Posted on 08/08/2003 8:50:29 PM PDT by Kaslin
http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/w.gif ASHINGTON, Aug. 8 — As President Charles G. Taylor edges closer to leaving Liberia, meeting one of President Bush's conditions for a greater American military role, Pentagon officials say they are firmly resisting any significant expansion of the small contingent of American forces already sent ashore.
But amid rising pressure from Kofi Annan, the United Nations secretary general, and from African and European allies, Mr. Bush now faces a decision on whether to send in a larger force to help secure the port and the capital, Monrovia, and open up relief corridors.
A spokesman for Mr. Annan said today that in a conversation this morning with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, he reiterated his request for a more sizable role for United States forces. "The secretary general's expectation is that the president will make the right decision and that U.S. forces in the region will play a constructive role," said Fred Eckhard, Mr. Annan's spokesman. The main American forces in the region are 2,300 marines in three Navy ships in the eastern Atlantic.
When Liberia began spiraling into chaos this summer, Mr. Bush set down three principal criteria for a wider American role: the departure of Mr. Taylor, a cease-fire between his government and rebel forces and a leading role to be played by an African peacekeeping force.
Now that those criteria are close to being met, the pressure on Mr. Bush has become more intense, officials say.
Administration officials say that with Mr. Taylor likely to leave Liberia as soon as Monday, the rift in the Bush administration is reaching a climax. On one side is the Pentagon, where officials say a larger American commitment is not needed at this time, and on the other are those favoring a larger American peacekeeping role.
A State Department official said today that Mr. Powell supported the goals of securing Monrovia, its port and nearby relief corridors, but that a decision on how many American forces would be needed would have to be resolved in the next few days.
"The Pentagon is dead set against this," the aide said, referring to the idea of sending in sizable numbers of American forces from offshore. "What the secretary supports is meeting the humanitarian goals in the best way."
Defense Department officials say that once Mr. Taylor leaves the country, and as long as the cease-fire holds and Nigerian and other West African peacekeeping troops build up their numbers, there should be no need for a sizable American force.
Twenty marines have been authorized to go ashore — seven landed earlier this week — in addition to the 80 American military personnel who are already in Liberia.
Those first seven marines were assigned a coordinating, communication and liaison role with the vanguard of Nigerian forces that began arriving in Liberia last week to begin stabilizing the country after years of chaos and civil war between Mr. Taylor's government and various rebel groups. The number of marines could grow incrementally to match the needs of an expanding international peacekeeping force, officials said.
Administration officials said Mr. Bush was considering a range of factors while at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., this weekend.
Speaking before the National Association of Black Journalists on Thursday, his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, echoed the Pentagon position, which is "to provide and facilitate" the entry of Nigerian peacekeepers. But she also said the American role was "unfolding."
The domestic political debate, meanwhile, is nearly a mirror image of that preceding the war with Iraq. Some Republicans who favored the Iraq war now oppose a larger American force in Liberia; many Democrats who opposed the Iraq war are criticizing Mr. Bush for not sending more troops into Liberia before now.
Among the critics are the Rev. Jesse Jackson, the Congressional Black Caucus and Senator Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, an opponent of the Iraq war who is the ranking Democrat on the African subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee.
"A lot of us were against taking over a large Middle Eastern country where there was anti-American feeling and the potential for a quagmire, while the whole world was skeptical of our motives," Mr. Feingold said. "None of those conditions are present in Liberia."
The reasons for Pentagon resistance are many, defense officials say. American military leaders are concerned that without a firm resolution of the political battles in Liberia, American troops could get sucked into an endless mission and become targets of Liberian rebels or even foreign terrorists from Al Qaeda. In addition, with 240,000 troops in the Middle East and Afghanistan, American forces are stretched thin.
Military officials familiar with the planning for Liberia said the marines in the eastern Atlantic should be viewed as a "quick-reaction force," which would go ashore only in case of emergency. Officials declined to specify what would prompt such an intervention, but past examples would indicate securing the American Embassy.
Pentagon and military officials declined to detail any agreements with commanders of the regional African group known as Ecowas should their forces become endangered, citing the requirements of operational security. "Ecowas has a good plan," a military officer said. "We're nearby to support the work of West African nations keeping the peace in West Africa."
Mr. Annan argues that the additional American forces are needed not simply to supplement the Ecowas forces — there are 500 Nigerians now, and the force level in the first wave is to be 3,250 — but because of the symbolic role they would play.
Other nations that are being asked to contribute forces to Liberia are also saying that they want American participation.
Britain has sent peacekeeping troops into Sierra Leone, and French troops have gone into Ivory Coast and Congo, and some Europeans say the United States must make a similar contribution, especially because Liberia has had close, longstanding ties to Washington.
"Many countries that have been called to provide things like an engineering battalion, a mechanized infantry battalion, a communication squadron — they're all willing to play if there is an American presence," a United Nations official said.
But at the Pentagon today, a senior Defense Department official said, "There are no plans to put greater forces on the ground right now beyond what has been authorized, unless there is a change of mission or a new mission."
ASHINGTON, Aug. 8 — As President Charles G. Taylor edges closer to leaving Liberia, meeting one of President Bush's conditions for a greater American military role, Pentagon officials say they are firmly resisting any significant expansion of the small contingent of American forces already sent ashore.
That's the liberals for you
The U.N. only has a mandate to stop nations from invading each other wihtout good cause, IMHO. Not to intervene in local civil disorder.
Jesse Jerkoff is circling overhead like a vulture waiting for an opportunity to receive another mystery check for "services rendered".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.