U.S. Will Send Iraqi Arms to Afghan Rebels

WASHINGTON —  Despite mounting disillusionment with the Afghan rebels, the Bush Administration has decided to ship them 7,000 tons of captured Iraqi weapons to use in their war against the Soviet-backed Kabul government, according to U.S. sources familiar with the arms transfer.

The weapons, largely Soviet-made small arms, rocket launchers, artillery and ammunition, would have a market value if newly purchased of about $30 million, officials said. As captured and used equipment, the arms would be valued at less than $5 million, according to the sources.

Administration officials declined to discuss the weapons transfer publicly, saying that the Afghan rebel aid program is technically a classified covert operation. But several sources confirmed the planned transfer.

The 7,000 tons of arms constitute a small fraction of the total weaponry seized in the Persian Gulf War against Iraq. But the arms still represent a sizable arsenal for the Afghan guerrillas, who have constantly struggled for enough weapons and ammunition to use against the well-armed and organized Afghan army.

The decision to ship the weapons comes despite a growing consensus in the Administration that the rebels’ 12-year campaign against the regime of Afghan President Najibullah has deteriorated into a civil war with no prospect of imminent victory.

“Everyone’s had it with these crazies,” said one U.S. official, expressing a frustration felt by a number of senior Administration policy-makers. White House National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft is said to be exasperated by the continuing military stalemate and the infighting among rival moujahedeen rebel factions.

In recent weeks, speculation was rife that all U.S. military aid to the rebels would be terminated.

But many in Congress and the Administration asserted that a complete cutoff would be a betrayal of the guerrillas whom the United States has encouraged for more than a decade, and they noted that Soviet aid for Najibullah continues.

The decision to transfer the surplus Iraqi equipment reflects the U.S. ambivalence--a huge supply is available, and transferring it costs the government virtually nothing, officials noted.

Aid to the moujahedeen , channeled primarily through the CIA, has come under increasing criticism since Moscow pulled its 100,000 troops from Afghanistan in 1988 and 1989.

For the first time in more than a decade, the Administration did not request secret funding to support the seven disparate factions of the moujahedeen (“holy warriors”) in its proposed 1992 budget.

But in closed-door congressional discussions earlier this month, the Administration and congressional supporters of the moujahedeen took steps to keep U.S. options for aid open. In fiscal 1992, the Administration has reserved the right to tap into a special CIA reserve account for further covert aid to the Afghan rebels.

“At least some of it will end up being used,” the official predicted.

A Defense Department official said that the Pentagon “has not decided what to do with all of” the captured Iraqi weapons. But officials in the Administration and on Capitol Hill said Congress has been properly notified of the proposed transfer.

The arms transfer and the new aid are aimed at maintaining U.S. pressure on Moscow and maintaining American influence in shaping domestic Afghan politics.

Despite its troop withdrawal, the Soviet Union still provides the Kabul regime with between $500 million and $750 million a year in military hardware, food and economic assistance, according to estimates by U.S. officials and private analysts.

Although Moscow is widely believed to be as frustrated with the bloody stalemate in Afghanistan as is the United States, President Mikhail S. Gorbachev reportedly continues aid in large part to appease rightists in the Soviet military who threaten his domestic reform programs, U.S. analysts say.

U.S. officials also suspect that Moscow is helping Najibullah stockpile arms to perpetuate his regime after Soviet assistance ends. Moscow accuses Washington of doing the same thing with the rebels--sending excess arms so they can continue the fight after U.S. aid ceases.

U.S. officials argue that continued American involvement gives the Administration leverage to press Moscow for a joint agreement to end the intervention by both countries.

The Administration also is using the new U.S. aid to strengthen the position of the more moderate moujahedeen factions. Three of the seven rebel groups--led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Abdul Rasul Sayyaf and Burhanuddin Rabbani--outraged Washington during the Persian Gulf action by backing Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

Aid to the three rebel groups--the most militant Muslim factions of the moujahedeen --has now been officially cut off by the United States.

But some in Congress complain that arms continue to flow to the hard-line factions because of lax U.S. controls on the final destination of military equipment sent to the rebels through Pakistan.

Rep. Don Ritter (R-Pa.), a longtime supporter of the Afghan resistance, said that, despite the cutoff of aid to the extremist moujahedeen factions, some officials within Pakistan’s intelligence service are diverting U.S.-supplied weapons to them. Ritter said that he and others have complained to the CIA about the diversions and that he is prepared to support a total ban on aid to the insurgents if the agency does not find a way to more effectively channel the weapons.

“If we can’t get more of this aid to people who support our ideals and values and are not interested in some massive pan-Islamic jihad (holy war) throughout the region, then we’ll have to reconsider the whole policy,” Ritter said in an interview.

But U.S. officials said the new weapons and financial aid are not expected to dramatically affect the course of the Afghan conflict. “We don’t expect ‘our’ guys to win,” said the official.