[casi] News, 26/03-02/04/03 (4)

[Peter Brooke <pbrooke@DELETETHISukonline.co.uk>]

News, 26/03-02/04/03 (4)

GRU INTELLIGENCE REPORTS (PERHAPS)

COALITION OF THE NOT VERY WILLING

*  Berlusconi Eases Italy's War Concerns
*  Inside Europe
*  'New' Europe distances itself from war


GRU INTELLIGENCE REPORTS (PERHAPS)

http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_014.htm

*  28TH MARCH

According to the latest intercepted radio communications, the command of the
coalition group of forces near Karabela requested at least 12 more hours to
get ready to storm the town. This delay is due to the much heavier losses
sustained by the coalition troops during the sand storms then was originally
believed. Just the US 3rd Mechanized Infantry Division sustained more than
200 disabled combat vehicles of various types. The 101st Airborne Division
reported some 70 helicopters as being disabled. Additionally, the recently
delivered reinforcements require rest and time to prepare for combat.

At the same time the US forces have resumed attacks near An-Nasiriya and
An-Najaf since 0630hrs and are continuously increasing the intensity of
these attacks. During the night and early morning of March 28 the Iraqi
positions in these areas were subjected to eight aerial assaults by bombers
and ground attack aircraft. However, so far [the coalition] was unable to
penetrate the Iraqi defenses.

Also during the early morning the British units begun advancing along the
Fao peninsula. Latest radio intercepts from this area show that under a
continuous artillery and aerial bombardment the Iraqis have begun to
gradually withdraw their forces toward Basra.

First firefights between troops of the US 82nd Airborne Division and the
Iraqi forces occurred in northern Iraq in the area of Mosula. At the same
time the arrival of up to 1,500 Kurdish troops has been observed in this
area. So far it is not clear to which of the many Kurdish political
movements these troops belong. Leaders of the largest Kurdish workers party
categorically denied participation of their troops. They believe that these
may be units of one of the local tribes not controlled by the central
authorities of the Kurdish autonomy and "ready to fight with anyone" for
money.

According to verified information, during the past 48 hours of the Iraqi
counterattacks the coalition forces sustained the following losses: up to 30
killed, over 110 wounded and 20 missing in action; up to 30 combat vehicles
lost or disabled, including at least 8 tanks and 2 self-propelled artillery
systems, 2 helicopters and 2 unmanned aerial vehicles were lost in combat.
Iraqi losses are around 300 killed, up to 800 wounded, 200 captured and up
to 100 combat vehicles 25 of which were tanks. Most of the [ Iraqi ] losses
were sustained due to the artillery fire and aerial bombardment that resumed
by the evening of March 27.

First conclusions can be drawn from the war

The first week of the war surprised a number of military analysts and
experts. The war in Iraq uncovered a range of problems previously left
without a serious discussion and disproved several resilient myths.

The first myth is about the precision-guided weapons as the determining
factor in modern warfare, weapons that allow to achieve strategic
superiority without direct contact with the enemy. On the one hand we have
the fact that during the past 13 years the wars were won by the United
States with minimum losses and, in essence, primarily through the use of
aviation. At the same time, however, the US military command was stubborn in
ignoring that the decisive factor in all these wars was not the military
defeat of the resisting armies but political isolation coupled with strong
diplomatic pressure on the enemy's political leadership. It was the creation
of international coalitions against Iraq in 1991, against Yugoslavia in 1999
and against Afghanistan in 2001 that ensured the military success.

The American command preferred not to notice the obvious military failures
during expeditions to Granada, Libya and Somalia, discounting them as "local
operations" not deserving much attention.

Today we can see that in itself massed use of strategic and tactical
precision-guided weapons did not provide the US with a strategic advantage.
Despite the mass use of the most sophisticated weapons the Americans have so
far failed to disrupt Iraqi command and control infrastructure,
communication networks, top Iraqi military and political leadership, Iraqi
air defenses. At the same time the US precision-guided weapons arsenal has
been reduced by about 25%.

The only significant advantage of the precision-guided weapons is the
capability to avoid massive casualties among the civilians in densely
populated areas.

What we have is an obvious discrepancy between the ability to locate and
attack a target with precision-guided weapons and the power of this weapon,
which is not sufficient to reliably destroy a protected target.

On the other hand, precision-guided munitions demonstrated their superiority
over conventional munitions on the battlefield. The ability to attack
targets at long ranges with the first shot is the deciding factor in the
American superiority in land battles.

The second myth disproved by this war is the myth propagated by the
proponents of the "hi-tech" war, who believe in the superiority of the most
modern weapons and inability of older-generation weapons to counteract the
latest systems. Today the technological gap between the Iraqi weapons and
those of the coalition has reached 25-30 years, which corresponds to two
"generations" in weapons design. The primary Iraqi weapons correspond to the
level of the early 1970s. Since that time the Americans, on the other hand,
have launched at least two major rearmament efforts: the "75-83 program" and
the "90-97 program". Moreover, currently the US is in the middle of another
major modernization and rearmament program that will continue for the next
five years. Despite of this obvious gap, Iraqi resistance has already been
publicly qualified by the US as "fierce and resilient". Analysts believe
that the correlation of losses is entirely acceptable to the Iraqis and they
[ the analysts ] do not see any strategic coalition advantage in this war.
Once again this proves that success in modern warfare is achieved not so
much through technological superiority but primarily through training,
competent command and resilience of the troops. Under such conditions even
relatively old weapons can inflict heavy losses on a
technologically-superior enemy.

Two enormous mistakes made by the US command during the planning stages of
this war resulted in the obvious strategic failure. The US has
underestimated the enemy. Despite the unique ability to conduct
reconnaissance against the Iraqi military infrastructure through a wide
network of agents implanted with the international teams of weapons
inspectors, despite unlimited air dominance the US military command has
failed to adequately evaluate combat readiness of the Iraqi army and its
technical capabilities; the US has failed to correctly assess the social and
political situation in Iraq and in the world in general. These failures led
to entirely inadequate military and political decisions:

The coalition force was clearly insufficient for a such a large-scale
operation. The number of deployed troops was at least 40% short of the
required levels. This is the reason why today, after nine days of war, the
US is forced to resort to emergency redeployment of more than 100,000 troops
from the US territory and from Europe. This, in essence, is the same number
of troops already fighting in Iraq.

The buildup and distribution of the coalition forces have been conducted
with gross neglect of all basic rules of combat. All troops were massed in
one small area, which led to five days of non-stop fighting to widen this
area. The initial attack begun without any significant aerial or artillery
preparation and almost immediately this resulted in reduced rate of advance
and heated positional battles.

Today we can see that the US advance is characterized by disorganized and
"impulsive" actions. The troops are simply trying to find weak spots in the
Iraqi defenses and break through them until they hit the next ambush or the
next line of defense.

Not a single goal set before the coalition forces was met on time.

