U.S. assessing possible military aid to Georgia

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. military planners have begun pondering the thorny question of how Georgia's shattered armed forces might be rebuilt without provoking a Russian backlash that could risk direct confrontation with Moscow.

With Russian tanks and troops still occupying parts of Georgia, U.S. officials have said openly that Washington will consider new military assistance for the former Soviet state turned Western ally that has staunchly supported the U.S. war on terrorism and aspires to NATO membership.

U.S. Gen. John Craddock, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said during a recent visit to Tbilisi that Washington would probably provide military help. But defense officials have since steered away from the issue, instead emphasizing the Pentagon's humanitarian aid mission to Georgia.

"Down the road we will be looking at what may be required to rebuild the Georgian military," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said. "Right now, the mission of the United States military is to provide humanitarian assistance."

U.S. military officials emphasized that the Georgian government has not yet requested military assistance and that any concrete U.S. planning could be a ways off.

But one official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said U.S. and Georgian officials have begun a dialogue about the country's potential military needs and that the U.S. side was awaiting a Georgian assessment of the damage sustained during the Russian onslaught.

The U.S. Defense Department had about 130 people in Georgia to train its forces in counterinsurgency techniques for missions in Iraq when Russian armor and warplanes swept aside Georgia's military after the August 8 invasion.

Pentagon officials say the number of U.S. personnel has since fallen to about 100 but that military training ceased after the invasion as the U.S. focus shifted to aid.

Now a passionate U.S. debate has emerged about what, if anything, can be done to help Georgia and its small military of about 30,000 active duty troops defend against any future Russian combat operations.

There is the danger of provoking Russia at a time when Moscow dramatically raised tensions by recognizing Georgia's breakaway regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states.

Washington has already angered Moscow with plans for a missile defense shield, meant to protect against launches by potential adversaries such as Iran, that would have components in two other former Soviet states, Poland and the Czech Republic.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday that Moscow would respond militarily to the deployment of U.S. missiles close to its borders.

NO 'FREE RIDE' FOR RUSSIA

Some analysts say the Bush administration could deter further Russian action by quickly sending sophisticated Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and portable anti-tank guided-missile systems known as Javelins to Georgia.

Two influential U.S. senators -- Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut -- wrote in the Wall Street Journal this week that Georgia should be given anti-aircraft and anti-armor systems to deter any renewed Russian aggression.

"The danger is letting the Russians think they can get away with this and do it again in Ukraine or someplace else. They have to realize that they're not going to get a free ride," said Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Boot said the United States would likely avoid giving Georgia offensive weapons such as tanks and fighter planes that could be used in an attempt to retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Others warn Georgia is too small and too far away from the main U.S. and European military reserves to mount any effective defense against the Russian military, which has more than 1 million troops and vast air and armor capabilities, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

"It's physically impossible for us to do enough to deter the Russians from further incursions. So it's not clear to me that military aid would be appreciably more than symbolic," said John Nagl, a former Army officer and 1991 Gulf War veteran now at the Center for a New American Security.

Charles Kupchan, a Georgetown University professor who served on the National Security Council under the Clinton administration, said renewed U.S. or European assistance for the Georgian military was unlikely to take place for months.

"It's hard to imagine that the United States would embark on the process of rearming Georgia until the conflict has reached a stable equilibrium. That at least has the possibility of triggering some kind of military confrontation between the U.S. and Russia," he said.

Analysts said the United States could help Georgia's military over time by providing shorter-range anti-tank and anti-aircraft systems that would not provoke Russia.

U.S. assistance could also provide training in infantry tactics and small arms, as well as more modern equipment including body armor, they said.

(Editing by Kristin Roberts and John O'Callaghan)