons."
It was unclear how Bush and Blair will resolve a dispute over whether the United States will use military tribunals to try two British nationals who are being detained at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as suspected terrorists. Some British leaders are calling for them to face justice back home.
Bush called them illegal combatants, "picked up off the battlefield aiding and abetting the Taliban," and made no commitment about how they would be tried. "The only thing I know for certain is that these are bad people and we look forward to working closely with the Blair government to deal with the issue," the president said.
Similarly, Blair said, "The context was a situation in which the al Qaeda and the Taliban were operating together in Afghanistan against American and British forces."
Bush and Blair said they would discuss the case in private talks later, and Blair promised a public statement today.
Bush did, however, provide Blair political cover on another important foreign policy matter: Middle East peace. With Blair needing to show progress because of domestic political pressures, Bush praised "movement toward reform and freedom" in the Middle East. "A Palestinian state will be built upon hope and reform, not built upon violence," Bush said.
Blair, whose stance on the Iraq war is much more unpopular with the British public than Bush's is here, seemed to relish the positive reception he received from Bush and Congress. He thanked lawmakers for their "warm and generous welcome that's more than I deserve, and more than I'm used to, quite frankly."

THE FINANCIAL TIMES, July 18, 2003

Russia calls for new UN resolution

By Mark Turner and Charles Clover

Russia on Thursday urged the US to consider a new United Nations resolution on Iraq, which might authorise international help to stabilise the country amid increasingly organised resistance to the US-led occupation.
Igor Ivanov, the Russian foreign minister, said: "It is necessary for the UN Security Council to adopt new resolutions on the deployment of international security forces or whatever the situation requires.
"That's the most likely way of securing the participation of a large number of countries."
His comments followed a conversation on Wednesday with Kofi Annan, UN secretary-general, in which Mr Ivanov reportedly called for a broadening of the UN's mandate in Iraq. Officials say Mr Annan detected more appetite in Washington than expected for wider UN involvement.
Faced with daily attacks on coalition forces in Iraq, and growing calls to bring the troops home, the administration of President George W. Bush is under pressure to find allies to share the security burden. But potential contributors, such as India and Pakistan, have made it clear they will not do so without clearer UN authorisation.
Colin Powell, US secretary of State, acknowledged those calls this week, and said he had had preliminary talks with foreign ministers. US diplomats on Thursday insisted these remarks did not indicate any formal move, adding that Mr Powell believed there was sufficient authorisation under resolution 1483 for any country wishing to commit troops. "We are not proposing anything, nothing has been proposed," said an administration official.
Other countries, however, appear to see an opportunity for the US to admit tacitly that it cannot cope with the aftermath of war in Iraq. Both Britain and Spain, its strongest allies, are keen for the UN to do more.
The UN's role will come to the fore next week when Sergio Vieira de Mello, Mr Annan's representative in Iraq, will tell the Security Council of his plans.
Three representatives from Iraq's US-appointed governing council are also expected to address the Security Council on Tuesday - although diplomats said that did not mark an effective bestowal of international legitimacy upon the body. One UN diplomat said: "This is not so much an Iraqi delegation as a delegation of Iraqis."
The same diplomat said any new UN resolution would be unlikely to cede control of security matters, as that remained the responsibility of the occupying powers.
A report commissioned by Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary, and made public on Thursday said the US had only three months to turn the security situation around. A team of experts led by the Center for Strategic and International Studies said: "The potential for chaos is becoming more real every day."
An audio tape said to carry the voice of Saddam Hussein, the ousted Iraqi dictator, was broadcast on gulf television stations yesterday - the 35th anniversary of the coup which brought him to power. The tape urged Iraqis to fight foreign occupiers and accused Mr Bush and Tony Blair, UK prime minister, of devising "lies against Iraq's people, leadership and culture" to justify the war.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, July 18, 2003

