| |
Pentagon Bites Back?
by Maria Tomchick
Now that Congress has given up its duty to rein in George Bush and his
Security Council, our best hope to stop the war against the Iraq may just
be the dissidents within the Bush administration itself.
On Wednesday, October 16, George Bush signed the Congressional resolution
granting him unchecked war powers against Iraq and then spent his day
entertaining Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (including giving Sharon
the message that it's fine to slaughter Palestinian civilians with missiles
and artillery fire).
On the same day, the UN was undergoing an unprecedented open discussion
about whether or not to use force against Iraq. The consensus: inspections
and diplomacy should prevail. Nation after nation stood up to shake its
finger at the USA and condemn the "military option," including a key
country that the US had assumed was on our side: Kuwait. The Kuwaiti
representative's exact words were: "any use of force must be a last resort
and within the United Nations framework."
Then on Thursday, as the State Department hurriedly rewrote the UN
resolution to remove all references to the use of military force, the hawks
in the administration announced that the US would reserve the right to
attack Iraq on its own if the UN refused to take action. But as the State
Department agreed to remove other key sections of the draft resolution--the
parts calling for troops to accompany inspection teams and that would allow
any representative of any of the five veto-wielding nations on the Security
Council to join the inspection teams in Iraq at any time--the go-it-alone
statement seemed to be just a lot of face-saving bluster.
Why the sudden change? Certainly losing Kuwait's support was part of the
reason. But there must be others. Perhaps the Bush administration is
distracted by more immediate matters: Sharon's visit, the upcoming visit by
Chinese Premier Jiang Zemin, congressional hearings on what was known prior
to 9/11, frantic fundraising and campaigning for the November elections,
and, of course, the roller-coaster economy.
Maybe. But my favorite explanation for the US' humiliating climbdown at the
UN is the split at the Pentagon, State Department, and the intelligence
agencies over the impending war. That split is hemorrhaging bits of
information that are slowly eroding the Bush administration's push for war.
Just in the last two weeks we've seen charges from the CIA that Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his minion, the vile Paul Wolfowitz, are
pushing senior CIA analysts to skew data on Iraq in order to support the
war drive. Last week, the Washington Post reported rumors that Rumsfeld has
been abusive to Pentagon personnel who produce data or opinions that don't
fit the program. And just a few days ago, the respected General Anthony
Zinni took a strong public stand against Rumsfeld and the other "civilians"
in the Bush administration: "I'm not sure what planet they live on, because
it isn't the one that I travel." And Zinni has traveled the Middle East
extensively in his current role as envoy to Israel and Palestine, and in
his former roles as head of US Central Command (which includes the Middle
East) and commander of troops in the Gulf War and Somalia.
Other embarrassing leaks have tinged the debate. No sooner had George Bush
given his speech to the American people on why we should go to war against
Iraq--replete with mentions of "dangerous gases" and "he [Saddam] gassed
his own people"--than the Pentagon released classified documents showing
that the US government had approved military experiments during the 1960s
in which it had tested chemical and biological weapons on its own troops,
released dispersal agents over populated areas of the US and Canada, and
had tested these agents on British and Canadian troops, too. Some of the
chemical agents included VX gas and Sarin.
And last week, the biggest leak of all came from the State Department:
North Korea has a nuclear weapons program far more advanced than Iraq's.
North Korean officials admitted as much to a US envoy on October 4, but the
Bush administration had kept a lid on this information for 13 days,
obviously to prevent it from effecting the congressional vote on war with
Iraq. Finally, some high-level anonymous source at the State Department was
too disgusted to keep it a secret any longer and leaked it to the major
wire services, putting the Bush administration into the uncomfortable
position of trying to explain why North Korea, a member of the vaunted
"Axis of Evil," is now somehow different from Iraq.
Then there were the analysts who verified that North Korea got its nuclear
technology from Pakistan, the Bush administration's closest ally in the
"War on Terrorism," a nation that more clearly fits the role of arming and
financing terrorist groups (the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Kashmiri rebels) and
possessing and passing out weapons of mass destruction to other nations
around the world than Iraq ever has.
