War on Iraq 'will weaken fight against terrorism'
Special forces and spy networks, key to both operations, would be stretched, warn military officials
WASHINGTON - As the Bush administration intensifies talk about toppling Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, military officials are confronting what some see as a looming problem: that by launching a war in the Persian Gulf, the administration will divert attention and resources from the military campaign against Al-Qaeda and terrorism.
Although Pentagon officials are proceeding to refine plans for a war against Iraq, military officers warn that a major campaign in the Middle East would place a serious drain on intelligence gathering and special forces units, two central components of the military's efforts to hunt down Al-Qaeda and Taleban members in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Balancing these conflicting stresses on US forces is among the key factors being assessed by war planners, and could contribute to the shape and timing of any military campaign against Iraq.
At the moment, with Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants still being sought along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan and elsewhere, some military officials worry that the administration may be shifting the focus to Iraq too soon.
'I'd prefer later than sooner,' said a senior officer involved in the Pentagon's deliberations.
'Can you imagine how it would look if we go to war with Iraq and there's another terrorist attack in the United States at the same time? People will wonder what we're doing.'
Defence officials said that spy satellites, reconnaissance aircraft and other intelligence resources employed in Afghanistan would have to be concentrated even more heavily on the Gulf region if President George W. Bush decides to attack Iraq.
Additionally, special forces members who speak Arabic and Farsi or have other expertise in the region - and in the past year have been used extensively in Afghanistan - would likely be diverted to an Iraqi campaign.
Despite the increasingly forceful language of Vice-President Dick Cheney and other administration officials, military planners say that, barring a provocation by Baghdad, no attack on Iraq is likely until January at the earliest.
They note that the administration must complete military planning, move troops and equipment into place, negotiate basing and overflight agreements with regional allies, and consult Congress before it could launch a war.
As they make the case for action against Iraq, advocates argue that taking on Mr Saddam would not be a diversion from the war on terrorism but an essential complement to it.
They cite what they say is Iraq's support of terrorist groups and the threat posed by its government as a source of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. -- Washington Post |
