Post-war Iraq to be divided into three sectors. Multi-national force to provide security. Seems like the French and German Govts. aren't raising too many hackles, although the AP report indicates they may have been surprised by the move. The multi-national force to include "New Europe", Asia, UK, and US. It appears that France, Germany, and Russia will not participate.
May 3, 2003
France, Germany Back U.S. Plan on Iraq
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
nytimes.com
Filed at 9:32 a.m. ET
KASTELLORIZO, Greece (AP) -- France and Germany, America's harshest critics of the Iraq war, on Saturday reluctantly endorsed a U.S. plan to divide Iraq into three zones and deploy a stabilization force that excludes them.
The initiative, unveiled as the European Union foreign ministers met on a Greek Aegean island, appeared to take EU officials by surprise. Some said they only learned of it from news reports quoting officials traveling with U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, who was on a visit to London.
German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said the plan ``is not a new situation and is not in contradiction with our discussion about giving the United Nations a role in postwar Iraq.''
The Americans ``can do what they want. This does not bother us at all,'' said a French diplomat.
The United States plans to set up an international military force in three regions of Iraq, with Poland and Britain controlling two zones and U.S. forces the third, U.S. officials said. They said Denmark, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Ukraine and Bulgaria would provide troops.
Polish Foreign Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewiczs told reporters ``this is a fresh responsibility for my country, but we are ready to share it.''
Poland ``would prefer'' a U.N. Security Council resolution endorsing the stabilization force, but that it should go ahead without one, if necessary, Cimoszewiczs said.
``We see a vital role for the United Nations in humanitarian relief,'' British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told reporters after the meeting.
He briefed Fischer and French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin on the sidelines of the EU meeting.
He said there was no attempt to sideline France and Germany, although that appeared to be the case. He called past disagreements over Iraq ``a matter of history'' and said it is time to look forward rather than back.
The ministers agreed to mend the trans-Atlantic relationship that was damaged in the months before the war.
They asked the EU head office to draft a strategy on how Europeans can better deal with such issues as international terrorism and weapons of mass destruction in the hands of unstable countries.
May 3, 2003
U.S. Plans to Reduce Forces in Iraq, With Help of Allies
By MICHAEL R. GORDON with ERIC SCHMITT
nytimes.com
BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 2 — The Bush administration is planning to withdraw most United States combat forces from Iraq over the next several months and wants to shrink the American military presence to less than two divisions by the fall, senior allied officials said today.
The United States currently has more than five divisions in Iraq, troops that fought their way into the country and units that were added in an attempt to stabilize it. But the Bush administration is trying to establish a new military structure in which American troops would continue to secure Baghdad while the majority of the forces in Iraq would be from other nations.
Under current planning, there would be three sectors in postwar Iraq. The Americans would keep a division in and around Baghdad; Britain would command a multinational division in the south near Basra; and Poland would command a third division of troops from a variety of nations.
The British are organizing a "force generation" conference next week in London to solicit troops for the effort, and another conference is likely to be held later this month in Warsaw.
The Bush administration's aim is to bring most of the American troops here back to their bases in the United States and Europe so they can prepare for potential crises.
The administration does not want substantial numbers of American forces to be tied down in Iraq. It is eager to avoid the specter of American occupation, and it is hoping to shift much of the peacekeeping burden of stabilizing Iraq to other governments.
If the administration plan is carried out, the effect would be to reduce the number of American troops in Iraq from over 130,000 soldiers and marines at present to 30,000 troops or fewer by the fall.
Still, the American troop withdrawal schedule, by all accounts, is ambitious given the continued instability in Iraq and the size of the country.
The guidance given to military commanders is that they should be prepared to assume risks in reducing the American forces just as they did when they fought their way into the country, according to allied officials.
In this case the risk involves leaving some areas of Iraq uncovered or with a minimal troop presence — an approach the military calls "economy of force" — before order is fully restored throughout the country.
American and allied forces would still concentrate on maintaining order in Baghdad, other major cities and the main routes allied forces use to transport supplies and troop movements.
American military officials cautioned that the timetable for rapid troop reductions depended on several conditions and that the withdrawal schedule would be likely to slow down if the conditions were not met.
First, they said, the security situation in Baghdad and Iraq must improve. American officials are calculating that there will be a reduction in criminal activity, paramilitary attacks and general lawlessness as the Iraqi police complete their training and begin to take over patrols. American commanders are also assuming that some sort of transitional Iraqi government will be established in the next two months.
