Buildup aims to put 'fear in our enemies'

Firepower in gulf already exceeds what officials expect to use

10/03/2001

By RICHARD WHITTLE / The Dallas Morning News

WASHINGTON - The U.S. military buildup in the Persian Gulf region gives President Bush weapons to punish Afghanistan's Taliban if he chooses, but it's equal parts insurance and "big stick" diplomacy, experts said Tuesday.

"You have a situation where you're doing more than physical; you're doing psychological at the same time," said retired Gen. Charles Krulak, a former Marine Corps commandant. "The psychological is intended to bolster our friends and put fear in our enemies."

Landlocked Afghanistan's treacherous terrain, its dearth of targets and the risk of political backlash in other Muslim countries lead many military analysts to conclude that a large-scale invasion is out of the question.

Mr. Bush is most likely to order airstrikes to punish the Taliban for harboring Osama bin Laden, they say, while U.S. and British special-operations forces conduct secret raids on terrorist bases or pinpoint them for bombing or missile attacks.

"The reality of life is that the war on terrorism is going to be taking place more on the unseen level than the seen level," Gen. Krulak said.

The Air Force has deployed dozens of warplanes to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, according to U.S. officials and published reports.

The Navy has two aircraft carriers - the USS Enterprise and USS Carl Vinson - already in the Persian Gulf region and two more on the way.

The USS Kitty Hawk left Japan on Monday and is headed for the southwest Asia "area of operations," which includes the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, said a senior defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The USS Theodore Roosevelt, which was in the Mediterranean on Tuesday, also is on its way to the southwest Asia area, the official said.

The Enterprise, Carl Vinson and Theodore Roosevelt have about 50 strike aircraft aboard - a mix of F-14 Tomcat fighters and F/A-18 fighter-bombers. Each carrier is accompanied by six to eight surface warships, including guided-missile destroyers and cruisers that can fire cruise missiles.

The Kitty Hawk's air wing remained at a land base in Japan, suggesting that the ship may be used as a base for ground troops, according to reports from the region. Special-operations forces also could launch from the carrier.

"Carriers have been used in the past as staging platforms," the senior defense official said. During U.S. military action in Haiti in 1994, the Army's 10th Mountain Division was launched by helicopter from the Navy's USS Eisenhower, the official noted.

With aerial refueling, any of the Air Force or Navy warplanes can easily reach targets in Afghanistan. The Taliban's headquarters city, Kandahar, is about 400 miles from the Arabian Sea. Pakistan, which lies in between, has given the United States permission to use its airspace.

"I have led strikes in excess of 1,100 miles," said retired Adm. R.J. "Zap" Zlatoper, a pilot who was commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet in the 1990s. With refueling from long-range Air Force tanker aircraft, he said, "You can extend the strike range as long as you like."

The presence of the aircraft carriers ensures the ability to strike even if Saudi Arabia refuses to allow Air Force aircraft to fly from its soil.

"You need no nation's permission to launch from an aircraft carrier," Adm. Zlatoper said. The buildup so far falls far short of the forces Mr. Bush's father sent to Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf region in 1990 during the buildup to the 1991 Gulf War. The Navy kept six aircraft carriers in the gulf and the Red Sea during that campaign, for example.

But the United States already has in place far more firepower than is likely to be used in Afghanistan, where the Taliban's handful of aircraft, a few airfields and a few dozen tanks are the most likely targets.

"I don't see in Afghanistan a target set that's going to require continual striking capabilities day after day," said the senior defense official.

The military buildup also has diplomatic goals.

"One certainly has been to intimidate - or try to intimidate - the Taliban," said military analyst Michael Hanlon of the Brookings Institution. "It doesn't seem to have worked, but it was certainly worth a try."

And it's meant to reassure allies in the region, such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, that the United States is positioned to protect them from any reprisals for their support of U.S. action against Afghanistan, the experts said.

"That's clearly a factor as well," said retired Vice Adm. Hank Giffin, who commanded the Atlantic fleet's surface forces.

"There's an implied threat in having a carrier force steaming off of your shoreline that helps political decision-makers and leaders in some countries that may be on the borderline of doing something to think twice," Adm. Giffin said.

The buildup also ensures the military the means to react to threats that may arise after any strikes in Afghanistan, or other nations that support terrorism. "You want to have additional capabilities to deal with unintended consequences," said the senior defense official. "You may think you know what's going to happen if you strike Afghanistan. But suppose the Iranians think you violated their airspace. ...?"

Basing ground troops on ships also may ease the political pressure any U.S. military action is bound to create on Pakistan, said a military officer who spoke on condition of anonymity.

"If you put troops on the ground in a Muslim country, in short order they'll become the enemy," the officer said. "If you could make everybody sea-based, you'd do it."

And keeping troops at sea protects them from terrorist attacks, noted Adm. Zlatoper.

Dispatching warplanes and warships to the region also is logical given the extended campaign against terrorism that Mr. Bush is promising. How they may be used might still be unclear to U.S. military planners, the veteran officers said.

"The carrier buildup is there because, I think, they don't fully know yet where the operations are going to be or the extent of them," Adm. Giffin said. "Whether they're used or how they're used is what we pay the leadership the big bucks to decide."