US preparations are underway for a full-blown invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein as the Bush administration works on a tough new resolution at the Security Council, writes Salah Hemeid Click to view caption The United States, backed by its main ally Britain, has stepped up pressure on the United Nations Security Council to adopt a tough new resolution before any resumption of UN arms inspections to search for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD). American officials said they were hopeful that a new UN resolution could be agreed upon this week, with a clear deadline for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to comply with weapons inspectors or face a second resolution proposing military action. Some permanent Council members, such as France, have been reluctant to support such a resolution while others, such as Russia, have expressed their opposition to military action after Iraq agreed to let inspectors back unconditionally. US officials, however, said the international community was falling behind the position mapped out by President George W Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair -- a last chance for UN inspections or military action will follow. But on Saturday Baghdad said it would not agree to any new UN resolutions or conditions, signalling again a manoeuver to blunt Washington's efforts for such a resolution. In an announcement following a meeting of top Iraqi leaders chaired by Saddam, an official spokesman said Iraq had already agreed with Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, on how to proceed with weapons inspections. The unidentified official did not give details of the agreement Iraq had reached with Annan, but he was apparently referring to a 1998 pledge Baghdad said Annan had made to complete the inspections in 60 days if Iraq readmitted the inspectors. President Bush, meanwhile, is building support in Congress, with reports that opposition to his Iraq plans is receding and consensus is building around his request for a congressional blank check to wage war on Saddam, with or without the United Nations. Bush also has gained ground in the battle for American public and political opinion as the nation debates the possibility of going to war against Iraq, according to a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll conducted this week. As the administration pushes aggressively for the UN resolution, American media disclosed this week that Bush has received a highly detailed plan for military operations against Iraq. Bush has also received at least three briefings from General Tommy Franks, the commander of US forces in the Gulf region, on the broad outlines for an attack. CNN quoted senior administration officials as saying that the early goals of the military campaign are to cut off Iraqi command and communications infrastructure and neutralise missile launchers, as well as known and suspected sites where weapons of mass destruction are held. Administration officials would not disclose numbers of troops to be used, CNN reported, but said the plans would rely on a "full array" of resources in the region, including those in Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The officials said Franks's plan assumes that even if the United Nations approve military action, the actual military work will be generated by US and some British assets, without much else from other allies. The New York Times, also quoting administration officials, said that any attack would begin with a lengthy air campaign led by B-52 bombers armed with 2,000- pound satellite-guided bombs to knock out Iraqi command and control headquarters and air defenses. They said a principal goal of the aerial bombardment would be to sever most communications from Baghdad, and isolate Saddam Hussein from his commanders in the rest of the country. Officials familiar with the war-planning document told The New York Times that it includes the number of ground troops, combat aircraft and aircraft carrier battle groups that would be needed. It also contains detailed sequencing for the use of air, land, naval and Special Operations forces to attack thousands of Iraqi targets, from air-defense sites to command-and-control headquarters to fielded forces. In another detailed report, The Washington Post said the next campaign, unlike the 1991 Gulf war, will not target Iraq's civilian infrastructure nor its military rank-and-file. Instead, the Post said, the US military is thinking about how to execute a sharp focused attack on Saddam and the people and institutions keeping him in power. Rather than a five-week long air attack, as in 1991, the US is likely to hit all its targets nearly simultaneously. Under these plans, most of the Iraqi regular army will be exempted from the attacks striking instead Saddam's Republican Guards and his vast security apparatus. The US war plan is designed to encourage mass defections from the security police by quickly shattering the internal security services and the Republican Guards -- the real key to collapsing the regime. However, Pentagon planners expect US ground forces to meet resistance in the cities, particularly in Baghdad, by the Special Republican Guard, which is reportedly trained for urban fighting. That is worrisome because major US military advantages, such as air power and aerial reconnaissance, are far less effective in a crowded city. The planners also fear that if it looked as though the US army were besieging the city, which has a population of some five million, global opinion would swing against the United States, and so constitute a strategic defeat. According to these media reports, Bush has reviewed the plans and voiced general satisfaction, but he has not decided anything yet. That decision might not take too long if Congress shows the support Bush is seeking, and the diplomatic environment at the UN turns more encouraging this week, observers believe.