During the nine days of the war the coalition has failed:

- to divide Iraq in half along the An-Nasiriya - Al-Ammara line,
- to surround and to destroy the Iraqi group of forces at Basra,
- to create an attack group between the Tigris and the Euphrates with a
front toward Baghdad,
- to disrupt Iraq's military and political control, to disorganize Iraq's
forces and to destroy the main Iraqi attack forces.

A whole range of problems that require their own solutions was uncovered
directly on the battlefield. Thus, combat in Iraq raised serious concerns
about the problem of coordination between units from different services.
Limited decision-making time and the ability to detect and to engage an
enemy at a great distance make "friendly fire" one of the most serious
problems of modern warfare. For now the coalition has no adequate solution
to this problem. At one location or another every day of this war the
coalition troops were attacking friendly forces.

The second problem of the coalition is its inability to hold on to the
captured territory. For the first time since the war in Vietnam the
Americans have to deal with a partisan movement and with attacks against
their [the US] lines of communication. Currently the coalition is rushing to
form some sort of territorial defense units for guarding its supply lines
and for maintaining order in the occupied territories.

A range of technical problems with equipment has been revealed during the
combat operations. Most operators of the M1A2 Abrams main battle tank agree
that the tank was inadequate for performing the set combat tasks. The
primary problem is the extremely low reliability of the tank's engine and
its transmission in desert conditions. Heat from the sun, hot sand and the
constantly present hot dust in the air nearly nullified the advantages
offered by the turret-mounted thermal sights. Visibility range of these
sights did not exceed 300 meters during movement in convoy and reached up to
700-800 meters during stops. Only during cold nights did the visibility
range reach 1000-1,500 meters. Additionally, a large number of thermal
sights and other electronics simply broke down. The tiny crystalline sand
particles caused electrical power surges and disabled electronic equipment.

This was the reason for the decision by the coalition command to stop
movement of troops at night when a contact with the enemy was deemed likely.

The main strong side of the coalition forces was the wide availability of
modern reconnaissance and communication systems that allowed to detect the
enemy at long ranges and to quickly suppress the enemy with well-coordinated
actions of different types of available forces.

In general the US soldiers showed sufficiently high combat resilience. Even
in the extremely difficult weather conditions the troops maintained control
structure and adequately interpreted the situation. Combat spirit remained
high. The majority of troops remain confident in their abilities, while
maintaining belief in the superiority of their weapons and maintaining
reasonable confidence in the way the war is being fought.

It should be noted, however, that the way the war is being fought did create
a certain sense of disappointment in most of the troops. Many are feeling
that they've been lied to and are openly talking about the stupidity of the
high command and its gross miscalculations. "Those star-covered Pentagon
idiots promised us a victory march and flowers on the armor. What we got
instead were those damned fanatics fighting for every dune and the sand
squeaking in your ass!" said one of the wounded recuperating at a hospital
in Rammstein. [ Reverse translation from Russian ]

Nevertheless, despite the sand storms the terrain favors the coalition
actions by allowing it to employ their entire arsenal of weapons at the
greatest possible range, which makes it difficult for the Iraqis to conduct
combat operations outside of populated areas.

Overestimating the abilities of its airborne forces was a weak side of the
coalition. Plans for a wide-scale use of helicopters as an independent force
did not materialize. All attempts by the US command to organize aerial and
ground operations through exclusive use of airborne forces have failed.
Because of these failures by the end of the fourth day of the war all
airborne units were distributed across the coalition units and used by the
attacking forces for reconnaissance, fire support, and for containing the
enemy. The main burden of combat was carried by the "heavy" mechanized
infantry and tank units.

Another serious drawback in the coalition planning was the exceptionally
weak protection in the rear of the advancing forces. This resulted in
constant interruptions in fuel supply. Tank units sometimes spent up to 6
hours standing still with empty fuel tanks, in essence, being targets for
the Iraqis. Throughout the war delivery of food, ammunition and fuel remains
a headache for the US commanders.

Among the US soldiers there has been a wide-scale discontent with the
quality of the new combat rations. Servicemen are openly calling these
rations "shitty." Many soldier just take the biscuits and the sweets and
discard the rest of the ration. Commanders of the combat units are demanding
from the coalition command to immediately provide the troops with hot food
and to review the entire contents of the combat ration.

Among the strong sides of the Iraqi troops are their excellent knowledge of
the terrain, high quality of defensive engineering work, their ability to
conceal their main attack forces and their resilience and determination in
defense. The Iraqis have shown good organization in their command and
communication structures as well as decisive and and well-planned strategy.

Among the drawbacks of the Iraqi forces is the bureaucratic inflexibility of
their command, when all decisions are being made only at the highest levels.
Their top commanders also tend to stick to standard "template" maneuvers and
there is insufficient coordination among the different types of forces.

At the same time commanders of the [Iraqi] special operations forces are
making good use of the available troops and weapons to conduct operations
behind the front lines of the enemy. They use concealment, show cunning and
imagination.

[.....]


http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_015.htm

*  29TH MARCH

Moscow - During the past day the situation on the US-Iraqi front remained
largely unchanged. The US is continuing reinforcing the attack group near
Karabela for a thrust toward Baghdad. By the morning of March 29 up to
20,000 coalition troops were massed in the area of Karabela. This forces
includes up to 200 tanks, 150 artillery systems and more than 250
helicopters. The order for the attack will be given by the coalition
commander Gen. Tommy Franks, who, according to intercepted radio
communications, will personally inspect the troops during the next several
hours.

Around 1900hrs yesterday an Apache attack helicopter crashed. Intercepted
radio communications show that the helicopter was heavily damaged in a
combat mission. The helicopter's pilot lost control during landing and the
helicopter crashed, causing serious damage to another helicopter that landed
earlier.

The coalition troops have so far failed to take An-Nasiriya despite of the
categorical orders from the command and more than 800 combat missions by the
strike aircraft. All attempts to break through the Iraqi defense were met by
Iraqi counterattacks. After 24 hours of fighting the coalition troops only
managed to advance several hundred meters in two sectors near An-Nasiriya at
the cost of 4 destroyed armored personnel carriers, no less that 3 Marines
killed by sniper and mortar fire, 10 wounded and 2 missing in action. The
exact Iraqi losses are being determined.

The Americans have also failed to advance near An-Najaf. Every coalition
attack was met by massive artillery barrages from the Iraqi side. Later
during the day the Iraqis mounted a counterattack throwing the US forces
back by 1.5-2 kilometers. No fewer than 10 Marines were killed or wounded.
After exchanging fire for six hours both warring sides remained in the same
positions. Iraqi losses in this area are estimated to be 20 killed and up to
40 wounded.

Near Basra the British troops pushed the Iraqi defense lines on the Fao
peninsula but were unable to capture the entire peninsula. The British
advance was a maximum of 4 kilometers from the highway leading to Basra.
Radio intercepts show that in this attack the Iraqis shot down a British
helicopter. Additionally, two tanks and one APCs were destroyed by
landmines. At least 2 [British] servicemen were killed, around 20 were
wounded and 15 were captured by the Iraqis.