And let's not forget the sharp, military wake-up call that the US press
gave scant attention to back in August. The combined US military forces
staged their summer exercise--the "Millennium Challenge"--over three weeks
in late July and early August. Planned over the course of two years, it was
the most elaborate war game ever attempted, involving 13,000 troops from
all branches of the military and sophisticated virtual reality computer
models. The scenario was as follows: the Blue Team (representing the US
military) would undertake an invasion of Red, a Middle Eastern country in
the Persian Gulf ruled by an evil dictator. Obviously, it was a dress
rehearsal for the invasion of Iraq.
The Red Team was led by a retired Lt. General and Vietnam Veteran named
Paul Van Riper. Van Riper managed in the first few days of the game to
bring the war to a halt and defeat the combined US military forces before
the invasion has even begun. How did he do it? He sank the entire US naval
fleet.
Van Riper used small speed boats, fishing boats, civilian yachts, and small
propeller planes armed with conventional explosives. As the US naval fleet
steamed towards Red, Van Riper gave a coded signal--broadcast not as a
radio transmission (which could have been jammed by US technology), but as
a call to prayer from the minarets of mosques. The fleet of kamikaze boats
and planes then went to work, smashing into US military ships and airbases
in the same way that terrorists had bombed the USS Cole in Yemen two years
ago. In addition, some of the small boats were armed with a few Chinese
Silkworm-type cruise missiles, which they used to sink the US' only
aircraft carrier and two marine helicopter carriers. Within hours, Red had
won the war.
That was when the US military planners who were refereeing the exercises
called a halt and resurrected the US navy from its watery grave. In
addition, they told Van Riper that US planes he had already bombed to
pieces had just flown over his country and destroyed his microwave
communications system. He would have to use satellites and cell phones. Oh
no, Van Riper insisted, we'll use motorcycle couriers and make
announcements from the mosques. When it looked like he was going to win a
second time, the planners told him to turn off his air defenses and move
his troops away from the beaches so the Blue Team could land and invade.
Even with these improbable handicaps, Van Riper managed to inflict
significant casualties on invading US forces. Finally, when Van Riper found
out that his orders to subordinates were being countermanded by the
referees, he quit in disgust.
Van Riper's conclusion is that the US military learned nothing from this
exercise, but I'm not so sure. With Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Jordan,
Turkey, and now Kuwait refusing to go along with the plan, the US will have
to rely more heavily on aircraft carriers to stage the kind of huge bombing
campaign that was a hallmark of the US wars in Afghanistan and Yugoslavia.
A large number of uniformed officers at the Pentagon will have the
disastrous "Millennium Challenge" on their minds as the civilian hawks in
the Bush administration (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, etc.) push for
an invasion of Iraq.
If retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni is any indication, they may be able to
put the brakes on this insane idea.
The juiciest sources for this article: "In the Council: Pleas for Unity and
a Debate on Resuming Arms Inspections," excerpts from statements made
before the UN Security Council, The New York Times, 10/17/02; "France Holds
Key to Deal in UN Debate on Iraq," Evelyn Leopold, Reuters, 10/18/02; "CIA
Feels Heat on Iraq Data," Greg Miller and Bob Drogin, Los Angeles Times,
10/11/02; "Toxic agents tested on US soil," Thom Shanker, NY Times,
reprinted in Seattle P-I, 10/9/02, A1; "Marine General Speaks Out Against
Bush's War Plans," Eric Boehlert, Salon, reposted on Alternet, 10/17/02,
www.alternet.org/Story.html?StoryID=14317; "US Says Pakistan Gave
Technology to North Korea," David E. Sanger and James Dao, NY Times,
10/17/02; "Wake-up call," Manchester Guardian Weekly, 9/26-10/2/02, p 20;
and "In Small Iraqi Port, Saddam's Handouts Keep Boats Afloat," Wall Street
Journal, 10/7/02, A1.
|