NATO May OK Polish-Run Force in Iraq

AP ^ | 5/20/03 | PAUL AMES

[Valin]

BRUSSELS, Belgium - In a possible first step toward direct involvement in Iraq, NATO is preparing to help Poland run a peacekeeping force in one of three military zones to be set up in the country by the U.S.-led coalition, diplomats said Tuesday. The decision to order military experts to begin planning was expected at a meeting of ambassadors from the 19 NATO allies Wednesday.

Poland asked the alliance last week for assistance in assembling the force, which is expected to number at least 7,000. The request also concerns intelligence sharing, communications and logistics. Warsaw plans to host a conference Thursday and Friday with nations willing to contribute to the force, including Italy, Bulgaria, Denmark, Ukraine and Romania. Poland is expected to contribute up to 2,200 troops as well as the regional headquarters, but has been seeking help from the U.S. to cover the expected US$90 million bill.

Officials at alliance headquarters said no ally had yet voiced any objections to NATO offering back up to the Poles. That contrasts with NATO's previous Iraq-related mission: sending defensive units to Turkey ahead of the war. France, Germany and Belgium, who opposed the war, blocked that deployment for weeks, sparking NATO's worst crisis for years.

Since the end of the war, diplomats at NATO have been discussing a possible peacekeeping role for the alliance in Iraq, but they stressed Tuesday that no decision on action beyond help to Poland was imminent.

After a visit to alliance headquarters last week, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said NATO nations were warming to the idea of greater involvement in Iraq. "There is a growing recognition within NATO that it's important to be involved in stability operations in Iraq and a growing enthusiasm for participating in that," Myers said.

NATO officials pointed out that the sort of assistance NATO is considering for Poland in Iraq is very similar to that provided this year to the German-Dutch-led force keeping peace in the Afghan capital, Kabul. Eventually NATO agreed to take full command of the operation beginning in August - NATO's first mission outside its traditional Euro-Atlantic theater.

U.S. officials see alliance involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq as signs that the post-Cold War NATO is making good on pledges to reinvent itself to face global challenges, despite the divisions over the Iraq conflict. "NATO needs to be revived ... It needs to go out where the problems are, and we're just about to make that decision tomorrow in Brussels on Iraq," Nicholas Burns, the U.S. Ambassador to NATO told BBC radio Tuesday.

The mission will be a test for Poland, which only joined NATO in 1999, and has struggled modernize and restructure its military along western lines since the collapse of communism in 1989. Polish Defense Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski said last week the Polish troops would lead a force in a south-central region between the American and British zones.

[marron]

The old NATO is over, because the threat that was the rationale for the alliance is gone. On its foundation, perhaps using some of its assets, we should be building a new alliance, one made up of actual allies. Since the threat is different, the roster of members will be different.

The definition of an ally is easy; its the guy still standing next to you when the lead is flying. That makes the list of potential alliance members very short, but those are the only countries that count. Any other candidates for membership would only get in the way, and you are going to wind up having to work around them anyway. An alliance that includes Belgium or France, obviously, is an alliance devoid of meaning.

The willingness to send peacekeepers into a zone that is already secure, and is ultimately secured by US troops, is helpful, but does not make you an ally. Being willing to send troops into actual combat, or sending peacekeepers into a hot zone such as Afghanistan, is the mark of an ally. Poland had commandos in Iraq actually in the fight. That makes them an ally. Canada had men in Afghanistan, but withdrew them. That makes them questionable. The French never faced any hostile fire at our side, and are clearly not allies. Seen through this prism, it should be very clear-cut.