By Khaled Abul Kheir
Albawaba.com – Amman
An Egyptian expert on strategic issues has refused to rule out the possibility that the US might use chemical weapons as one means to eradicate the Taliban.
Other measures he cited in an interview with Albawaba.com included missile attacks and air raids targeting communication centers, to be followed by airborne commandos dropped in to fight Taliban forces.
Retired Lt. Gen. Talaat Musallam noted that the Taliban were much more competent, in military terms, than of the Somalis, who nevertheless were able to inflict damage and casualties on invading US troops in 1992.
He noted that the Somalis eventually drove US forces out of their country.
The military expert said that Taliban forces would be able to mount a large-scale guerilla war that would wear out the Americans, who would not be able to completely benefit from their military superiority in terms of the weapons they possess.
Following are excerpts of the interview:
Q: What chances do Taliban have as they encounter the US forces?
A: There is no room for comparison in this context. The US has the most advanced conventional and non-conventional weapons. However, weighing things on such a traditional scale does not necessarily fit here. In many cases, the weaker combatant in terms of numbers and weapons might cause its opponent heavy losses and force him to give up on strategic goals. This has happened to the US in particular. Examples are Lebanon, Vietnam and Somalia.
Q: How do you see this war’s scenario?
A: I believe that this war will take two forms: missile and air attacks targeting all installations of the Taliban, such as communication centers and training camps. The other form would be the use of airborne commandos to arrest leaders of the Al Qaeda organization and the Taliban movement.
In addition, forces from the Afghan Northern Alliance opposition and Pakistan might take part in the offensives.
Q: In the Gulf War, the US did not mount land operations. Will the coalition army engage in such attacks if they resort to a commando airdrop? Will that be to the benefit of the Taliban?
A: Absolutely. Special forces operations provide the local defenders with the chance to kill or capture some of the invaders. Missile and air attacks, on the other hand, are launched from a distance and give no chance for a real war.
Q: The Americans will launch their attacks from Pakistan, other Muslim Central Asian countries and lands under the opposition control. Do you think that the US will be standing on a solid ground this time, compared to the situation during the second Gulf War?
A: We can say that the support the US received in the Gulf War was much more substantial than that it now receives from the Muslim states in Asia. When the Americans were in Saudi Arabia, there was no chance they would be met with armed opposition.
Analysts would differ on this last point, but I believe that the Pakistani opposition to the American presence might change its pacifist tactics into belligerent ones.
Q: Do you think that the US would use non-conventional weapons in its war against Afghanistan?
A: There is no need to use weapons of mass destruction, but there is a possibility that chemical weapons might be used in a limited manner, especially in rugged mountainous areas, to force fighters out of caves they would use as shelters.