Exchange of fire continued in the area of the Basra airport. The Iraqis
destroyed one coalition APC wounding two coalition soldiers. The Iraqi
losses are difficult to estimate, but available information suggests that up
to 20 Iraqi soldiers and local militia members might have been killed in the
air and artillery strikes.

All attempts by the British troops to break through the Iraqi defenses from
the south along the Al-Arab river have yielded not results. The British
command reported that it is unable to storm Basra with the available forces
and will require no less than two additional brigades and at least five
additional artillery battalions. Thus, to avoid further casualties the
British are adopting defensive tactics, while trying to maintain a tight
blockade around Basra and trying to improve their positions with small
localized attacks. The British are also maintaining pressure on the Iraqi
positions on the Fao peninsula.

The psychological levels among the city's residents, according to
interviews, is far from critical. The Iraqi military made several public
announcements to the residents offering them a chance to leave the city.
However, most of the residents do not want to leave, fearing the fate of the
Palestinian refugees, who, after losing their homes, gained pariah status in
the Arab world. Basra's residents were extremely depressed by the video
footage aired by the coalition command showing Iraqis on the occupied
territories fighting for food and water being distributed by the coalition
soldiers. The city's population views this as a sample of what awaits them
if the Americans come...

At the Al-Kuwait airport the unloading of the 4th Mechanized Infantry
Division is continuing and is expected to be completed by the night of April
1. During a night flight one of the US military transport aircraft requested
an emergency landing. What happened to the plane is still being determined.

Currently the coalition command is deciding how better use the 4th Infantry
Division. The complete deployment [of the division] and preparations for
combat are expected to take at least 10 days. However, the combat units
require immediate reinforcements and it is possible that the [4th Infantry}
Division will be joining combat in stages, as the units become ready. This
will mean a considerable reduction of the Division's combat effectiveness.

A report was obtained, prepared by the Al-Kuwait-based [coalition]
Psychological Operations Tactical Group for the [coalition] Special Ground
Forces Command. The report analyzed the effectiveness of the information and
propaganda war. According to the report, analysis of the television
broadcasts, intercepted radio communications, interrogations of Iraqi POWs
show that psychologically the Iraqis are now "more stable and confident"
that they were during the last days before the war. This, according to the
report, is due primarily to the coalition's numerous military failures.

"...Following nervousness and depression [of the Iraqis] during the first
days of the war we can now observe a burst of patriotic and nationalistic
feelings. ...There has been a sharp increase in the number of Iraqi
refugees, who left the country before the war, returning to Iraq. A "cult of
war" against the US and the UK is now emerging among the Iraqis...", the
report states. [Reverse translation from Russian]

[Coalition] analysts believe that if this attitude of the Iraqis is not
changed within the next 7 days, a "resistance ideology" may take over the
Iraqi minds, making the final [coalition] victory even more difficult. In
response to this report the US Army Psychological Operations command decided
to combine all Iraqi POWs into large groups and to distribute the resulting
video footage to the world media. A more active use of the Iraqi opposition
was suggested for propaganda work in the occupied villages. The same
opposition members will be used to create video footage of the "repented"
Iraqi POWs and footage of the local [Iraqi] population "opposing Saddam."

Radio communications intercepted during the last five days suggest that the
coalition is using Israeli airfield for conducting night air strikes against
Iraq. Combat aircraft are taking off regularly from the [Israeli] Hatzerim
and the Navatim airbases do not return to the same bases but fly toward the
border with Jordan while maintaining complete radio silence.

Possibly these are just Israeli Air Force exercises, However, [Russian]
radio intercept and radar units observe increased intensity of radio
communications coming from the Jordanian air force and air defense
communication centers during such overflights, as well as changes in the
operating modes of the US Army "Patriot" tracking radars deployed in Jordan.
This indicates the Israeli airbases as used as forward airfield or that some
of the coalition air force units are based there. Normally the IAF F-15I
fighter-bombers and A-4N strike aircraft operate from the Hatzerim airbase
and the F-16 fighter-bombers operate from the Nevatim base.

Experts believe that these airbases may be used by the F-117 stealth bombers
"officially" based at the Al-Udaid airbase in Qatar. Using these two
locations minimizes the risk to the F-117s by allowing them to fly along the
left bank of the Euphrates (in the direction of Turkey) and to avoid the
dangerous maneuvering over Iraq.

The destruction of the telephone stations in Baghdad did nothing to disrupt
the communications of the Iraqi army. The coalition command acknowledged
this fact after analyzing the dense [Iraqi] radio traffic. Because of that
the USAF was ordered to employ the most powerful available [conventional]
munitions against predetermined strategic targets. This attacks will be
carried out immediately before renewing ground advance.

(source: iraqwar.ru, 03-29-03, translated by Venik)


http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_016.htm

* 30TH MARCH

March 30, 2003, 2042hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - No significant changes
have been reported during March 29-30 on the Iraqi-US front. Positional
combat, sporadic exchange of fire and active search and reconnaissance
operations by both sides continue along the entire line of the front.

American troops continue massing near Karabela. As was mentioned in the
previous update, the US group of forces in this area numbers up to 30,000
troops, up to 200 tanks and up to 230 helicopters. Latest photos of this
area suggest that the [US] troops are busy servicing and repairing their
equipment and setting up the support infrastructure.

According to radio intercepts, the coalition commander Gen. Tommy Franks has
visited the US forces near Karabela. He personally inspected the troops and
had a meeting with the unit commanders. Currently no information is
available about the topics discussed during the meeting. However, it is
believed that the [coalition] commander listened to the reports prepared by
the field commanders and formulated the main objectives for the next 2-3
days.

The current technical shape of the coalition forces was discussed during the
meeting at the coalition central headquarters. During a personal phone
conversation with another serviceman in the US one participant of this
meeting called this technical state "depressing". According to him "...a
third of our equipment can be dragged to a junk yard right now. We are
holding up only thanks to the round-the-clock maintenance. The real heroes
on the front lines are not the Marines but the "ants" from the repair units.
If it wasn't for them we'd be riding camels by now..." [Reverse-translated
from Russian]

Based on the intercepted radio communications, reports from both sides and
other intelligence data, since the beginning of the war the coalition lost
15-20 tanks, around 40 armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting
vehicles, more than 50 military trucks and up to 10 helicopters. In addition
to that there have been at least 40 more disabled tanks, about the same
number of disabled APCs and IFVs, about 100 disabled wheeled vehicles of all
types and around 40 disabled helicopters. These numbers are based on the
analysis of non-classified technical reports received daily by the Pentagon.

During the attack last night up to two US Marine battalions attempted to
push the Iraqis out of their defensive positions near An-Najaf. Despite of
the preliminary 4-hour-long artillery and aerial bombardment once they
approached the Iraqi positions the US troops were met with heavy machine-gun
and RPG fire and were forced to return to their original positions. One US
tanks was destroyed by a landmine and two APCs were hit during this night
attack. Radio intercepts show that 2 Marines were killed and 5 were wounded.
The latest attempt by the US troops to improve their positions on the left
bank of the Euphrates near An-Nasiriya was also a failure. Despite of all
the precautions taken to ensure the tactical surprise the US forces were met
with heavy fire and returned to the original positions. According to the
reports by the [US] field commanders, three Marines were missing in action
and four were wounded in this engagement.