Another condition is that the other nations will provide the necessary troops.
The new troop deployment plans were described today by senior allied and administraton officials. The deployment plan was also a topic of discussion of an unusual meeting here of American and British division commanders and other senior officials.
According to a senior administration official, the goal is to reduce the American force to a single division.
Achieving this goal would depend, in part, on the number of foreign troop contributions. "The larger the number of countries that participate, the fewer the number of forces from the United States will be necessary," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told reporters in London today before flying back to Washington from a seven-nation tour.
Under the planning, the British would maintain a headquarters to command a multinational division to be based in Basra and elsewhere in southern Iraq. That division would be made up of a British brigade and possibly forces from other nations, including Spain and Italy, which are expected to send troops.
Poland would also command a division and has offered to contribute a brigade of troops.
The Australians, who have sent special forces to Iraq, are expected to keep a small military presence in Iraq. Other nations that are expected to contribute troops include Bulgaria, Denmark, Ukraine and the Netherlands.
Three more nations — the Philippines, Qatar and South Korea — have agreed to make other contributions, including field hospitals, engineers, and civil defense and mine-clearing specialists, the official said.
A senior allied official said today there had been discussions about the possibility of troop contributions from India and Pakistan, creating yet another division of troops.
A recent and largely symbolic contribution is the deployment of some 200 Albanian soldiers.
As of now, however, the American-led effort pointedly excludes France, Germany and Russia, three nations that actively opposed the war.
A fierce fight over the role the United Nations will have in postwar Iraq is expected to be fought in Washington, New York and the capitals of Europe and the Middle East over the next few weeks.
The Bush administration's push to withdraw combat forces raises a number of complex issues. American military commanders and administration officials have emphasized that it is not enough to topple Saddam Hussein's government but also vital to consolidate that victory by creating a secure environment for rebuilding the nation's infrastructure and encouraging the formation of a new government.
In his speech on Thursday, President Bush pledged that the allied forces would bring order to parts of Iraq that were still dangerous and would not leave until their mission was completed.
Even so, the allied force that is now deployed is extended to the limit as it seeks to deal with criminal gangs, remnants of Mr. Hussein's government, Iranian agents, suicide bombers, ambitious Iraqi politicians and their militias and other threats to the new order.
It remains to be seen how well the Americans and their allies will be able to carry out this task if American forces are substantially reduced and American and British forces are replaced by troops from Eastern Europe and Asia.
The situation in Iraq is now so uncertain that American forces plan to keep rules of engagement that allow them to initiate offensive operations even as they make the transition to "peace enforcement."
In the weeks leading up to the war, the Army chief of staff, Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, said that as many as several hundred thousand troops would be needed to bring stability to Iraq. Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, put the number at around 100,000.
The force that allied planners seem to have in mind seems closer to Mr. Wolfowitz's figure, though only a fraction of them would be American.
The United States now has a broad array of forces in Iraq. The Army forces here include the Third Infantry Division, which is charged with maintaining order in Baghdad; the Fourth Infantry Division, which is overseeing Tikrit and is patrolling east of capital; and the 101st Airborne Division, which is has headquarters in Mosul.
Other Army forces in Iraq include the Third Armored Cavalry Regiment, which is patrolling the western part of the country, including the town of Falluja. Most of the units of the 82nd Airborne Division in Iraq are in the process of withdrawing, but some of its troops will remain in Baghdad. The Second Light Cavalry Regiment also has some forces in Baghdad, and more of its troops are to be deployed in Iraq.
A large Marine expeditionary force is charged with maintaining order in the Iraq's southern cities while British forces are in Basra.
The large American component of this force would be reduced by the fall to less than two American divisions and one British-led multinational division, according to the Bush administration's plans. The key American force would be the First Armored Division, which would be based in Baghdad, taking the place of the Army's Third Infantry Division. A division generally totals from 15,000 to 20,000 soldiers depending on the number of support troops.
The success of the redeployment will depend not just on the military's success in hunting down remnants of the old order but also on success in restoring electricity and other services, rebuilding the infrastructure, supporting the formation of a new government and generally securing the support of the Iraqi public.
There is as yet no interim Iraqi administration. Most of the discussions that have been held by senior American officials here on forming one have included representatives of groups that have been in exile abroad as well as representatives of the two main Kurdish factions. Which leaders and exile groups will take part in a temporary administration is still unclear.
But the administration is calculating that these are temporary problems and that political trends will improve and will allow the disengagement of most American troops. |
