海角大神

How tricky would it be for the US military to establish a no-fly zone聽over Syria 鈥� and do Pentagon officials think it鈥檚 a good idea?

Sen. John McCain ( R) of Arizona and other US lawmakers, arguing that聽imposing a no-fly zone would deal a blow to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, are demanding that the White House do just聽that.

But the nation鈥檚 top military officer warns that establishing a no-fly聽zone in Syria would be much more difficult than it was to create one聽over, say, Libya.

What鈥檚 more, senior US military officials say they are not convinced that聽knocking out Syrian air power would make much difference in聽alleviating most of the violence that civilians there are enduring聽at the hands of the regime.

鈥淎bout 10 percent of the casualties that are being imposed on the聽Syrian opposition are occurring through the use of air power,鈥� said Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a Monitor-hosted luncheon with reporters on Tuesday.聽鈥淭he other 90 percent are by direct fire or by artillery,鈥� he added,聽noting that those figures could vary by two to three percentage points in either聽direction.

鈥淪o, the question then becomes, if you eliminate one capability of a聽potential adversary, will you be inclined to find yourself in a聽position to be asked to do more against the rest?" he asked.聽In other words, establishing a no-fly zone probably would not do much to decrease civilian casualties, and might draw the US military more聽deeply into a conflict without clear military objectives.

There鈥檚 also a strong likelihood that the Assad regime or the Syria-backed terrorist organization Hezbollah would retaliate against US interests, and those of American allies,聽outside the Syrian border.

鈥淚 have to assume,鈥� Dempsey said, 鈥渢hat the potential adversary isn鈥檛聽just going to sit back and allow us to impose our will on them 鈥� that聽they could, in fact, take exception to the fact that we are employing聽a no-fly zone and then act outside of their borders.鈥�

This action, he said, could include 鈥渓ong-range rockets, missiles, artillery, or聽even asymmetric threats鈥� 鈥� Pentagon parlance for actions that range聽from roadside bombs to cyberattacks.

In short, the Pentagon could create a no-fly zone, Dempsey said.聽But 鈥渨hether the military effect would produce the kind of outcome I聽think that not only members of Congress but all of us would聽desire 鈥� which is an end to the violence, some kind of political聽reconciliation among the parties, and a stable Syria 鈥� that鈥檚 the reason聽I鈥檝e been cautious, is the right word, about the application of the聽military instrument of power: because it鈥檚 not clear to me that it聽would produce that outcome.鈥�

Dempsey added, however, that if he is ordered to do so, the military will act.

In that case, to be effective, a no-fly zone must have 鈥渟everal elements.鈥�

First the military would have to knock out Syrian air defenses. It聽would also need a search-and-rescue plan for downed US聽fighter pilots.

Finally, the Pentagon would have to brace for retaliatory attacks聽from Syria, both within its borders and beyond.

鈥淣ow, none of these reasons are reasons not to take action,鈥� Dempsey聽said. 鈥淏ut they all should be considered before we take that first聽step.鈥