Canadian general assumes command of peace keeping brigade in Afghan capital

By Amir Shah

Canada took command Thursday of a brigade of international troops trying to bring security to <Afghanistan>'s war-battered capital of Kabul where rebels have killed peacekeepers and launched regular attacks against government targets.
Canadian Brig. Gen. Peter J. Devlin assumed command of the Kabul Multinational Brigade from Germany's Brig. Gen. Werner Freers in a ceremony at Camp Warehouse, headquarters of the brigade in eastern Kabul.
"Mixed emotions is what I feel today," Freers said in a prepared speech. "I am looking forward very much to rejoin my family back home and I feel melancholy to no longer be a part of the community among my comrades in arms and with my
Afghan friends."
The job of the brigade, which is part of the larger International Security Assistance Force (<ISAF>), is to "assist the Afghan security forces and provide a secure environment for the re-establishing of community structures in Kabul and its surrounding areas," <ISAF> commander Lt. Gen. Norbert van Heyst said in a prepared statement
The Kabul brigade has 3,600 forces from 19 countries, including 350 Canadians. Eventually the Canadian contingent will be 1,800 soldiers while the German force of 2,600 will be whittled back to1,500 by mid-August.
Germany and the Netherlands jointly command <ISAF> until next month when NATO will take over international peacekeeping in Kabul. There are currently about 5,000 international peacekeepers in the beleaguered capital.
The job is a dangerous one. Last month four German peacekeepers were killed when an explosive-laden car was rammed into a bus carrying peacekeepers to the airport to return home to Germany. Other attacks have occurred against peacekeepers in the capital.
Yet, Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been pressing the international community to send its soldiers outside of the capital to try to bring law and order to the regions, now ruled by thieving warlords, who have long-standing grudges
they usually settle violently.
The U.S.-led coalition force of about 11,000, mostly Americans is scattered throughout south, eastern and northeastern <Afghanistan> hunting the remnants of al-Qaida, the Taliban and loyalists of rebel leader Gulbuddin
Hekmatyar.
But Karzai perviously said security is the most important need, requiring the help of international peacekeepers. So far most donor countries have refused, saying they don't have the troops to send to <Afghanistan>.
Reconstruction in some areas has been slow because of the fighting, particularly in northern <Afghanistan> where rival warlords, Rashid Dostum and Atta Mohammed, both aligned to Karzai's government, have been engaged in relentless
bloodletting.
In southern and eastern regions, the reconstruction has faltered because of the hunt for al-Qaida and Taliban and the daily attacks from rebels.
The Kabul Multinational Brigade has helped train <Afghanistan's fledgling army that has gotten off to a slow start because of a lack of cooperation from the defense ministry, which is dominated by an ethnic Tajik armed force, which has been reluctant to hand its power over to a multiethnic force.
Karzai has promised changes in the defense ministry to try to reduce the dominance of any one ethnic group, but so far no substantive changes have been made causing the United Nations to delay plans to begin disarming the country.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, July 18, 2003

Two top U.S. generals to hold talks in Turkey on Iraq

Two top U.S. generals were scheduled to hold talks in the Turkish capital on Friday in apparent efforts to smooth tense relations between the two countries over Iraq and discuss future cooperation there.
Gen. James L. Jones, the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, arrived in Turkey late Thursday and was meeting early Friday with top military officials including the head of the military, Gen. Hilmi Ozkok, a U.S. official said on condition of anonymity.
Those talks would mainly focus on efforts to move forward following the detention of 11 Turkish special forces by the United States in northern Iraq earlier this month, the U.S. official said. The detentions enraged Turkey and sparked a diplomatic crisis between the two nations.
Relations between the two NATO allies have been strained since March, when Turkey rejected a U.S. request to allow the deployment of more than 60,000 U.S. troops for the war in Iraq.
Jones' visit, the second since last week, would be followed by a visit later Friday by Gen. John Abizaid, the new head of U.S. Central Command, which oversees U.S. forces in Iraq. The visit would be Abizaid's first trip abroad since he replaced Gen. Tommy Franks, who retired earlier this month.
The U.S. official said Abizaid's talks with Ozkok and others would include "a broader agenda" than that of Jones, but would provide no details.
The daily Milliyet reported Friday that Abizaid was likely to discuss the possibility that Turkey send peacekeepers to serve in Iraq _ a move that would apparently aim to ease tensions and
bring closer cooperation between the two countries in Iraq.
Turkey already maintains several thousand troops in northern Iraq to chase Kurdish rebels who fought a 15-year war with Kurdish rebels and to monitor the situation in northern Iraq. But those troops fall outside the scope of the U.S.-led mission.
The daily Radikal reported Friday that Abizaid's talks would also address joint efforts to combat Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq.
The July 4 detention of 11 Turkish special forces in the northern Iraqi city of Sulaymaniyah by the United States over an alleged plot to assassinate an Iraqi Kurdish official has deepened the rift between the two nations.
Turkey denied the plot and both sides have expressed regret over the detention and have pledged closer cooperation in the future to avoid similar incidents.