Dec 2, 2001: "America's drums of war elicit a deafening silence"

[seafan]

From the UK Telegraph, December 2, 2001

US plans for 'Phase II' of the war against terror have alarmed coalition partners, write David Wastell in Washington and Christina Lamb.

IN a discreetly located office overlooking the White House a former Army general pulled out of retirement by President George W. Bush sat down last week with top officials around a map of the world to plan the next move in America's continuing war on global terrorism.

--snip

The unexpectedly rapid military progress in Afghanistan, which has left the Taliban confined to three provinces and unlikely to hold out long amid round-the-clock US bombing of their forces in their stronghold of Kandahar, has whetted many a hawkish appetite in the Pentagon for taking on other pariah regimes.

--snip

The key, all agree, will be to capitalise quickly on the expected success in Afghanistan and move on to the next target - or targets - before the dust has time to settle.

--snip

Mr Bush appeared to open a new category (of targets) by declaring that countries which developed weapons of mass destruction "to terrorise the world" would also be "held accountable".

Under this heading he mentioned Iraq and North Korea by name, delighting the Pentagon hawks, including Mr Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, who have long argued within the administration that intervention to destroy Saddam's regime must be an urgent aim of American foreign policy.

Separately, John Bolton, the under-secretary of state for arms control, widened the list of candidates still further by also accusing Libya, Syria, Iran and Sudan of building germ warfare arsenals or harbouring others who are attempting to do so.

--snip

As for Iraq itself, the administration appears to have embarked on a new strategy. Within two weeks of the September 11 attack, Mr Bush made up his mind that dealing with Saddam too soon would risk fragmenting the coalition and undermine its effectiveness almost before it had begun its work, and ordered his senior officials to put it to one side.

In the absence of clear evidence of a link between Baghdad and the September 11 attacks it was hard to see how a move against Saddam could be justified to other countries, even Britain.

Last week however, Mr Bush introduced a new element with his comments on countries which were developing weapons of mass destruction. Saddam had to allow weapons inspectors back into the country, Mr Bush said, or "he'll find out" what the consequences are.

Although White House officials insisted that this was not a change of policy, most observers and many within the administration regarded it as a sign that the administration plans to build an international case against Saddam over the next few months before making a military move.

Whether this is in the form of arming and supporting the Iraqi opposition, an option favoured by Mr Rumsfeld and Mr Wolfowitz and advocated by the Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, or a heavy wave of airstrikes, or both, is far from settled. The urbane Iraqi opposition in exile with their liking for the fine hotels and restaurants of London and Washington are a very different prospect from the mountain warriors of the Northern Alliance.

Such war-drumming is leading to a growing rift between Washington and London where the fear is that the White House, flushed with its own success, might use the war on terrorism as a licence to take revenge for past incidents such as the killing of 18 US peacekeepers in Somalia in 1993 or the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen last year in which 17 American servicemen died.

"Many people are now praying things won't be over too soon in Afghanistan, otherwise the young cowboy will be unstoppable," said a senior British military officer.

--snip

http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=QUBBWAQGJUYMLQFIQMFCM5OAVCBQYJVC?xml=/news/2001/12/02/war102.xml