Military Experts Say U.S. Effort Would Be Risky

U.S. participation in allied military operations in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as President Clinton is considering, would require thousands of American troops and expose U.S. forces to serious casualties and possible capture by the Bosnian Serbs, military experts said Wednesday.

Pentagon strategists are gearing up for two basic missions:

* To evacuate any peacekeepers who are pinned down by the rebel Serbs and to help the United Nations consolidate its forces, bringing small groups of peacekeepers back from remote areas where they have been easy prey.

* If that does not work, the President has promised the allies that the United States will send between 20,000 and 25,000 ground troops--and the necessary transportation--to support a North Atlantic Treaty Organization effort to cover the total withdrawal of all U.N. forces.

U.S. officials said Wednesday that the United States wants the allies to keep their peacekeeping forces in Bosnia to prevent collapse of the Muslim-led government. And they insisted that any use of U.S. troops would be “limited”--that is, the Americans would not take part in combat operations.

Still, both Pentagon planners and private military experts warned that even the initial operations would be risky and could well leave the United States and its allies with no choice but to escalate their attacks to counter Bosnian Serb defiance.

“Even worse than U.S. forces taking casualties is the fear that the United States will have to react to having to take casualties,” said Dan Goure, a military analyst for the Center for Strategic and International Studies here.

Even the most minimal operations in Bosnia would face these dangers:

* Merely helping to consolidate the U.N. peacekeeping forces would be risky enough. Many of these peacekeepers are in small groups, stationed in remote areas where they have been deployed as observers or keepers of weapon depositories. Americans sent to rescue them would be vulnerable to Bosnian Serb attacks.

* U.S. helicopters dispatched to assist in such operations could be targets of shoulder-fired missiles, now a regular part of the rebel Serbs’ arsenal. The allies would also have to bring in heavy weapons to counter Bosnian Serb artillery.

* Supply routes would be difficult to maintain. There are just two seaports to which Bosnia has access--Split and Ploce in Croatia--that are capable of handling large numbers of allied troops and equipment, and the Bosnian Serbs have begun to shell and blockade the 200-mile corridor that leads from the ports to Sarajevo.

* The Bosnian Serbs have shown that they are willing to pay a relatively high price to defy the allies. About 370 U.N. peacekeepers are being held hostage, and the Bosnian Serbs have been shelling U.N.-protected cities.

A full-scale withdrawal of peacekeeping forces could be even more dangerous, military specialists said. Although U.S. and allied troops would be bolstered by a heavy infusion of air power, tanks and artillery, casualties in such situations often are high.

Moreover, any longer-term operation would be impeded by the mountainous Bosnian terrain and the continual fog and rain, which limit the use of air power. Not every allied warplane has all-weather capability.

Pentagon officials said Wednesday that, although the United States would wait for the allies to request U.S. assistance before it sends any troops, much of the initial U.S. force is in place, and other units are being notified to be ready to join them.

Besides the dozens of U.S. and other allied jet fighters in Italy, the United States has an aircraft carrier, a nuclear submarine armed with cruise missiles, an amphibious ready group and 2,000 Marines--some of whom are trained in special operations--standing by in the Adriatic Sea.

And depending on developments, Pentagon officials said they are prepared to send in the 1st Armored Division, based in Germany, Air Force AC-130H gunships and dozens of attack helicopters and transport helicopters, along with an array of special forces units.

“Messages are being sent, and people are being moved,” one Pentagon official said Wednesday.

Added another: “We are preparing for every eventuality. We are ready to deal with whatever situation comes up.”

Although details of the operations are still being ironed out, Pentagon officials said any initial moves probably would be made by members of the 2,000-member Marine Expeditionary Unit now aboard three U.S. Navy amphibious ships stationed in the Adriatic Sea.

Elements of the unit would be flown to a rescue site and would slide down ropes from hovering helicopters to help rescue U.N. peacekeepers. Fighters and helicopter gunships would provide cover. After the rescue, the peacekeepers would be flown to safety.

The Marine Corps unit carries a limited amount of equipment--including 16 cargo helicopters, four attack helicopters, 18 tracked vehicles and 10 to 20 five-ton trucks.

But analysts pointed out that the Marine unit simply does not have enough men for widespread or long operations. If a long deployment were necessary, authorities soon would be forced to order in infantry and Special Forces units and more armor and artillery.

And if the allies decided to withdraw the peacekeeping forces entirely, the United States would send substantially more troops, warplanes, armor and ships in an effort to quell Bosnian Serb opposition. “We’d really do it up big,” one officer said.

It is still unclear just what the Administration will finally do in terms of a military response. Barring an immediate emergency, the issue must be taken up by the U.N. Security Council and by NATO officials late next week.

The French have also asked for a meeting of allied defense ministers in Paris on Saturday to try to agree on a plan before the Bosnia situation deteriorates further.

But Clinton Administration officials warned that allowing Bosnian Serbs to prevail would constitute an even greater risk than the military danger, effectively depriving the United Nations--and the allies--of any credibility for decades to come.

Robert W. Gaskin, a former Pentagon planner now at Business Executives for National Security, a defense-monitoring group, agreed.

“This is more than a civil war,” he said. “It is the first post-Cold War test of the allies’ hope for exercising collective security.”