These failed attacked have once again confirmed the fears of the coalition
command that the Iraqi forces were much better technically equipped than was
believed before the war. In particular, the DIA [US Defense Intelligence
Agency] intelligence report from February 2003 insisted that the Iraqi army
practically had no night vision equipment except for those systems installed
on some tanks and serviceability of even that equipment was questioned. In
reality, however, the coalition troops have learned that the Iraqis have an
adequate number of night vision surveillance systems and targeting sights
even at the squadron level and they know how to properly use this equipment.
A particular point of concern [for the coalition] is the fact that most
Iraqi night vision systems captured by the coalition are the latest models
manufactured in the US and Japan. After analyzing the origins of this
equipment the US begun talking about the "Syrian connection". In this
regard, the US military experts have analyzed Syria's weapons imports for
the past two years and have concluded that in the future fighting [in Iraq]
the coalition troops may have to deal with the latest Russian-made anti-tank
systems, latest radars and radio reconnaissance systems resistant to the
effects electronic counter measures.

In the same area [An-Najaf] a coalition checkpoint manned by the US Marines
was attacked by a suicide bomber - an Iraqi soldier - who detonated a
passenger car loaded with explosives next to the US troops. At least 5 of
them were killed.

In a closed radio address to the coalition troops the coalition command
asked the soldiers to show "patience and restrain" and "not to let loose
their emotions and feelings of anger" [Reverse-translated from Russian] The
radio address was recorded following an incident in the area of Umm Qasr
when, in plain view of the locals, British soldiers executed two Iraqis
after finding a submachine-gun in their house; and after a US attack
helicopter returning from a combat mission opened cannon fire on a passenger
car and its occupants. It was announced [by the coalition] that both of
these incidents will be investigated. However, military psychologists
believe that these incidents are the result of the troops being subjected to
enormous stress; psychologists say that these soldiers require medical
treatment.

Near Basra the British forces have completely abandoned offensive operations
and switched to positional warfare. Isolated attacks continue in the airport
area - still not under full British control - and on the Fao peninsula where
the Iraqis continue to hold a large staging area.

According to the British field commanders, the troops are extremely
exhausted and are in dare need of rest and reinforcements. Three British
soldiers went missing and two more were wounded in this area during the past
24 hours.

A supply convoy of the 3rd Motorized Infantry Division was ambushed last
night to the south of An-Nasiriya. In the course of the attack 10 fuel
trucks were destroyed, one escorting APC was hit, 8 troops were wounded and
1 is missing. So far it is not known who was behind the attack: the Iraqi
army combat reconnaissance units or the partisans operating in this area.

Analysis of the information coming from the combat zone shows a rapid
decline in the [coalition's] contacts with the media and increasing
restrictions on all information except for the official reports. For
example, since yesterday morning all phone and Internet lines used by the
coalition troops to maintain contact with relatives in the US and Europe
have been shut down at the division level and below. Not only does this
indicate that the coalition command is trying to change the course of the
information war, but this also points to a possible upcoming massive
coalition attack against the Iraqi forces and an attempt on the part of the
[coalition] commanders to prevent any information leaks.

[Russian] analysts believe that all the talk about a "two-week timeout" in
the war is nothing more than a disinformation attempt by the coalition.
Forces and equipment currently available to the coalition will be sufficient
for at least 1-2 weeks of active combat; this is comparable to the duration
of a major combat operation. It is likely that such an operation may take
place during the next day in the area of Karabela. Goals of this operations
have already been discussed in previous reports.

At the same time the coalition is already planning a new large-scale
operation that will utilize the new forces currently being deployed to the
region. Based on our [Russian] intelligence and that of our allies [Russian]
military experts believe that this large-scale operation will be launched
from the general vicinity of Karabela and will develop into a wide maneuver
around Baghdad from the west ending in the area of the Tartar lake east of
Al-Hadid (or east of the Tartar lake at Samarrah). From this point a part of
the force will continue advancing toward Saddam Hussein's home town of
Tikrit and from there it will turn toward Baghdad from the north through
Samarrah and Baahkuba; meanwhile the rest of the [coalition] force will
strike the rears of the Iraqi forces fighting in the north near Kirkuk and
Mosul. Such an operation would require up to 60,000 troops, no less than 300
tanks and 200 helicopters. It is believed that such forces can be put
together by April 15 and by April 18 they should be ready to attack.

Certain available information points to a serious conflict between the
coalition command and the US political and military leadership. The [US]
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld - the main planner and lobbyist of the
military operation against Iraq - accuses the coalition command and Gen.
Tommy Franks personally of being passive and indecisive, which [in
Rumsfeld's opinion] led to the lengthening of the conflict and the current
dead end situation. In his turn Franks in front of his subordinates calls
the Secretary of Defense the "old blabbermouth" and an "adventurist" who
dragged the army into the war on the most unfavorable terms possible.
However, most [US military] officers believe that both military leaders are
responsible for the coalition's military failures. Rumsfeld allowed gross
errors during the planning of forces and equipment required for the war,
while Franks did not show enough strength to get the right forces and the
right training for the troops in this campaign and, in essence, surrendered
to the whims of the politicians...

It is entirely possible that the future of this war will see the departure
of one of these two commanders. Some reports suggest that Rumsfeld has
already proposed to President Bush a change in the coalition command.
However, Bush declined this proposal calling it untimely and damaging to the
morale of the troops and that of the American people.

(source: iraqwar.ru, 03-30-03, translated by Venik)


http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_017.htm

* 31ST MARCH

March 31, 2003, 1828hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - During the night of March
30-31 the situation on the US-Iraqi front became increasingly more critical.
All indications are that the coalition has launched a new attack.

Following a three-hour-long artillery barrage and several nighttime aviation
strikes the coalition forces came in contact with the Iraqi troops near
Karabela and attempted to move around the Iraqi defenses from the east.

For now the coalition is limiting its actions to probing the forward layer
of the Iraqi defenses, attempting to assess its density and organization
after nearly five days of artillery and aerial bombardment. There have been
no reports of any coalition breaks through the Iraqi defenses in this area.
At the same time morning radio intercepts uncovered a large US military
convoy moving around the Razzaza Lake. At the moment it is unclear whether
the purpose of this movement is to get to the town of Ar-Ramdia or a wider
maneuver leading to the town of Al-Falludja.

Another [coalition] convoy numbering up to 100 combat vehicles was seen near
the town of Al-Hillah moving in the southeaster direction 30 kilometers from
the strategic Baghdad Basra highway. Given there is no Iraqi resistance this
coalition force will be able to reach the highway by today's night. So far
there were no reports of any losses in this area.

