Washington -- A scathing new report published by the Army War College
broadly criticizes the Bush administration's handling of the war on
terrorism, accusing it of taking a detour into an "unnecessary" war in
Iraq and pursuing an "unrealistic" quest against terrorism that may
lead to U.S. wars with states that pose no serious threat.

The report, by visiting U.S. Professor Jeffrey Record, who is on the
faculty of the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., warns
that as a result of those mistakes, the Army is "near the breaking
point." It recommends, among other things, scaling back the scope of
the "global war on terrorism" and instead focusing on the narrower
threat posed by the al Qaeda terrorist network.

"(T)he global war on terrorism as currently defined and waged is
dangerously indiscriminate and ambitious, and accordingly ... its
parameters should be readjusted," Record writes. The anti-terrorism
campaign "is strategically unfocused, promises more than it can
deliver, and threatens to dissipate U.S. military resources in an
endless and hopeless search for absolute security," he said.

Record, a veteran defense specialist and author of six books on
military strategy and related issues, was an aide to former Sen. Sam
Nunn when the Georgia Democrat was chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee. In discussing his political background, Record
also noted that in 1999, while on the staff of the Air War College, he
published work critical of the Clinton administration.

His essay, published by the Army War College's Strategic Studies
Institute, carries the standard disclaimer that its views are those of
the author and don't necessarily represent those of the Army, the
Pentagon, or the U.S. government.

But retired Army Col. Douglas Lovelace, the director of the Strategic
Studies Institute, whose Web site carries Record's 56-page monograph,
hardly distanced himself from it.

"I think that the substance that Jeff brings out in the article
really, really needs to be considered," he said.

Publication of the essay was approved by the Army War College's
commandant, Maj. Gen. David Huntoon, Lovelace said. He said he and
Huntoon expected the study to be controversial, but added, "He
considers it to be under the umbrella of academic freedom."

Larry DiRita, the top Pentagon spokesman, said he had not read the
Record study. He added: "If the conclusion is that we need to be
scaling back in the global war on terrorism, it's not likely to be on
my reading list anytime soon. "

Many of Record's arguments, such as the contention that Saddam
Hussein's Iraq was deterred and did not present a threat, have been
made before by critics of the administration. Iraq, he concludes, "was
a war-of-choice distraction from the war of necessity against" al
Qaeda. But it is unusual to have such views published by the War
College, the Army's premier academic institution.

In addition, the essay goes further than many critics in examining the
Bush administration's handling of the war on terrorism.

Record's core criticism is that the administration is biting off more
than it can chew. He likens the scale of U.S. ambitions in the war on
terrorism to Hitler's overreach in World War II.

"A cardinal rule of strategy is to keep your enemies to a manageable
number," he writes. "The Germans were defeated in two world wars ...
because their strategic ends outran their available means."

The essay concludes with several recommendations. Some are fairly
noncontroversial, such as increasing the size of the Army and Marines
Corps. But he also says the United States should scale back its
ambitions in Iraq, and be prepared to settle for a "friendly
autocracy" there rather than a genuine democracy.