International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation

US Global Strategy to Maintain World Order The New Role of NATO and the US Central Command

Bahig Nassar

1. US nuclear weapons in South West Asia

Apart from several countries and islands, such as Japan and Guam, where US nuclear weapons are deployed, these weapons are deployed only in two regions: Western Europe under NATO command and the Middle East and the Gulf area (South West Asia) under US central command.

However, US nuclear weapons had been deployed with the full consent and approval of European countries, whereas these weapons can be deployed at any time in South West Asia (SWA) without any agreement concluded with the countries concerned.

On January 27, 1980, following the entry of the Soviet troops in Afghanistan, president Carter unilaterally declared his Doctrine on US policy in SWA, stating: "Let our position be absolutely clear. Any attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force." Consequently, the USA Rapid Deployment Force had been created.

On January 1, 1983, the Reagan administration, established a new US Central Command (US CENTCOM) to project power and command. US Rapid Deployment Force (RDF) in a vast area extending from East Mediterranean to Pakistan and from the joint Turkish and Iraq borders (NATO frontiers) in the North to the African Horn region in the South with Diego Garcia island in the Indian Ocean as its central base. The decision to set up this new geographic united command which was the first to be created by US in 35 years, was taken without the approval or the prior notification of the countries of the region.

According to the Report of C. Weinberger, the then US Secretary of Defense, to the Congress on the FY (fiscal year) 1985 Budget, FY 1987 authorization request and FY1986-90 Defense programs the US CENTCOM "is charged with achieving US National Security Policy objectives in SWA, including the Persian Gulf and Horn of Africa. Its primary responsibilities are to ensure continued Western access to Persian Gulf oil; to deter Soviet aggression and preserve regional stability, and to halt and if possible reverse the spread of Soviet influence. While, in principle, most of our general purpose forces could be used for rapid-response missions, we have identified a certain number of units that could readily be allocated to US CENTCOM for this purpose:"

Information compiled by "Intervention and Nuclear Weapons: Facts and figures on the Mediterranean" issued by the World Peace Council, 1985, nuclear weapons assigned to CENTCOM are the following:

• Army and Marine Corps: equipped with 203.2-mm nuclear capable self-propelled howitzers. Neutron shells can also be launched by this artillery
  
  
• Strategic Bomber Squadrons: each strategic B-52 bomber can carry 20 cruise missiles with an explosive capacity equal to 300 Hiroshima bombs. Twenty-eight strategic bombers with 560 cruise missiles are assigned to the RDF.
  
  
• Carrier Battle Groups: their enormous nuclear power is displayed by nuclear powered submarines and aircraft carriers with nuclear capable planes
  
  
• Surface Action Group: equipped with 100 harpoon and long range tomahawk cruise missiles which carry nuclear weapons.

To support RDF operation the first of a series of Memoranda on US-Israel Strategic understanding was concluded on November 30, 1981, against threats `caused by the Soviet Union or Soviet-controlled forces from outside the region introduced into the region." This referred to Soviet assistance to several Middle East (ME) countries.

The most important of these Memoranda were concluded in 1987 on Israeli participation in the US Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars). Also, US concluded other Agreements to provide military facilities (bases) for the operations of the RDF with Morocco, Egypt, Oman, Bahrain and Kenya, while Saudi Arabia provided a variety of facilities to this force.

 

Combat Forces Available to USCENTCOM (According to Weinberger Report)
Army 1 Airborne 1 Airmobile/ Air Assault Division 1 Mechanized infantry Division 1 Light Infantry Division 1 Air Cavalry Division	Airforce 7 Tactical fighter wings 2 Strategic Bomber Squadrons
Marine Corps 1-1/3 Marines Amphibious Forces	Navy 3 Carrier Battle Groups 1 Surface Action Group 5 Maritime patrol Air Squadrons

2. NATO links to the south

From the first inceptions of establishing the RDF and its Central Command the USA made every effort to link their operation with NATO.

The Reagan administration took a step and convinced its allies that the USA must be free to move its NATO forces out of Europe to other regions, (International Herald Tribune, May 17-1982). On December 2, 1983, European states parties to NATO, approved a communiqu, issued by defense ministers, co-ordinating their military actions with the US-RDF deployments and operations in areas outside the traditional zone of NATO. On the basis of national decisions, they will extent facilities "to assist such deployments needed to strengthen deterrence in such areas."

Speaking about co-operation amongst NATO member states in support of RDF operations, Weinberger, stated in his above-mentioned report to the Congress:

"We and our NATO allies are studying ways for the allies to compensate in Europe for any diversion of US NATO- oriented forces to South West Asia."