The US forces resumed attacking Iraqi defenses near An-Najaf. The US group
of force in this area has been reinforced with at least three reserve Marine
battalions and now Americans are trying once again to capture this key town.
According to the US intelligence Iraqi defenses in this area number up to
3,000 troops aided by around 1,500 volunteers and [Ba'ath] party activists.
The Iraqis here are armed with around 30 T-55 and T-62 tanks, up to four
artillery batteries and more than 300 various anti-tank weapons. The town is
being stormed by the elements of the 1st Marine Division numbering up to
6,000 troops assisted by 80 tanks and 60 artillery systems. Additionally,
aerial support is provided by up to 40 helicopters. So far the Americans
were unable to push the enemy. Early today morning an American tank was
destroyed near An-Najaf. At least two of its crew were killed.

Intensive exchange of fire is continuing in the vicinity of An-Nasiriya. The
US Marines have so far been unable to side nth staging area they captured
seven days ago on the left bank of Euphrates. The bridge connecting this
staging area with the main coalition forces is nearly destroyed and is under
constant fire from the Iraqi defenses located in the riverside city blocks.
This is the reason why the [coalition] troops holding the staging area can
only be reinforced by small and lightly-armed units and only during
nighttime. During the past night alone the Marines holding the staging area
sustained 2 killed and 5 wounded.

The situation [for the coalition] is complicated by the fact that the
residential blocks occupied by the defending Iraqis come to the very edge of
the river, giving a significant advantage to the defenders who control the
river and all approaches to the river. Currently the coalition artillery and
aviation is methodically destroying these blocks in an attempt to push the
Iraqis away from the shoreline.

Intercepted radio communications indicate that the Marines engineering units
are ordered to build a pontoon crossing up the stream from An-Nasiriya and
move up to three battalions of Marines and troops from the 82nd Airborne
Division to the left bank of the Euphrates for a future strike in the rear
of the An-Nasiriya garrison. The coalition command would have been ready to
bypass other defended crossings on the Euphrates if it wasn't for one
problem: the entire group of forces has only two pontoon units. Any new
pontoon units will arrive not sooner than in mid-April.

A standoff between the Basra garrison and the British marine infantry is
continuing in the area of Basra. Using localized attacks the British are
attempting to "lean" on Basra as closely as possible and to tighten the
blockade, but so far they were unsuccessful. Thus, during the last night the
British attempted to take the town of Al-Hasib located 7 kilometers
southeast of Basra. The British plan was to reach the Al-Arab River and to
slice the local Iraqi defenses in half, separating Basra from the defending
Iraqi forces on the Fao peninsula. Up to a battalion of the British marine
infantry supported by armored vehicles entered the town of Al-Hasib from
south but in less than an hour they were stopped by Iraqi fire and requested
aviation and artillery support.

Fighting for the control of the town is continuing. At least two British
soldiers were killed and three were wounded in this battle. One British
armored personnel carrier was destroyed. British commanders are reporting
killing 50 Iraqis and capturing 10. In the area of the As-Zubair River port,
which was declared to be under full coalition control just a week ago, a
British patrol boat was attacked. The boat was carrying its crew and a
marine infantry unit. As the result of the attack at least 4 British
soldiers were killed and 9 were wounded.

The official coalition losses are, to put it mildly, "falling behind" the
actual figures. The 57 dead acknowledged by the coalition command reflect
losses as of the morning of March 26. This information was provided to a BBC
correspondent by one of the top medical officials at a field hospital in Al
Kuwait during a confidential conversation. "We have standing orders to
acknowledge only those fatalities that have been delivered to the hospital,
identified and prepared to be sent back home. The identification process and
the required standard embalming takes some time ­ occasionally up to several
days. But only the command knows how many casualties we sustained today and
you will learn about it in about three daysŠ" [Reverse-translated from
Russian] This conversation was taped by the journalist and sent to the
editor via a cellular phone network.

Based on the radio intercepts and internal information networks of the US
field hospitals as of this morning the coalition losses include no less than
100 killed US servicemen and at least 35 dead British soldiers.
Additionally, some 22 American and 11 British soldiers are officially
considered to be missing in action and the whereabouts of another 400
servicemen are being established. The number of wounded has exceeded 480
people.

US experts at the coalition command headquarters studied the cases of
destroyed and damaged M1A2 tanks and various APCs. The conclusion was that
without a doubt the Iraqis do possess modern anti-tank weapons but so far
use them on a "very limited scale." Only three tanks have been hit by guided
weapons which destroyed these tanks with the first hit. The rest of the
tanks were destroyed with more standard weapons. Some of the most common
causes [of destroyed armor] include: anti-tank guns (about 40% of all hits),
man-portable rocket-propelled grenade launchers (25% of hits), and landmines
(25% of hits). Effectiveness of anti-tank artillery has been particularly
high. "Impacts by high-velocity projectiles do not always destroy the tank
and its crew. However, in 90% of all cases the tank is disabled and the crew
is forced to abandon the tank on the battlefieldŠ" ­ says the report that
was distributed to the commanders of the forward units for analysis.

Russian military analysts are advising the Iraqi military command against
excessive optimism. There is no question that the US "blitzkrieg" failed to
take control of Iraq and to destroy its army. It is clear that the Americans
got bogged down in Iraq and the military campaign hit a snag. However, the
Iraqi command is now in danger of underestimating the enemy. For now there
is no reason to question the resolve of the Americans and their
determination to reach the set goal ­ complete occupation of Iraq.

In reality, despite of some obvious miscalculations and errors of the
coalition's high command, the [coalition] troops that have entered Iraq
maintain high combat readiness and are willing to fight. The losses
sustained during the past 12 days of fighting, although delivering a painful
blow to the pride and striking the public opinion, are entirely
insignificant militarily speaking. The initiative in the war remains firmly
in the hands of the coalition. Under such circumstances Iraqi announcements
of a swift victory over the enemy will only confuse its own troops and the
Iraq's population and, as the result, may lead to demoralization and a
reduced defensive potentialŠ

Russian military analysts believe that the critical for the US duration of
the war would be over 90 days provided that during that time the coalition
will sustain over 1,000 killed. Under such circumstances a serious political
crisis in the US and in the world will be unavoidable.

(source: iraqwar.ru, 03-31-03, translated by Venik)


http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_018.htm

* 1ST APRIL

April 1, 2003, 1404hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - As of the morning of April
1 active combat operations continued along the entire US-Iraqi front.

The town of Karabela ­ one of the key points in the Iraqi defense ­ is
subjected to a continuing artillery barrage. The town outskirts are being
attacked by the coalition aviation. However, so far the US forces made no
attempts to enter the town. Available information suggests that after
evaluating Karabelaıs defenses the US command made a decision to delay
storming the town. Orders were issued to the coalition troops to move around
the town from the east and to take control of the strategic Al-Hillah,
Al-Khindiya, and Al Iskanderiya region. Several largest highways are
intersecting in this area, which also contains the three strategic bridges
across the Euphrates. Gaining control of this ³triangle² will finally open
the way for the coalition troops into the valley between the Tigris and the
Euphrates and the route to the Babylon-Baghdad highway. Yesterday and today
early morning most heated combat continued in this area.

