DoD News Briefing
Thursday, January 15, 1998 - 1:30 p.m.
Captain Mike Doubleday, DASD (PA)
....................
Q: Has there been any major change in U.S. military assets in and around the Persian Gulf in the past week or so?
A: Ivan, the term I used on Tuesday continues to be operative. That is we maintain a very robust force in the Gulf region. It is centered on the ground-based aircraft which are ashore in several of the countries in the region, also the two aircraft carriers that we're maintaining, and a number of surface combatants that are Tomahawk-capable.
There are some adjustments that we're making because we're interested in maintaining this personnel tempo that contributes to the overall retention figures and morale of troops, and we, in connection with that, you've known for some time that the NIMITZ Battle Group will be returning to the United States on schedule and be replaced by another battle group. The deployment order on that one -- we still anticipate, will be signed soon. I'll be glad to share with you the ships that are going to be involved in that deployment, but I'm not in a position to do so right now.
In addition to that, there is a series of exercises which we conduct in Kuwait called Intrinsic Action. We are going to be commencing another in that series here very shortly. 1,500 soldiers are in the process of deploying to Kuwait to participate in Intrinsic Action. The actual exercise is going to be conducted commencing on the 20th of January and continuing on into mid-April. Those soldiers are made up of elements from the Headquarters of the U.S. Army Forces Central Command at Fort McPherson, Ga., and Task Force 130 made up of elements of the 2nd Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, Ga.
Those of you who have visited over there know that we maintain pre-positioned equipment in Kuwait so the units don't deploy with any equipment. They pick it up, take it out into the training areas, and that process is, as I say, going on now.
The ARG, which has been operating in the region, has departed. The Marines on that ARG had conducted late last year a similar sort of an exercise called Eager Mace, and because of this Intrinsic Action exercise that's ongoing, that's enabled the Marines and the ARG units to redeploy on their schedule, too. There are also some swaps that have been made on surface combatants. The USS BARRY has recently joined the two aircraft carrier battle groups in the Gulf and there are four units, three of which were Tomahawk-capable, which have departed the area.
So to give you kind of an overall picture of what we've got there, we've got over 26,000 U.S. military personnel that remain in the area; we've got over 320 aircraft which include all kinds of fixed wing aircraft that remain in the area; we have the two aircraft carriers in the area; and approximately 20 other ships, some of which are support ships, some of which are combatants.
Q: They're not necessarily all in the Gulf?
A: I say in the region because I don't want to distinguish. Some are in the Northern Arabian Sea area, some in the Persian Gulf area, but all in that area.
Q: The 320 aircraft, does not include the B-52s that were sent to Diego Garcia?
A: It does.
Q: It does not include planes in Turkey?
A: It does not include the aircraft that are up in Turkey.
Q: What does the Pentagon know about alleged experiments on Iraqi prisoners using chemical weapons?
A: We don't have any independent confirmation of that, but we certainly are aware of the concerns that Mr. Butler has expressed, and we believe that because of the information that he believes he has and the information that he is seeking, that his inspectors need to have unfettered access to the sites there, to follow up on that information.
Q: The Russians have offered to replace the U-2s with a plane of their own to do the reconnaissance over Iraq. Do you think they have the capability to do this as well as the U-2s do it? How do you feel about this proposal?
A: First of all, I'm not familiar with what kinds of aircraft the Russians might be talking about here, nor am I aware of any kind of offer that has been made. What I am aware of is that the original agreement which was struck regarding air surveillance, was between the United Nations and between the Iraqis and it involved the U-2 specifically.
Q: What's the next step? If Ambassador Butler leaves Baghdad empty-handed, so to speak, without any kind of agreement on unfettered inspections, what's the next step in this process?
A: Ivan, I'm not going to speculate for you where that will go. Ambassador Butler will be departing for Iraq later today. He will, as I understand it, be making a stop in Paris en-route. He is expected to return to the -- to report to the Security Council in about a week. Earlier today the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Ambassador Richardson, expressed his position on that, which is that Mr. Butler needed to travel with a very firm indication of the feelings of the UN Security Council. He has that in a very strong letter which was issued by the Security Council President. He feels that we should continue pursuing the diplomatic channel, which we are doing.
Q: Does the Department of Defense have a clear understanding of UNSCOM? Whether the Iraqis are continuing to manufacture their weapons of mass destruction or if the inspection program has halted the current, ongoing manufacture? And a second part of the question would be, wouldn't this be a very critical issue in deciding what steps to take, especially military steps?
A: Your question is a very broad one, and one which really should be addressed to the people at UNSCOM. What we believe, very generally speaking, is that the work that the UNSCOM team does, the inspectors do, is very important so that we can get a full understanding of the extent of various programs that the Iraqis have underway for their weapons of mass destruction.
Now we believe that the inspectors require full access so that the international community can understand where those programs are and be reassured that weapons have been destroyed and programs have stopped if, in fact, that is the case. But we will not know that unless the inspectors have access. For that reason, many officials of the United States Government and many others of the international community have pointed out that until there is this unfettered access and until the UN inspectors are satisfied of the status of the programs, that the sanctions cannot be lifted.
Q: Wouldn't ongoing weapons production by Iraq be a far more egregious violation than just holding onto weapons they've already made?
A: Weapons manufacture?
Q: Ongoing weapons production.
A: As I say, this is... The whole issue of what the status of their program is, what the status of their efforts are, is exactly what we want to see and what the international community wants to see in terms of these inspectors.
Q: Have all the requests for material and personnel by General Zinni out in the Gulf been approved by the Pentagon? Are there any that have been disapproved?
A: I'm not aware of any requests that are pending from General Zinni.
.................
.....................
Press: Thank you.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
