Changes Likely for Iraq's 'No-Fly' Zones

W A S H I N G TO N, May 16, 2001 -- The United States is considering a major shift in its commitment to patrolling the "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq, military officials said.

"Options are being discussed. No final decisions have been made," confirmed Rear Admiral Craig Quigley, the Pentagon spokesman.

U.S. forces have patrolled the "no-fly" zones for more than a decade to monitor any military actions that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein might instigate against Kurdish minorities in the north. In the southern Iraqi marshlands, Americans monitor Iraqi activity against Muslim minorities. Plus, the U.S. military watches possible Iraqi military movements toward Kuwait or Saudi Arabia.

For the last several weeks, the Bush administration has been conducting an ongoing review of its Iraq policy. Besides military operations, U.S. officials must make decisions about diplomatic and economic issues such as assessing continued allied support for enforcing sanctions against Baghdad.

"I don't think you are going to see any military piece of that taken in isolation," Quigley said.

Watching the Numbers

In favor of making changes are two key generals, who split responsibility for running the northern and southern "no-fly" zone operations. Gen. Joseph Ralston, head of the U.S. European Command, and Gen. Tommy Franks, head of the U.S. Central Command, worry the American luck is running out, sources said.

Sooner or later, Ralston and Franks fear Hussein's forces might get lucky and actually shoot down a U.S. pilot, sources said.

Indeed, there have been two close calls recently. Last year a British warplane flying with the Americans over southern Iraq, reportedly developed mechanical trouble and barely made it back to friendly territory.

Earlier this year over northern Iraq, a single engine U.S. Air Force F-16 also developed mechanical trouble. The plane made an emergency landing at an airfield just over the Turkish border, sources said.

Ralston and Franks reportedly are not in favor of full withdrawal. Part of the reason is that such a move is politically unpalatable — President Bush is the son of former President George H.W. Bush, who led the international coalition in the war against Iraq more than 10 years ago.

An Effort to Do More With Less

The question now is whether the United States could cut back on the flights it runs in order to lower the risk to pilots and to ease the deployment strain on military forces. Satellites and unmanned aircraft may be able to perform some of the reconnaissance missions, according to sources.

But there is a risk to that strategy. Iraq often moves its surface-to-air missile batteries and anti-aircraft guns around the countryside. Plus, only manned fighter aircraft can really keep up to date on the latest threat locations.

This discussion comes as Iraq has significantly stepped up firing surface-to-air missiles and anti-aircraft guns against U.S. warplanes. "Go back to the January time frame, you've seen a considerable increase in activity in the northern no-fly zone," said Quigley.

Taking a Step Forward Before Stepping Back

Administration sources confirm that in April, firings of missiles and anti-aircraft artillery doubled, compared to March. U.S. officials said there was no particular explanation for the increase, and noted that Hussein is still offering a reward for the shooting down of a U.S. pilot.

In addition, U.S. officials confirm the Iraqis have now repaired much of the radar capability around central Iraq that U.S. and British forces bombed in mid-February.

U.S. officials said they are watching to see if the repaired radar once again becomes part of a broader command-and-control network that allows the Iraqis to target allied aircraft in southern Iraq from stations near Baghdad.

If that network is re-established, Pentagon officials said the United States will be ready to drop bombs again — at the very time the Pentagon is continuing to look for ways to reduce its operations in the region.