Boston Globe April 22, 2003
No long-term presence, Rumsfeld says
By Robert Schlesinger
WASHINGTON - The US military does not plan on having a long-term presence in Iraq, and the end of Saddam Hussein's government should mean fewer US troops in the region, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said yesterday.
For a dozen years, US military strategy in the region focused on dealing with Hussein, but with the successful end to his regime, planners have started contemplating the future US military profile in the region. Rumsfeld's remarks, during one of his regular press briefings, were part of the most extensive public discussion yet on the potentially contentious issue.
''I would, personally, say that a friendly Iraq that is not led by a Saddam Hussein would be a reason we could have fewer forces in the region, rather than more, I mean just logically,'' Rumsfeld said.
Rumsfeld said that troops are already being removed from the region, including several aircraft carrier battle groups. And some of the F-117 stealth fighters and B-2 stealth bombers stationed in the region have also been returned to their regular bases. Longer-term changes have also started: The US Air Force units that had enforced the northern no-fly zone over Iraq have been moved from their base at Incirlik, Turkey, ending a 12-year US mission. Turkey's population was overwhelmingly opposed to the war with Iraq, and its government denied the United States permission to stage a ground invasion of Iraq from its land.
The military presence in Saudi Arabia, which contains a US facility at Prince Sultan Air Base, is also likely to reduce sharply.
''The footprint will more than likely be diminished and remain smaller at the request of the US military,'' said a source familiar with the operations of the Saudi government who spoke on condition of anonymity. ''The Saudis will remain under the US military umbrella ... It's not going to change very much in concept, but it will change in size.''
Reducing the US military profile in the region could ease tensions among Arabs opposed to US troops stationed in the region. One stated reason for Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's war on the United States is the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, home to the two holiest sites in Islam, Mecca and Medina.
While some military analysts have said that the US presence in the region could be shifted to Iraq, Rumsfeld all but dismissed the possibility.
''The likelihood of it seems to me to be so low that it does not surprise me that it's never been discussed in my presence,'' Rumsfeld said. ''... We've got all kinds of options and opportunities in that part of the world to locate forces. It's not like we need a new place.''
Rumsfeld was responding to an article in The New York Times on Sunday, quoting unnamed administration officials as saying that the United States was planning a permanent military presence in Iraq, a notion he described as ''enormously unhelpful.''
''Any impression that is left, which that article left, that the United States plans some sort of permanent presence in that country, I think, is a signal to the people of that country that's inaccurate and unfortunate, because we don't plan to function as an occupier, '' Rumsfeld said. To emphasize his point, he added, ''You can substitute `long-term' for `permanent' and my answer's the same.''
But some military analysts questioned the realism of not having a long-term military presence in that country.
''You mean the way we brought the boys home quickly from Germany after the end of World War II?'' John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, said. ''Anybody who believes that isn't paying attention. We're still in Germany 58 years after the end of World War II. We're still in Korea. We were in Saudi [Arabia] and Kuwait a dozen years after the end of Desert Storm. We have found ourselves a perfectly serviceable power projection platform.
''If you think about the business opportunities in the new and improved Iraq, well, oil and tourism and rebuilding Iraq's military have got to be right up there at the top,'' Pike said. ''That alone will require a sustained and pervasive American military presence through the end of the decade.''
Owen Cote of the MIT Security Studies Program said that the US intends to reduce forces in the region quickly, but also questioned how rapidly that will happen.
''The involuntary part of our presence is likely to continue for years,'' Cote said. ''There's no way they're going to avoid the need for a pretty robust presence there for a while.''
Copyright © 2003, Globe Newspaper Company