During a night attack the US forces were able to reach the center of
Al-Khindiya by 0800hrs and to move to the right bank of the Euphrates.
However, their further advance was stopped by heavy fire from the Iraqi
positions across the river. Al-Khindiya is being defended by up to 2,000
Iraqi soldiers and militia armed with up to 20 tanks and around 250
anti-tank weapons of various types. During this battle one US soldier was
killed, 2 were missing in action and seven were wounded. For now it is
impossible to determine the Iraqi losses. Throughout the night the US field
commanders have reported at least 100 killed and 30 captured Iraqi soldiers
and militia members. However, by morning the number of captured was revised
down to less than 15.

The [coalition] effort to capture Al-Hillah was unsuccessful. All attempts
by the US troops to enter the town during the night have failed. Every time
they were met with heavy Iraqi fire near the town. Intercepted radio
communications show that one US APC was destroyed and at least 5 soldiers
were killed and wounded.

Fighting is continuing near An-Najaf. The town is currently surrounded from
three sides by the US Marines, who are still unable to enter the town. The
Iraqi positions are being subjected to artillery and aerial bombardment. No
information is available about any losses in this area.

Since 0700hrs reports are coming about large-scale attacks by the US Marines
and infantry units against An-Nasiriya. As was previously expected, up to
two Marine battalions deployed on the left bank of the river to the north of
the town have begun advancing on An Nasiriya from the north and are now
trying to break the Iraqi defenses and to capture this strategic town. More
than a hundred of aerial strikes have been delivered against the Iraqi
positions [at An-Nasiriya] just during todayıs morning. There is a
continuing artillery barrage. All this indicates the US Marines are
determined to fulfill their orders and take the town. However, so far
neither Marines nor the paratroopers were able to widen their staging area
or to break through Iraqi defenses. Radio surveillance indicates that during
the morning hours of today there were 5 medevac helicopter flights to this
area. At least 3 US soldiers were killed.

Another US combat convoy crossed to the left bank of the Euphrates and by
todayıs morning reached the outskirts of the town of Ash-Shatra located 40
kilometers north of An Nasiriya. This unit is now engaged in combat. For now
there is no additional information about this convoyıs losses or movements.

Localized fighting is continuing near Basra. Throughout the last night and
todayıs early morning the British forces were making attempt to capture the
neighboring villages of As Zubair and Suk-al-Shujuh, but, despite of
overwhelming artillery and aviation support, the British were forced to
return to their original positions. During these battles 1 British soldier
was killed, 1 is missing and up to 5 were wounded. No information is
available about the Iraqi losses. According to the reports by the British,
at least 200 Iraqi troops were killed and no less than 50 were captured.
However, only under 10 captured Iraqis were delivered to the British camp
and only 4 of them were in military uniform. This was reported by one of the
US journalist located in this area during a phone conversation with the
editor.

Active combat reconnaissance operations by both sides are continuing in the
north of Iraq. There have been reports of an attack launched by an Iraqi
battalion against the positions of a US combat unit from the 82nd Airborne
Division. It was reported that during the night the Iraqis moved around the
US position and in the morning attacked the US forces from the rear. A
fierce exchange of fire is continuing in this area. The US forces have
requested aviation support.

The combat activity of the Kurds supported by the US forces was limited to
clearing several areas occupied by its long-time enemy ­ the militant
Islamic group called ³Ansar al Islam², after which the Kurdish units have
stopped. Amid calls by the US military for a continuing offensive the
Kurdish troops appear to be in no rush to engage the regular troops of the
Iraqi army and are more interested in reaping the spoils of war. The Kurdish
leadership is not particularly interested in ³leading² the advancing forces.
Instead they are calling on the US to strengthen the US forces deployed in
this area with at least another 2,000 paratroopers and to ³bomb the Iraqis
some more.² This indicates that the Kurds are not willing to move their
forces too far from the home bases fearing an attack in the back by the
Turkish troops. Their fears are reinforced by the continuing assurances by
the US to respect Turkeyıs territorial integrity. The term ³territorial
integrity² in this case covers almost 40% of the territory of the current
Northern Kurdistan, which has the de facto independence from Turkey and
Iraq. It is likely that the Kurdish forces will move forward only after the
complete military defeat of the Iraqis, when their desire for the war booty
will make them less cautious.

Analysis of the present state of the US-British coalition fighting in Iraq
suggests that the current active combat phase will last for about 4-5 days.
After that the troops will once again require time for rest, repairs and
reinforcement. Most analysts believe that this time the coalition will
require more downtime than the last time, when it stopped for just long
enough to get resupplied and immediately continued their advance so not to
lose the initiative and not to let the enemy come to their senses. The price
of putting this ³squeeze² on the troops is enormous exhaustion and extensive
wear of equipment, which is long overdue for serious scheduled maintenance.

At the same time the fresh forces arriving in Kuwait from Europe and the US
will not be able to join the combat before Monday April 7 as deployment of
troops is progressing with many delays and is poorly organized. The units
that already arrived [in Kuwait] cannot get to their weapons and the weapons
already delivered here are sitting here without the troops to which they are
assigned.

Because of this the coalition command has ordered the attacking forces to be
as aggressive as they can be to use this short time to break the Iraqi
defenses along the entire line of the front. The troops are ordered by the
end of this operation to advance to the starting positions for the final
assault on Baghdad and to begin preparing to take the Iraqi capital. This
order is specifically referring to the importance of An-Nasiriya, An-Najaf
and the Karabela ­ Al-Hillah­ Al-Iskanderiya ³triangle². These areas will
see the most combat action in the upcoming days.

Additionally, we should expect elements of the coalition forces reaching the
Amman Baghdad highway, currently controlled only by small US paratroop and
special operations units and to form here in the area of Al-Khabbania the
western side of Baghdadıs blockade. The Al-Khabbania region also contains
three strategic airfields and large stores of weapons causing serious
concern on the part of the coalition.

(source: iraqwar.ru, 04-01-03, translated by Venik)


http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/iraqwar_ru_019.htm

* 2ND APRIL

April 2, 2003, 1335hrs MSK (GMT +4 DST), Moscow - Exceptionally difficult
and unstable situation has developed on the US-Iraqi front by the morning of
April 1. The coalition troops are persistently trying to take control of the
strategic "triangle" Karabela - Al-Khindiya - Al Iskanderiya. At the same
time the coalition units are continuing their advance toward Al Kut and
An-nu-Manyah, but so far the US forces were unable to take any of these
towns. To move forward the US units are forced to leave behind large numbers
of troops needed to blockade the towns remaining under Iraqi control. The
An-Najaf and An-Nasiriya garrisons are still involved in active combat deep
behind the coalition forward lines.