However, more deep and organic links tightening the relation between NATO command in Europe and the US Central Command in South West Asia (the ME and the Gulf area) had been established during the second Gulf War when a broad coalition of forces, traditional and nuclear, were created to drive back Iraqi forces from Kuwait. Lessons drawn from this war had led to the following steps:

• On July 18,1991, president Bush, during a visit to Greece, declared that several US units in Germany would be transferred to bases in Italy and Greece to be close to the oil fields in the gulf.
  
  
• A huge arms build up in the Gulf, was established by foreign powers specially the USA, while rapid interventionist forces of many European countries were ready to project power on the Middle East and the Gulf to protect their interest.
  
  
• NATO commands were allowed to undertake operations outside the traditional areas of its former activities.
  
  
• A special interventionist force was created by Italy, France, Spain and Portugal for operations in the Southern flank of the Mediterranean and military celebrations on this occasion took place in Florence, Italy, on November 9,1996.
  
  
• In February, 1996, a military alliance was created between Israel and Turkey. Arab countries were invited to join after concluding the necessary settlements with Israel in order to establish a regional military structure pact. It should be noted that Turkey is a NATO member state while other ME countries are under the control of US Central Command.
  
  
• After NATO expansion to the East, talks are underway with several countries in the Mediterranean region to expand NATO to the South. NATO command is conducting, at present, these talks with Morocco, Tunis, Egypt, Jordan and Israel. Other talks may be conducted with each of the other countries of the Southern Mediterranean once they changed their policy to suit NATO principles and aims. They will not be NATO full members but a kind of a special link is under discussion to involve them in NATO global policy. Nuclear weapons are assigned to NATO and US Central Commands, while US, Israel, British and French units involved in the above mentioned plans are carrying weapons of mass destruction.

3. What are the consequences of all these plans ?

1. In spite of the dismantling of the Soviet regime and the settlements concluded between Israel and several Arab countries, arms built up is escalating and the Israeli and US nuclear weapons are proliferating in the ME and the Gulf area.

2. Peace in the ME will be maintained by nuclear deterrence while US will use force to prevent the countries of the region (except Israel) from acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

3. Instead of transforming the ME into a zone free from weapons of mass destruction with security measures which will equally benefit all the countries of the region, plans are implemented to establish military alliances among them through links with NATO or by creating regional military structures around the already existing Israeli-Turkish alliance. Similar to the role of US nuclear weapons within the framework of NATO, Israeli and US nuclear weapons can continue its deployment within the future military structures and alliances.

4. A process of interlinking NATO with US CENTCOM is underway. However, NATO expansion to the East and its links with US CENTCOM in the South are assuming global dimensions. Both of them are no more military edifices to confront Soviet "threats." Their function, at present, is to support the new World Order dominated by the USA. Together with its alliance with Japan and the US military build up in the Pacific, three main targets are supposed to be attained: (1) pressures will be born on Russia and China. (2) US sway over its allies in Europe and the Pacific will be strengthened and (3) the chaotic relations among many countries of the Third World (including ME countries) will be controlled. Among all these structures, NATO will assume the central role in the US global strategy designed to maintain World Order with deterrence, nuclear and conventional.

5. Undoubtedly several steps had been recently taken in the field of disarmament, including the CTBT, the reduction of nuclear weapons and the discussions underway to conclude a Treaty to prohibit fissionable material for the production of weapons. However, there are grave flaws and deep holes, which run contrary to the above mentioned steps and create a base for a new strategy, such as the lab-tests to produce more sophisticated mini nukes allowing their actual use in military operation and the rejection of the nuclear weapons states to get rid of the fissionable material formerly produced. The restructuring of the former military alliances and the changes of their missions are meant to serve the new US global nuclear strategy designed to maintain the current internationalization and globalisation of economies, policies and cultures in a way that and globalisation of economies, policies and cultures in a way that suits its vital interest the worldover.

4. Conclusion

Special plans are very much needed to foil these US plans in order to attain the target of eliminating all nuclear weapons by the year 2000 (or beyond). Among them is to delink and separate NATO from the US Central Command by preventing Mediterranean countries from establishing special relations with NATO, to transfer the ME into a zone free from all weapons of mass destruction and above all to dismantle NATO, the US Central Command and the other alliances which are in charge, at present of implementing the new US nuclear strategies. These targets are tightly linked with the efforts now underway to eliminate nuclear weapons by the year 2000. The more NGOs advance in one of the two tracks the more the targets of the other are likely to be achieved.

Bahig Nassar,Coordination Center of Arab Peace Organizations. Adress: 16 Mohammed Shafik St., El-Mohandessin 12411, Giza, Egypt; Tel: +202-3467892, Fax: +202-5786298.