The push towards Baghdad

NEWSNIGHT 27/03/03 MARK URBAN INTERVIEW

On the same day that Tony Blair and George Bush met at Camp David, American troops tried to consolidate their positions on the drive to Baghdad and British tanks outside Basra fought what was described as their biggest engagement since World War Two. In the north of the country, American paratoopers dropped into Kurdistan.

Mark Urban assessed the situation and discussed how coalition troops were progressing in the push to Baghdad with General Barry McCaffrey, former commander of the 24th mechanised infantry division in the 1991 Gulf War.

MARK URBAN:
We have some interesting pictures from Najaf. If we look at the satellite, this is where we are going, one of the bridges the Americans secured. They went over the river there and into a fire fight.

If we look at the tape we can see obviously the first bit of good news - the Iraqis tried to destroy the bridge and failed. Then when we see the American troops going over, they are using the loud speaker vehicles to civilians telling the people to stay inside. I think from what one can see, on the other side, the evidence is there is not too much damage to the town despite the reports of heavy fighting, and the Americans are clearly in control. If we look at this issue of tying down troops in the places along the Euphrates, it gives control of the bridges but also poses a question mark about the push on Baghdad.

And to consider that question we are joined again by General Barry McCaffrey, former commander of the 24th mechanised infantry division in the 1991 Gulf War.

General, welcome. Do you think that the commanders of that operation now on the ground were right to divert that amount of effort into securing their lines of supply and communication back to Kuwait?

GENERAL BARRY MCCAFFREY:
I think in the short run there were significant problems operating against the fuel tankers. The initial force on the ground was really inappropriate.

We didn't have a military police brigade so they have been forced to turn around and clear up the rear. We are seeing the commitment of the parachute brigade, the 86nd airborne, to also take on some of the duties, so probably in the next two or three days there will be a better consolidation of this rear area and the third division will be better postured to start a war of manoeuvre against the three tank divisions of the Republican Guard.

MARK URBAN:
They've clearly had some results in the sense they haven't had bad ambushes along that route, certainly no combat fatalities. Does the commander have to choose between losing some of that security to throw forces towards Baghdad or does he have enough to prosecute the attack on Baghdad without losing that sense of security?

MCCAFFREY:
I think it is hard to say. We have killed an awful lot of these people. They pose no particular threat to the armoured units. They were a threat clearly to soft-skinned vehicles.

My guess will be that what you will see in the next few days we'll begin this war of manoeuvre against the five Republican Guard divisions up there with rather modest forces. Heavily equipped 3rd Infantry Division and a couple of combat teams and a lot of Apaches and a lot of air. I think it will work.

We'll wreck most of the mobile forces and the big question is, when you go into Baghdad do you have adequate combat power? My judgement is probably not. They probably need to bring in more forces and we need to be very deliberate about this. It will be a tough objective to take.

MARK URBAN:
Do they wait for the first of those reinforcements? Do they wait for them to get there to prosecute the final assault on Baghdad or do they have to drive it on before that, do you think?

MCCAFFREY:
I'm sure we've got a lot of reconnaissance in this city, special operation forces, and there is enormous capability to intervene directly into the city at night on roof tops.

Having said that, even with 150 Apaches and a considerable amount of artillery, if it was me I would wait for the 4th infantry division to close in, the 2nd Armoured Cavalry Regiment will deploy by air and the 3rd Armoured Cavalry Regiment will come in shortly after that. It is a tough call for the commanders - what do they think is feasible.

MARK URBAN:
You caused quite a stir when you made your remarks on Newsnight a few days ago about the inadequacy of the troop numbers. Hearing from Washington that these could total up to 120,000 do you think it shows the Pentagon did misjudge the question and are prepared to address their mistake?

MCCAFFREY:
I think there is enormous bad feeling about all of this. Basically they went into this with a good plan but they held the deployment of much of the force structure under this rolling start concept and their notion was there are a series of assumptions and I thought they were pretty good but I told them if you are wrong on it, you will have a political and military setback of considerable proportions.

I think their viewpoint will be we are continuing to deploy the force just as planned, nothing went wrong, when in fact I think Donald Rumsfeld says ones and twos are harassing the lines of communication. We had a marine infantry battalion fight for two days to take the bridges across the Euphrates and that wasn't that. That was a knockdown and a drag out fight.

This transcript was produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.