The coalition command had to deploy two brigades from the 101st Airborne
Division to blockade and to storm An-Najaf and An-Nasiriya. These two
brigades will replace elements of the US 1st Marine Division (the 15th
Marine Expeditionary Unit under the command of Col. John Waldhauser) that
has been fighting in this area for the past six days. These "heavy" attack
brigades are currently being deployed to the area of intense fighting near
Al Hillah.

Rough estimates show that the territory "captured" by the coalition forces
still contains at least 30,000 Iraqi regular troops and militia engaged in
active combat. Military experts are already warning the US command about the
danger of underestimating the enemy: doing so may seriously complicate the
situation of the attacking forces and foil the coalition's very optimistic
plans.

On the other hand, the Iraqi command is being forced to withdraw its troops
under the protection of towns. Iraqis are also forced to minimize all active
combat operations outside the city limits as the desert terrain maximizes
the enemy's advantage in aviation and its technological superiority in
reconnaissance and targeting systems. This robs the Iraqis of their mobility
and forces them to resort to "fortress-like" type of warfare, which,
clearly, is significantly reducing their combat effectiveness.

Near Karabela the command of the 3rd Mechanized Infantry Division has
completely abandoned its plans to storm the town. After blocking Karabela on
three sides the 3rd Infantry Division directed its main thrust toward the
towns of Al-Musaib and Al-Khindiya. Heavy combat is continuing in this area
for the second day. The US is continuously escalating the intensity of its
attacks and is using nearly all artillery and tank units available to the
strike group's command. Nevertheless, the coalition forces are still unable
to penetrate the Iraqi defenses. The commander of the 3rd Infantry Division
Major General Buford Blount is reporting fierce Iraqi resistance. According
to the General, elements of the 2nd Iraqi Republican Guard "Medina" Division
that are defending these positions maintain high combat potential and are
repelling all attempts to break through their lines. During the past day and
today's early morning the [coalition] field commanders have reported the
loss of up to 5 tanks, 7-10 APCs and IFVs and no less than 9 killed. At
least one helicopter was hit and made an emergency landing. Two more
helicopters reported taking serious damage and their situation so far is
unknown. Iraqi losses [near Karabela], based on the US reports from the
battlefield, include at least 300 killed and up to 30 destroyed tanks and
APCs. In the morning the coalition forces have ceased the attack and now the
Iraqi positions are being engaged by aviation. The next [coalition] attack
is anticipated during the night.

Heavy fighting is continuing in the town of Al-Hillah. Despite strong
aviation and artillery support the US Marine units are still unable to
strengthen their positions on the left bank of the Euphrates and to push the
Iraqi forces out of the town. During the past 24 hours the US Marines in
Al-Hillah lost up to 5 armored vehicles; at least 10 soldiers were killed or
wounded. According to the reports by the US commanders, the Iraqi losses
during this time amount to at least 100 killed; 10 reinforced strongholds
inside the town have been destroyed; there are reports of 80 Iraqis captured
during a cleanup operation in the occupied part of the town.

A crisis situation has developed in the area of Al-Divania. Having
encountered no initial Iraqi opposition elements of the US Marine 2nd
Expeditionary Unit begun advancing toward the town but were met with heavy
artillery and mortar fire and were forced to assume defensive positions
resorting to close combat. The exchange of fire continued for nearly seven
hours resulting in up to 12 destroyed US tanks and APCs and up to 20 killed
or wounded Marines. Currently the Iraqi positions are being attacked by
artillery and aviation.

Yesterday's attempts by the US troops to storm the part of An-Nasiriya on
the left bank [of the Euphrates] yielded no results. After moving behind the
Iraqi positions, while simultaneously attacking them from the front, the US
troops still were unable to break the Iraqi defenses and by morning were
forced to return to the their starting positions. The coalition losses in
this engagement, according to reports by [the US] field commanders, were 2
killed and up to 12 wounded; a [US] helicopter took a hit and made an
emergency landing in the northern part of An-Nasiriya.

Also no results came from the coalition attempts to capture An-Najaf. All US
attacks were repelled. There have been reports of 3 destroyed APCs and at
least 5 killed or wounded coalition troops.

Near Basra the British forces are still unable to tighten their blockade of
the city. During the night the Iraqis attacked British units near the
village of Shujuh and threw the British back 1.5-2 kilometers. According to
the Iraqi reports, at least 5 British soldiers were killed in this attack.
The British, on the other hand, have reported 2 missing and 4 wounded
soldiers. Iraqis have reported that a destroyed British tank and two APCs
were left behind on the battlefield.

Tactical attack units from the US 82nd Airborne Division and the 22nd SAS
Regiment, earlier deployed to northern Iraq near the town of Al-Buadj, were
destroyed and dispersed as the result of a daylong battle with the Iraqi
troops. The exact number of [coalition] losses is still being verified.
Intercepted radio communications show that the coalition troops are
retreating in small groups and have no exact information about their own
losses. Currently the remaining units are trying to reach the
Kurdish-controlled territory. It is believed that up to 30 [coalition]
soldiers were killed or captured by the Iraqis.

Military analysts believe that today and tomorrow will decide the outcome of
the attack on Baghdad that begun two days ago. If the coalition forces fail
to break the Iraqi defenses, then by the weekend the US will be forced to
curtail all attacks and to resort to positional warfare while regrouping
forces and integrating them with the fresh divisions arriving from the US
and Europe. Such a tactical pause in the war, although not a complete halt
in combat operations (the coalition command will continue trying to use
localized attacks to improve its positions), may last seven to fourteen days
and will lead to a full re-evaluation of all coalition battle plans.

(source: iraqwar.ru, 04-02-03, translated by Venik)


COALITION OF THE NOT VERY WILLING

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&ncid=736&e=10&u=/ap/200
30327/ap_on_re_mi_ea/war_italy_us_troops

*  BERLUSCONI EASES ITALY'S WAR CONCERNS
by Alessandra Rizzo
Yahoo, 27th March

ROME (AP): Premier Silvio Berlusconi's office rushed to reassure the country
Thursday that the deployment to northern Iraq of 1,000 U.S. paratroopers who
are stationed in Italy did not break the government's pledge that Italian
bases would not be used for direct attacks on Iraq.

Parliament earlier this month endorsed the government's position of allowing
U.S.-led coalition forces to use Italian air space and military bases for
logistical purposes such as refueling but not for directs attacks on Iraq.

It was not clear if the troops of the 173rd Airborne Brigade, stationed at a
U.S. base in Vicenza, in northeastern Italy, had deployed directly from
Italy to Iraq, or had made an intermediate stop.

Insertion of the 173rd into Kurdish-controlled territory in northern Iraq,
however, immediately stirred controversy in Italy, where anti-war sentiment
is very strong. The center left opposition and anti-war activists insisted
the deployment violated the government's pledge.

"We are in open violation of Parliament's decisions," said Paolo Cento, a
lawmaker with the Green party and a strong war opponent.

Berlusconi's office said in a statement Thursday that "U.S. authorities in
charge of the operations have given explicit confirmation that the mission
rules out direct attack on Iraqi targets."

