|
US may call up more reservists for Iraq
General Peter Pace, vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the Pentagon would need to alert reserve troops in the next four to six weeks unless a multinational division of 10,000 to 15,000 troops was pledged before then. But US hopes for winning international support appeared to be waning in the wake of the tepid response to President George W. Bushâs call at the United Nations on Tuesday for more international assistance.Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary, told a congressional committee on Wednesday: "Weâre not going to get a lot of international troops with or without a UN resolution." The call-up of additional reserve and guard troops to maintain the 130,000-strong US force in Iraq could further weaken domestic popular support for the US role in Iraq. Most reserve and guard troops are married men with families and regular jobs and the long deployments in Iraq are already straining morale. Going to be tough on the Reserves without question. Senator Ernest Hollings, a South Carolina Democrat, warned: "Itâs not going to fly having the majority of the Reserves and the Guard on duty in Iraq. I donât know how you can do it." That attitude sounds rather French to me. The US currently has 170,000 reservists called up, down from a maximum of 223,000 at the height of the Iraq war. But the number is still far greater than the 50,000 who were called up to secure US airports and borders after the September 11 attacks. The US is still hoping that allies such as Pakistan, Turkey and South Korea will form a third multinational division of 15,000 troops to serve alongside the UK and Polish divisions. That would reduce the US need to call up more active or reserve forces to maintain the current military strength in Iraq. "We have every hope that that will happen," said General Pace. "But hope is not a plan." Mr Rumsfeld and senior military officials said they are now looking to the rapid training of an Iraqi army and police force as the quickest way to reduce the need for US forces. General John Abizaid, who commands the US forces in Iraq, said the most important element now "is the ability of Iraqis to take care of the security situation." He said the best possible scenario would be that Iraqi capabilities improve enough to allow some reduction in US forces next year. "Itâs not impossible to believe that could happen next year, provided thereâs not a spike in violence that is unanticipated." Germans could help by doing what they just offered to do: start training Iraqi police. Perhaps the next step is to do some of that in, say, Kuwait? That wouldnât violate German sensitivities. Mr Rumsfeld, who was testifying in defence of the administrationâs $87bn budget request to Congress, said the US had no choice but to bear the costs of victory in Iraq. "We believe it is necessary for the security of our country and the stability of the world," he said. "The price of sending terrorists the message that weâre not willing to spend what it takes, that we value comfort or money more than freedom, would be far greater." Yup. Posted by: Steve White 2003-09-25 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=19071 |