HOSTAGE CRISIS IN LEBANON : U.S. Carrier Day Away From Lebanon, ‘All Options Open’

The U.S. aircraft carrier Coral Sea left the Egyptian port of Alexandria slightly ahead of schedule Tuesday, and Defense Department officials refused to quell speculation that the government is considering military retaliation against the presumed murderers of Marine Lt. Col. William R. Higgins in Lebanon.

But Adm. William J. Crowe Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned President Bush and other top decision-makers that all the traditional options for military retaliation carry both political and military risks, Pentagon officials said.

Other top defense officials, not speaking for attribution, said it would be difficult to find and punish the terrorists responsible for the death of Higgins, who had been held hostage in Lebanon since February, 1988. And it would be all too easy, they said, to kill innocent civilians in the process.

Day Away From Lebanon

The Coral Sea--with dozens of warplanes aboard and nine warships in escort--was in the Mediterranean Sea, within a day’s steaming time of Lebanon and several days from Iran, which has supported the terrorists in Lebanon.

Pentagon spokesman Pete Williams, asked about the Coral Sea’s mission, said, “All options are open.” Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, he added, has maintained “a somewhat flexible schedule” while Bush decides what to do.

“There’s pressure in the Pentagon to do something--coming from the President and from Cheney,” said a senior Defense Department official who asked not to be identified. “There’s a feeling that if Rich (as Higgins was known) was killed, it requires a response in a way that other things did not.

“But all the old considerations apply,” the official added wearily. “We don’t know where they (the presumed killers) are. It’s difficult to find the target.”

Concern Over Other 14

Bush told members of Congress on Monday night that he was concerned that retaliation could provoke the killing of the remaining 14 Western hostages held in Lebanon.

But even without the threat of harm to the hostages, the military faces challenges in assembling a force capable of mounting a surgical retaliatory strike, officials said.

Traditionally, U.S. naval forces have provided the backbone of American retaliatory capability in the Middle East. Using carrier-based aircraft, the United States has struck targets it believed to be terrorist strongholds in Libya and Lebanon.

The successful efforts have employed massive force. The strike on Libya in April, 1986, for instance, used two carrier battle groups--a total of 20 ships, including the Coral Sea. The operation used 84 combat aircraft and 35 support aircraft, many of them carrier-based.

By contrast, just three years earlier, the Navy mounted an operation against Lebanon using just one carrier group and 28 combat planes. One of those planes was shot down, and its navigator, Lt. Robert O. Goodman Jr., was seized by Syrian forces. Navy officials regularly say that they are wary of repeating that mistake.

Fewer Ships in Mideast

At present, the size of U.S. naval forces in the Middle East is sharply reduced from as recently as last year, when the United States was escorting oil tankers through the Persian Gulf to protect them from hostilities during the Iran-Iraq War.

The Coral Sea is the only carrier in the area. The next closest is the America, which was in port in Singapore on Tuesday. That put it at least five days’ steaming time from the Arabian Sea, where it could help support a strike, Navy officials said.

Another, closer alternative is the battleship Iowa, which was in the French Mediterranean port of Marseilles on Tuesday, about 2 1/2 days from Lebanon. But the World War II-vintage ship and its guns labor under extreme military and political restrictions. An explosion in one of the Iowa’s three gun turrets killed 47 sailors in March, and the Navy imposed a moratorium on the firing of the massive guns.

Only 6 Guns Operable

Chief of Naval Operations Carlisle A. H. Trost partly lifted the moratorium in early June, directing that the guns may be fired in “real-world contingencies” or in exercises preparing for them. But the damaged turret remains inoperable, leaving the Iowa with six guns instead of nine.

Experts said that the guns’ past record of inaccuracy could also militate against their use. Off Lebanon in 1983, the battleship New Jersey scattered its powerful shells widely off-target as it tried to target anti-government gun emplacements, and local leaders charged that the rounds hit villages and injured civilians.

The Navy says that it has solved the problem of the guns’ inaccuracy. An Israeli-made pilotless drone, called the Pioneer, is being used to spot targets and improve accuracy.

But the solution is likely to pose problems of its own. The terrorists who claim to have killed Higgins acted in retaliation for Israel’s seizure in Lebanon on Friday of Sheik Abdel Karim Obeid, whom Israel considers a leading Muslim terrorist. The use of an Israeli drone might appear to confirm the terrorists’ charge that the United States and Israel colluded in Obeid’s kidnaping.

New Option: The F-117

A relatively new option in the U.S. arsenal comes from the F-117 Stealth fighter, which was used in the 1986 strike on Libya, according to widespread reports. It began flying at night in 1983, and only recently have daytime flights begun over the California and Nevada deserts.

Even if the United States were to get a windfall of intelligence about the precise identity and location of Higgins’ murderers, the potential inaccuracy of U.S. weapons could pose a major political problem. With targets of retaliation in close proximity to civilian settlements, little short of perfect aim would shield the United States from charges of indiscriminate attack.

“The issues are simple, and the frustrations and anger makes you want to do something,” one senior military officer said. “But it’s not that simple from a military standpoint. You have to be sure that anything you do is going to help the cause in terms of stemming the flow of international terrorism.”

One former senior Pentagon official who remains active in advising the Bush Administration said the best military response may be to speak quietly while slowly moving a big stick to within striking distance of Iran. This former official said:

“We should move some more military assets (into the Persian Gulf) and then privately go to them and say: ‘We hold you responsible, and if we don’t see some action, some cooperation, then we will hold you accountable, and you will feel our sting.’ Then let them suffer the sleepless nights, the weeks of sweating and constant vigilance.”

This slower approach not only would give the United States more time to gather intelligence and military strength, this former official said, but it also would promise more effective retribution once the strike came.

“If you went into Baalbek (a terrorist stronghold in Lebanon) tomorrow, you’d only move the rubble around,” he said. “If you went back in 10 days, you’d probably get something. They’re probably even sending some civilians and children up there now, while the terrorists have gone underground. If they follow their normal practices, they’ll resurface.”