Port facilities were much better in Saudi Arabia said Mr Mitchell and it took months to get all the

"Port facilities were much better in Saudi Arabia," said Mr Mitchell, "and it took months to get all the pieces for Desert Storm in place. Macedonia and Greece were uncomfortable enough hosting the peace-keeping force of 28,000, and would probably face insurmountable political difficulties if they were asked to allow a much bigger invasion army to gather on their soil.Then there are the logistical difficulties. "Just to get their basic equipment there took three or four weeks," said Mr Mitchell. Even then, Britain had to beg and borrow men and equipment from almost every corner of the military; with the cuts the armed forces have undergone since then, it would be impossible to muster a force of that size today.Assembling an armoured division strong enough to fight the Serbs would inevitably require the US to take the lead - unlikely, given the degree of opposition in Congress. At its peak, it had a reinforced division in the field, consisting of 40,000 troops, some 200 battle tanks, over 90 artillery pieces and at least 18 attack helicopters. This was planned to be the largest contingent in the 28,000-strong Nato peace-keeping force under British command.Even to assemble a force of that size would take another two weeks, however.

The remaining battle group is on 72-hour stand-by in Germany, but it would take at least 10 days to transport its heavy equipment by sea to the region through Greece.Contrast this with Britain's contribution to the allied force that fought in the Gulf eight years ago. Fully deployed, they would have had 30 Challenger tanks, 40 Warrior fighting vehicles and 12 AS-90 155mm heavy, self-propelled guns. If the peace talks in France had succeeded, a second battle group would have been added, bringing the British contribution up to 8,000. "The rule of thumb is that an invading force should outnumber the defenders by three to one. Even if Nato took the decision to assemble such a force today, I estimate it couldn't be done in less than four to six weeks."It might theoretically be possible to fly 100,000 troops into the region, but it would be suicidal for them to go into Kosovo without the kind of heavy weaponry that in practical terms can be transported only by sea.Britain currently has a reinforced armoured battle group and headquarters of 4,800 troops from 4th Armoured Brigade in Macedonia.

But military strategists say if they had to fight their way in, it would take a heavily armoured force many times bigger. "There are believed to be about 40,000 Serbian troops in Kosovo, to say nothing of possible reinforcements not far away," said Phillip Mitchell, ground forces specialist at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). Critics of the present strategy of attacking Serbia only from the air argue that soon there will not be a single Albanian left alive in the province, and that the 12,000-strong Nato troops in Macedonia, sent as the advance party of a peacekeeping force, should move into Kosovo immediately. But, leaving aside the constant assurances in recent weeks that Nato would never fight its way into Kosovo, any reversal of strategy is likely to encounter huge physical and political obstacles. AS THE world is confronted with its inability to prevent the "ethnic cleansing" and murder of thousands of Kosovo Albanians, demands for Nato to send in ground troops are getting louder. Flying over this mountainous landscape, where targets are easily concealed, it is likely the planes would have to carry out manoeuvres which could seriously affect its "stealth" characteristics.Even a standard banking turn increases the aircraft's radar profile by 100 times, sources say.John Davison.