Assault On The Serbs: Military analysts say bombing will not be enough

The Endgame

MILITARY ANALYSTS have been remarkably consistent this week on the great imponderable of the Nato campaign against Yugoslavia - the role of ground troops.

The argument boils down to the fact that the most effective way to achieve the alliance's stated objectives - stopping the Serbs' ethnic cleansing in Kosovo - would be to put troops on the ground. Against this is the political truth that it would inevitably mean body bags being brought home and a protracted war against a motivated enemy. General Sir Peter de la Billiere, the British commander in the Gulf War, said: "Air strikes alone do not destroy a nation's capacity to fight. This is particularly so in the case of Serbia, which believes it has a genuine right to Kosovo.

The optimistic view was that bombing would bring backPresident Slobodan Milosevic to the negotiating table. This would be hard enough, said Sir Peter. "But the alternative is far more disturbing. Suppose the Serbs simply take their punishment and sit tight, much as Saddam Hussein has done?"

If even heavier air attacks still did not destabilise President Milosevic, then the allies' only alternative would be to fight their way in and that would need a huge allied force. "I do not know whether that degree of commitment would be forthcoming," said Sir Peter.

That idea appears to be a complete no-no to the Americans, who would be required to commit large numbers of troops to any such operation. Some senior Nato army officers fear that the unwillingness to sustain casualties may be a strategic weakness that President Milosevic can exploit.

General Sir Michael Rose, the former British commander with the UN in Bosnia, also doubts air strikes alone can achieve the desired effect.

In 1995, Sir Michael said, Nato launched 3,500 strikes against the Bosnian Serbs, but because of the long warning time, most of these ended up hitting empty buildings. He thinks Nato has been right to rule out using troops so far but also believes greater use could have been made of them to protect the borders of neighbouring countries, such as Albania. "Nato needs to develop a coherent long-term strategy capable of delivering the desired political goals in Serbia - something that it has so far consistently failed to do," he said.

Asked yesterday what the "endgame" was, General Wesley Clark, Nato's Supreme Commander in Europe, said: "I assume that we will get additional military objectives, or we will continue to work."