Experts Warn of High Risk for American Invasion of Iraq

NYT. 1 August 2002

Excerpts

WASHINGTON -- In the first public hearings on the administration's goal of ousting Saddam Hussein from the Iraqi presidency, an array of experts warned a Senate committee today that an invasion of Iraq would carry significant risks ranging from more terrorist attacks against American targets to higher oil prices.

Opening a Congressional debate that is almost certain to gain momentum into the fall, the witnesses -- including former senior military officers and nongovernment experts on Iraq -- expressed confidence that American forces would prevail in an invasion.

But they said it would be a difficult fight, requiring a major commitment of troops and the support of many allies.

There was a broad consensus among the varied experts that if President Bush decided to use military force to remove Mr. Hussein -- as many in Congress expect -- the Pentagon could not assume that the Iraqi military would collapse without a fight or that Iraqi opposition forces could carry on the fight alone.

Rather, the experts said, the military would need to deploy tens of thousands of ground troops as well as many aircraft, ships and armored vehicles to ensure victory.

There is also an emerging debate among legislators over whether Mr. Bush would need Congressional approval for an invasion of Iraq. Some administration officials have said they do not need approval, but the White House has not taken an official position on the issue.

Senator Trent Lott, the Republican minority leader, told reporters today that he did not think the administration needed Congressional approval for a major assault. He said that authority had been granted last fall in a resolution supporting military action against Al Qaeda. "I suspect that Al Qaeda elements are in Iraq," Mr. Lott said.

"The resolution we passed, we made it very clear the president has the authority to pursue the Al Qaeda wherever they may be found, in whatever country, which could very well include Iraq."

[N.B.] Senator Thomas A. Daschle, the majority leader, said he knew of no intelligence confirming Mr. Lott's assertion.

Joseph P. Hoar, a retired Marine Corps general who was commander of American forces in the Persian Gulf after the 1991 war, was particularly skeptical of an invasion, calling it "risky" and perhaps unnecessary.

General Hoar also said it was far from certain that Turkey and other allies in the region would allow the United States to use their bases.

But Thomas G. McInerney, a retired Air Force lieutenant general, was more optimistic, arguing that "the most massive precision air campaign in history" could quickly crush Iraq's military and spark an uprising against Mr. Hussein.

The two generals did agree that the Pentagon could not expect Iraqi opposition groups to mount an effective campaign against Mr. Hussein's forces without large numbers of American ground forces to help.

Morton H. Halperin, a senior fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations, echoed concerns in Europe and the Middle East that the United States should use its influence to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict before attacking Iraq.

"Especially if there is no progress on the Palestinian issue, it is likely that an American military conquest of Iraq will lead many more people in the Arab and Muslim world to choose the path of terror [read: resistance]," he said.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Return to article index