US says it wants to see French troops in Iraq

US: As casualties mount among American occupation forces in Iraq, the Pentagon is having difficulty replacing over-stretched…

US: As casualties mount among American occupation forces in Iraq, the Pentagon is having difficulty replacing over-stretched and exhausted US troops with international contingents, and may have to ask France and Germany, which opposed the war, for help.

The issue has thrown Pentagon planning into disarray, with US Defence Secretary Mr Donald Rumsfeld and Gen Tommy Franks disagreeing in Congressional testimony about troop levels needed in Iraq for the foreseeable future.

Mr Rumsfeld, whose Congressional appearances before now have been warmly greeted, was grilled at a Senate Armed Services Committee meeting on Wednesday about the Bush administration's handling of the post-war Iraq situation.

Senator Edward Kennedy expressed concern that "we have the world's best-trained soldiers serving as policemen in what seems to be a shooting gallery". Pentagon officials had predicted that more than 30,000 troops would be supplied by third countries to augment the US-British presence in Iraq and allow the US military presence to be reduced quickly to 50,000 troops.

READ MORE

But key allies India, Pakistan and Portugal, which US officials hoped would contribute 25,000 to 30,000 troops, have said they would do so only under a United Nations or NATO mandate.

Portugal said it would send only 120 paramilitary police rather than regular soldiers, USA Today reported yesterday.

Mr Rumsfeld told the Senate committee there were 19,000 non-American forces from 19 countries in Iraq, in addition to 145,000 US troops, but many are in non-combat roles. He hoped for an additional 11,000 before the end of the summer.

Mr Rumsfeld told the senators that the US would welcome troops from all NATO countries, including France, a country the Pentagon has up to now practically ostracised over its opposition to the US-led invasion of Iraq.

Astonishingly, Mr Rumsfeld said he did not know if France and Germany had specifically been asked by the Pentagon to contribute troops to help in peacekeeping operations in Iraq. "I have no idea. I'd be happy to run around and try to find out the answer to that," he stated.

He also startled senators by disclosing that the occupation was costing $3.9 billion a month, twice the amount previously estimated in April. He only gave the figure under intense pressure from war critic Senator Robert Byrd.

Gen Franks, who commanded the invasion force, told the committee that the current level of 145,000 troops must be maintained for the "foreseeable future".

In further testimony yesterday, he said US troops could be in Iraq for four years.

Mr Rumsfeld said that the future levels were unknown and might be reduced if replacements were found from other nations.

According to the Pentagon, 214 US troops have died in Iraq since the war began on March 20th; 76 of those soldiers have died since May 1st, when Mr Bush declared major combat operations over. A total of 1,044 have been wounded, 382 since May 1st.

President Bush, who is touring Africa, said: "There's no question we've got a security issue in Iraq, and we're just going to have to deal with it person by person. We're going to have to remain tough."

Democratic presidential candidate Senator John Kerry said yesterday it was clearly time for Mr Bush to step forward and "tell the truth" that the war is continuing and that the US needs help from the UN and NATO.