The phantom front

Saddam Hussein had withdrawn some forces out for the defence of Baghdad once it was clear that Turkey was not going to allow the Anglo-American forces access of its territory for an attack on Iraq. It is in fact, the forces earmarked for the northern front that were diverted to Kuwait even before the war was initiated and are now assembling to advance north into Iraq.

Allowing for the inevitable change in plans dictated by the Turkish position, especially its moving its own army to the Iraqi border, what role could the US forces have played and what have they done so far? The most ambitious plan might have been to replay the Afghanistan model where the US special forces, backed by heavy use of air power, supported the Northern Alliance to break the Taliban front in the north and opened up the route to Kabul. A Kurdish force of 10,000 fighters, almost similar to that of the Northern Alliance, was expected to be available for a ground offensive.

And the use of US air power in support was even facilitated by Turkey agreeing to the use of its air space for strikes on targets in Iraq. But no such military action seems to have been attempted. The US forces, on the other hand, assisted by Kurdish fighters attacked and dispersed the Ansar al-Islam group which was hostile to Saddam Hussein regime which had taken hold of territory in Kurdish north close to the Iraq-Iran border.

Credible US media reports now indicate that the para-drop itself had been carried out on an airstrip in an area controlled by Kurds since 1991, an airstrip that the Kurdish Democratic Party8217;s fighters had been guarding for months.

In fact many of them expressed surprise why the Americans had dropped by parachute when they could have simply landed in aircraft which they did after the initial para-drop on what was possibly the most well guarded airstrip in Kurdish area!

A possible aim of the operation was a demonstration psychological effect to indicate the US military forces would not ignore the north even if Turkey did not co-operate in the war, and hence would open a northern front. But the real plan was possibly to build just sufficient forces limited by logistic challenges to ensure stability in the northern Kurdish region. The attack on Ansar al-Islam, which has been the most aggressive ground action in the north so far, would fit into that strategy. At the same time, the small American forces would be useful as the core with high-technology systems and the ability to bring down accurate lethal air strikes to support the Kurdish forces in case of an Iraqi uprising in the north. But as in the rest of the country, such an uprising did not take place. The northern front, therefore, remains ossified in the absence of a revolt in the cities of Mosul and Kirkuk.

Military action with small size forces relying on Kurdish 8216;8216;pesh marga8217;8217; those who face death, has concentrated on controlling the roads and bridges leading to the two northern cities. No attempts seem to have been made to control the oilfields. But in spite of claims of having established complete control, US media reports indicated that by last weekend just about 10 km of the road to Mosul has been brought under control of US-Kurdi forces.

For example, over 50 bombing sorties were undertaken, most with B-52 strategic bomber reminiscent of their use of support of Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, against Iraqi forces in 24 hours before the road section north of Mosul could be occupied by last Saturday. The overall picture that one gets of the northern front is that the Iraqi resistance is holding out in spite of obvious loss of command, control and communication from a central authority in Baghdad.

Air Commodore retd Jasjit Singh, editorial consultant to The Indian Express, will analyse the war daily. Readers can send their queries to him at jasjitsinghexpressindia.com