The statement insisted the government would stick to its commitments as
endorsed by Parliament.

Both U.S. and Italian military officials as well as Italian government
officials refused to release details of the mission. Italian newspapers
reported that the paratroopers flew out of Aviano air base in northeastern
Italy, 62 miles from their base in Vicenza.

The troops parachuted into northern Iraq overnight to open a northern front
against Saddam Hussein's forces. They secured an airfield, which will be
used to bring in supplies and support personnel.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,926069,00.html

*  INSIDE EUROPE
by Ian Black
The Guardian, 31st March

Donald Rumsfeld has enough on his plate working out how to win the war in
Iraq, which is clearly not going to be the leisurely flower-strewn breeze up
the Euphrates some predicted. But given responses during the first week of
hostilities, the US defence secretary might need to rethink his now infamous
"old Europe" jibe, which imperiously divided the continent into pro- and
anti-American camps.

Take brand new Slovenia, the tiny ex-Yugoslav republic that prefers to be
described as Alpine rather than Balkan. Two days into the fighting, it voted
to join the EU by an impressive 89% (mustering just 66% for Nato) - an event
understandably overshadowed by the news from Basra and Baghdad. Slovenes are
used to being mistaken for Slovaks but were outraged to hear that the US
state department had named their country as backing the war, even allotting
a few million dollars for its support. No more than a mistake - or perhaps
wishful thinking- in Washington, though still quite wrong.

But even the card-carrying European members of America's 45-strong
"coalition of the willing" turned out to be not so willing once the balloon
went up. The Dutch government was furious when one of its air force officers
was whisked on to the podium for a media briefing at Centcom HQ in Qatar -
even though he was only visiting to discuss the deployment of Patriot
missiles on the Turkish-Iraqi border. And it declined to follow Washington's
orders to expel Iraqi diplomats, just like "old" France.

Spain, it is true, is still hanging tough despite massively mounting
opposition to the policy of Jose Maria Aznar. Silvio Berlusconi had to
reassure his country that the deployment to Kurdistan of 1,000 US
paratroopers based in Vicenza did not break his pledge that Italy would not
be used for attacks on Iraq.

Elsewhere in Rumsfeld's brave "new" Europe, the Czech Republic insisted it
did not belong to the war party though it has sent chemical warfare
specialists to Kuwait. Using force to impose democracy in Iraq, warned its
president, Vaclav Klaus, is a notion "from another universe". Croatia -
expected to join the EU in 2007 - was annoyed at being numbered among the
willing just because it had opened its airspace to US civilian aircraft.

News from Romania and Bulgaria was bad too, though both have just joined
Nato and signed the pro-American letters that had Jacques Chirac blow a
Gaullist fuse. Neither are displaying much enthusiasm. Polls in Bucharest
showed 87% opposing the deployment of 278 non-combat troops to the Gulf. The
Sofia government has sent 100 soldiers for non combat duties but refused to
expel Iraqi diplomats. Poland has despatched 200 special forces but with 75%
opposition to war it not surprisingly protested when President George Bush
boasted publicly of their exploits. Near-pariah Ukraine, threatened for
flogging radar equipment to Saddam, denied a claim from Washington that it
was prepared to move its anti-chemical weapons force from Kuwait to Iraq.
But plucky little Latvia said it was chipping in with a dozen peacekeepers.
The phrase scraping the barrel springs grimly to mind.

So, amid (so far) muted sounds of schadenfreude, Europe's divisions are
alive, well, and on embarrassingly public display - confounding optimists
like Romano Prodi who argue that if governments are split then at least
their peoples speak as one. Not if their elected representatives in Brussels
and Strasbourg are to be believed. Astonishingly, the European parliament
did precisely nothing: it threw out a resolution by Socialists, Greens and
Liberals deploring the absence of UN legitimacy and the failure to give
diplomacy more time. And it also rejected a centre-right motion blaming Iraq
and calling for loyal transatlantic cooperation. "Old" or "new", Europe is
simply a complete mess.


http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/story.jsp?story=392773

*  'NEW' EUROPE DISTANCES ITSELF FROM WAR
by Stephen Castle in Brussels
The Independent, 1st April

 With troops locked in a bloody and unpredictable struggle in Iraq, leaders
from "new" Europe are distancing themselves from the war that the US claims
they back.

The conflict in the Gulf is unpopular with voters, and support for
Washington and London has declined as casualties have mounted. Meanwhile,
some countries that never backed war have vented their anger at being listed
among America's 45-nation coalition of allies.

Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minster, began his political retreat
before a shot was fired. Mr Berlusconi was a signatory of the Anglo-Spanish
letter that backed the US before the conflict begun. That did not translate
into concrete military support, however. Last week, Mr Berlusconi was at
pains to insist that the deployment in northern Iraq of 1,000 US
paratroopers who had been stationed in Italy did not break a pledge that
Italian bases would not be used for direct attacks on Saddam Hussein.

Denmark, which has backed the action, had to scale back its small military
deployment because of parliamentary opposition. The Netherlands, which did
not sign the Anglo Spanish letter but was sympathetic, has ruled out
military involvement, fearful of destabilising negotiations to form a
coalition government.

Countries which took a tough, pro-American line are encountering political
difficulties. Jose Maria Aznar, the Prime Minister of Spain, which has
dispatched 9,000 troops to Iraq for humanitarian work, is under intense
pressure from domestic opposition.

The publication of pictures of elite Polish troops posing for photos with US
soldiers in Iraq provoked a backlash in Poland. Although Warsaw remains a
firm supporter of the US, surveys suggest only 20 per cent of Poles think
their troops should be involved in fighting.

The weight of public opposition has forced countries to face in opposite
directions. Ireland has made Shannon airport available to the US, but failed
to endorse the war.

Across the ex-Communist nations of Europe, identified by Donald Rumsfeld,
the US Defence Secretary, as part of the "coalition of the willing",
sentiment has proved ambivalent. One explanation is that the Anglo-Spanish
letter endorsed by three of the applicant nations, and a subsequent
declaration by a further 10 eastern European states, did not commit them to
supporting hostilities. Some leaders went along with the formulation on the
basis that taking a tough line might force President Saddam to back down.

In others the politics have changed: in Czech Republic, which is included in
Washington's list of coalition nations, the Anglo-Spanish letter was signed
by the outgoing president, Vaclav Havel.

His successor Vaclav Klaus has warned that using force to impose democracy
on Iraq is a notion "from another universe" and sets a dangerous precedent.

Several nations provided logistical support because failing to do so would
have provoked a diplomatic schism with Washington. Yet these nuances have
been brushed aside by a Pentagon in its efforts to present the image of
broad support.

Croatia was presented as part of the "coalition of the willing" on the basis
that it opened its airspace and bases to US civilian aircraft. But Stipe
Mesic, the President, denounced the war as "illegitimate" because it lacked
UN backing. Slovenia has also rejected the idea that it backs the conflict.




_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk