History > 2006 > UK > Wars > Afghanistan (III)

Peter Brookes

The Times        July 11, 2006

Shot soldier is named

as bomber kills 17 at market

August 29, 2006
The Times
By Michael Evans, Defence Editor

THE latest British military fatality in Afghanistan has been named as Lance Corporal Jonathan Hetherington of 14 Signal Regiment.

The 22-year-old soldier, who had also fought in Iraq, was killed by Taleban forces in the southern province of Helmand.

He was the 21st British soldier to die in Afghanistan since 2001 and the 8th to die in Helmand this month.

His details were released by the Ministry of Defence as a suicide bomber killed 17 people, including several children, and wounded nearly 50 in a crowded market in Lashkar Gah, the capital of Helmand.

It was the worst suicide attack in Helmand since British troops arrived in May. A suicide bomber killed about 21 people three weeks ago in the neighbouring province of Kandahar in an attempted attack on a Canadian military patrol.

There is a big British force in Lashkar Gah and it is not known if the bomber was targeting civilians or whether his bomb detonated prematurely. No British soldiers were among the casualties.

The MoD said that Lance Corporal Hetherington, who was born in Salisbury, Wiltshire, but was raised in South Wales, had been shot during a Taleban assault on his “platoon house” base in Musa Qala, a small town located in the north of Helmand.

In between fighting in Operation Telic 1 in Iraq in 2003 and his current posting in southern Afghanistan, he also served a tour in the Falkland Islands.

The British base in Musa Qala has been attacked almost every day since June.

Lance Corporal Hetherington, who was single, was a specialist electronic warfare signaller. It was his job to eavesdrop on and jam the communications systems of the Taleban.

He joined the Royal Signals in September 2000, when he was 16, and attended the Army Technical Foundation College at Harrogate. He later trained as a radio systems operator at the Royal School of Signals in Blandford, Dorset. In January 2003 he was posted to 102 Logistics Brigade Signal Squadron in Germany, from where he was deployed to Kuwait for the invasion of Iraq.

After the Falklands, he was posted to 14 Signal Regiment (Electronic Warfare) in February this year and was selected for a six-month tour in Helmand for Operation Herrick, the code name for the British campaign in Afghanistan.

Lieutenant-Colonel Steve Vickery, his commanding officer, said yesterday: “Lance Corporal Jon Hetherington had only been in Afghanistan for a short time. He stood out as a young man of stature and great enthusiasm.”

He had made such an impression since joining 14 Signal Regiment that he had been selected to join the regimental recruiting team before the posting.

Defence sources said that the MoD was considering spending up to £30 million on two Predator B unmanned aerial vehicles — advanced remotecontrolled spy planes — from General Atomics, the US company, to help British troops to spot the movements of the Taleban. The Predator is equipped with Hellfire missiles for the instant targeting of enemy positions.

    Shot soldier is named as bomber kills 17 at market, Ts, 29.8.2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2332460,00.html

British soldier shot dead in Afghanistan

· Serviceman dies in clash with Helmand insurgents
· MoD confirms inquiry into shootings by UK troops

Monday August 28, 2006
Guardian
Alex Kumi

A British soldier has been shot dead during clashes with insurgents in southern Afghanistan, it emerged yesterday.

Details of the latest fatality came as the Ministry of Defence confirmed that the Royal Military police are investigating six serious shooting incidents involving British troops in the country.

The double blow points to the mounting pressure faced by troops amid an upsurge in fighting as Afghanistan goes through one of its bloodiest periods since the fall of the Taliban five years ago.

The soldier, who died in the unstable Helmand province yesterday at about 5am local time, became the eighth British serviceman to die in the country this month.

Meanwhile, the MoD provided details of the investigation into the shootings. A spokeswoman said that, in addition to the six incidents being scrutinised, reports concerning a further 22 had been dismissed without action. But she refused to comment on the number of soldiers being investigated or whether the inquiries were likely to lead to prosecutions.

The spokeswoman said: "The need to investigate matters where it is alleged that the law, and therefore the armed forces' standards of conduct, may have been breached is fundamental.

"It is vital to have a robust audit trail in order to protect the MoD and individuals from subsequent claims for compensation or judicial process and conversely, to ensure action is taken where the standards of our armed forces have fallen below that expected."

She added that this did not "detract in any way from the ability of UK personnel to open fire within the relevant law and applicable rules of engagement."

The soldier killed yesterday was a member of 14 Signal Regiment, based at Cawdor barracks, Pembrokeshire.

The regiment - which specialises in electronic warfare, including jamming communications and other systems - was sent to Afghanistan on June 14 and has been working with members of the local army and police to bring order.

The serviceman was killed in an attack on a platoon house in Musa Qala, northern Helmand. The province, in southern Afghanistan, has seen a recent surge in firefights between Nato forces and local rebels.

Commenting on the latest death, the MoD spokeswoman said: "The soldier died immediately of wounds sustained during the attack. No other UK or foreign forces were injured in the incident.

"Next of kin have been informed. They have requested that the soldier's identity is withheld for a 24-hour period of grace."

In July the government announced that an extra 850 troops would be deployed to Helmand, bringing the number of British soldiers in the country to 4,500 by the autumn.

The problems faced by the troops have prompted some to question Britain's continued presence in the country. But Brigadier Ed Butler, commander of the UK taskforce in Helmand, defended the presence of the troops.

"The current tempo of operations in northern Helmand, including those in Musa Qala, is demanding but manageable," he said.

"We are making good progress in helping to bring security to areas that have had little by way of law and order for over 30 years, most recently with the establishment of a large number of Afghan police in the heart of the town.

"The Taliban are a determined enemy, and the challenge of bringing security to Musa Qala is a continuing one. But we are well on track to succeed."

British troops, who serve as part of the multinational Nato force, are in Afghanistan to help rebuilding and to tackle terrorism and heroin cultivation.

In contrast to earlier US-led operations aimed at tracking down Taliban and al-Qaida fighters, the International Security Assistance Force's mission in the south is defined as being to provide security for reconstruction and development work.

Fatalities

· In total, 21 British soldiers have died in Afghanistan since 2001, including from accidents and illnesses.

· Fourteen soldiers have been killed in fighting since operations began.

· Six soldiers have been killed in action since the beginning of August.

· Two soldiers have died in accidents this month.

· More than 800 people - mostly militants - have been killed since May.

    British soldier shot dead in Afghanistan, G, 28.8.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1859715,00.html

11.45am

Soldier killed in Afghanistan is named

Monday August 7, 2006
Guardian Unlimited
David Fickling and agencies

A British soldier killed in southern Afghanistan's strife-torn Helmand province yesterday has been named as Private Andrew Cutts of the Colchester-based Royal Logistics Corps.

Pte Cutts' died yesterday while his 13 Air Assault Support Regiment was resupplying a coalition base at Musa Qala north of Helmand. A military spokesman said that Taliban fighters had been killed in the incident, although there was no word of how many.

Since the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, only two British soldiers had died as a result of hostile action. Yet in the past two months, 10 British troops have been killed in the province.

The news came as the UN's envoy in Afghanistan warned that military campaigns against Taliban fighters in the country would not be sufficient to defeat the growing insurgency.

"There is a virtual unlimited reservoir of Taliban fighters. It is not possible to defeat the movement by inflicting heavy losses on it," UN assistance mission head Tom Koenigs told Germany's Der Spiegel magazine.

The British-led international security assistance force took over leadership of military operations in southern Afghanistan from the Americans last week, with 8,000 troops in the region.

Officials said that they hoped the situation would improve before next spring, but were "not promising Switzerland within six months".

Fighting between the two sides has been bloody. Isaf claimed last week that 400 Taliban had been killed and 700 injured or captured during the six-week Operation Mountain Thrust - a campaign to crack down on Taliban militants in the run-up to the handover of power.

But militants have continued to stage serious attacks on coalition troops. Three British soldiers were killed in a Taliban attack near Musa Qala on Tuesday, and on Thursday a Canadian soldier was killed by a roadside bomb on the main highway linking Helmand with the southern Afghan capital Kandahar.

A suicide bombing in a market place in Kandahar province killed 21 people on Thursday, and Isaf claimed that a firefight in the Nahr Surkh area of Helmand on the same day killed 25 Taliban militants.

One senior officer in the region was yesterday quoted as saying that British troops are now at the ends of their tethers. "The men are knackered - they are on the brink of exhaustion," the unnamed officer told the Sunday Telegraph. "They are under considerable duress and have suffered great hardship."

    Soldier killed in Afghanistan is named, G, 7.8.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1839043,00.html

British Soldier Killed by Afghan Insurgents

August 7, 2006
The New York Times
By CARLOTTA GALL

KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 6 — A British soldier was killed Sunday during an operation in Helmand Province, bringing to nine the number of NATO soldiers killed in the week since they formally replaced American forces in southern Afghanistan.

The soldier for the International Security Assistance Force, or ISAF, as the NATO force in Afghanistan is called, was killed by a gunfire at the end of an operation in Musa Qala, a mountainous region known for its poppy growing and Taliban sympathies, NATO said. “The incident occurred when ISAF troops came under small-arms fire, following a successful mission,” a NATO news release said. “The operation aims to reduce insurgent presence and to ensure ISAF freedom of maneuver.”

A total of 10 British soldiers have been killed since they deployed in Helmand Province as part of ISAF two months ago, facing heavy resistance from resurgent Taliban fighters. A spokesman for the NATO force, Maj. Toby Jackman, said NATO forces were continuing operations against insurgents “unchecked” since American forces ended their two-month military operation in the south last week.

The Taliban insurgents “are clearly resisting hard, but they are losing in the overwhelming number of engagements,” he said.

    British Soldier Killed by Afghan Insurgents, NYT, 7.8.2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/world/asia/07afghan.html

British troops in Afghanistan 'on the brink of exhaustion'

Filed: 06/08/2006
The Daily Telegraph
By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent

British troops fighting Taliban insurgents in southern Afghanistan are on the "brink of exhaustion", The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.

Commanders fear that the number of "high tempo" operations being launched against the Taliban is "unsustainable" unless the 3,600-strong task force is reinforced with an extra 1,000-strong infantry battle group.

Since May, British troops in Helmand province have fought 25 major battles in which they killed an estimated 700 Taliban.

Commanders say the mission has so far been "fantastically successful", but they believe that the relentless number of back-to-back operations being fought in harsh terrain in temperatures of up to 50C is beginning to take its toll.

"The men are knackered - they are on the brink of exhaustion," said one senior officer. "They are under considerable duress and have suffered great hardship."

On Tuesday, three British soldiers were killed in an ambush, bringing the total number of deaths during the mission to nine. Several soldiers have also been wounded.

Most of the fighting is being conducted by about 700 troops drawn mainly from the 3rd battalion The Parachute Regiment, the Gurkhas, the Territorial Army and the Royal Irish Regiment.

They are supported by a squadron of light tanks from the Household Cavalry and a battery of six 105mm light guns from 7 (Para) Royal Horse Artillery. Troops occupying three isolated outposts in Sangin, Nawzad and Musa Qala in the north of the province are being attacked every day by Taliban fighters.

Commanders believe that if they slow the momentum of attacks, the Taliban will gain time to regroup and reorganise before winter.

The Sunday Telegraph has also learnt that an interim study of the mission, by Brigadier Mungo Melvin of the Directorate of Operational Capability, has found "shortcomings" in the assessment of the enemy threat.

Patrick Mercer, the Conservative spokesman for homeland security, said the Government had a responsibility to reinforce the task force. He said: "Why the Prime Minister is not giving the commanders in Afghanistan the troops they require is completely incomprehensible."

    British troops in Afghanistan 'on the brink of exhaustion', DTel, 6.8.2006, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/06/nafg06.xml

Army pays tribute to 'brave and dedicated' soldiers killed in Helmand ambush

· MoD names members of reconnaissance unit
· Chief of staff says loss of life 'sad but inevitable'

Thursday August 3, 2006
Guardian
Richard Norton-Taylor

The army paid tribute yesterday to the dedication, abilities and courage of the three members of a forward reconnaisance party killed in an ambush in southern Afghanistan in the early hours of Tuesday morning.

The soldier driving their armoured reconnaissance vehicle was named as Lance Corporal Ross Nicholls, 27, of the Household Cavalry. He leaves a wife, Angela, a two-year-old boy, Cameron, and a newborn baby girl, Erin, who live in central London.

L Cpl Nicholls had asked to be deployed to Afghanistan even though he intended to leave the army. He first enlisted into the Royal Signals, and had served in Afghanistan as well as Iraq.

Lieutenant Colonel Edward Smyth-Osbourne, commander of the Household Cavalry Regiment, based in Windsor, said L Cpl Nicholls had "established himself as a bright, professional and effective operator whose presence was a real asset to the squadron".

Second Lieutenant Ralph Johnson, of the House Cavalry, was also killed in the ambush. Aged 24 and single, he lived in Windsor. Lt Johnson was described last night as a "first class troop leader who led from the front". Lt Col Smyth-Osbourne characterised the young officer as "brave, determined and thoroughly loyal to his soldiers and superiors". He said Lt Johnson's "innate energy enamoured him to all; particularly endearing was his devotion to his men, and the time and effort he committed to them prior to their deployment. It was obvious to all that he adored his time in the army".

The colonel added that in Afghanistan, the lieutenant "displayed real composure and huge professional competence in a novel, harsh and unforgiving environment - and it was typical that, during the early hours of 1 Aug, he was leading from the front when killed in an ambush in northern Helmand."

Captain Alex Eida, of 7 Parachute Regiment, Royal Horse Artillery, was also killed in the ambush. He took part in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 as an artillery officer. The following year he was deployed to Kosovo in what the MoD described as a "demanding covert surveillance role". His job in Afghanistan was that of forward observation officer.

Capt Eida, 29, from Hooley in Surrey, was said last night to have been "always prepared to go the extra mile for his soldiers, who willingly did the same for him". Lt Col David Hammond, his commanding officer, said he knew the captain well. "He was a real character and personality, who grew up as an officer amongst us and gave so much to the regiment." He added: "His relaxed yet self-assured air of professionalism, his commitment to his vocation and his soldiers, and his infectious enthusiasm earned him the respect of all those that knew him. We have lost a gifted young officer and friend who was a leading light of the unit, and will be sadly missed."

In all, nine British soldiers have been killed in the dangerous region to the north of Helmand province where some 4,500 troops will be based for at least three years. Britain's most senior military officer said yesterday that it should come as no surprise that the Afghan campaign was costing lives.

Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, chief of defence staff, said that he had not expected the operation in Afghanistan to be easy, and the loss of life was a sad but inevitable consequence of using military force. He told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme that he would not hesitate to send more troops to the country if the commanders on the ground felt it was necessary. "We knew it was going to be difficult, we knew we were going to take casualties; so there's been no surprise at that," he said.

    Army pays tribute to 'brave and dedicated' soldiers killed in Helmand ambush, G, 3.8.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1836019,00.html

7pm

MoD names troops killed in Afghan ambush

Wednesday August 2, 2006
Guardian Unlimited
James Sturcke

The Ministry of Defence tonight named the three British soldiers killed in an ambush in the Helmand province of Afghanistan yesterday.

Captain Alex Eida, 29, of the 7 Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery, 24-year-old 2nd Lieutenant Ralph Johnson and Lance Corporal Ross Nicholls, 27, both of the Household Cavalry, were killed while on a Nato patrol.

The soldiers were in the Musa Qala district of Helmand - the region most affected by recent fighting - when they were attacked by rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns, the ministry said in a statement.

Their deaths brought the number of British deaths in Afghanistan since June to nine.

Capt Eida's commanding officer, Lieutenant Colonel David Hammond, praised him for his "tremendous commitment and positive attitude, all backed up by an impressive work ethic".

"He was a real character and personality who grew up as an officer amongst us and gave so much to the regiment," Lt Col Hammond said.

"His relaxed yet self-assured air of professionalism, his commitment to his vocation and his soldiers and his infectious enthusiasm earned him the respect of all those that knew him."

Capt Eida joined the Territorial Army while studying for a technology business studies degree at the University of Glamorgan, the MoD said.

His passion for travel and adventure training took him to Camp USA as an instructor, and he then spent time as a ski rep and instructor in France.

He attended the royal military academy at Sandhurst, passing out in April 2002, and joined 7 Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery. In 2003, he was deployed to Iraq, going to Kosovo in a covert surveillance role the following year.

Lance Corporal Nicholls, a father of two, joined the Royal Corps of Signals in 1995 and served with 216 Signals Squadron, part of 16 Air Assault Brigade.

During that time, he completed a number of operational tours, including both Afghanistan and Iraq, before transferring to the Blues and Royals in July 2004.

"He embraced life with the Household Cavalry with gusto and enthusiasm," Lieutenant Colonel Edward Smyth-Osbourne, the commanding officer of the Household Cavalry Regiment, said.

"He established himself as a bright, professional and effective operator whose presence was a real asset to the squadron.

"He volunteered to deploy to Afghanistan, despite the fact he had decided to leave the army, and was serving as Lt Johnson's operator when he was killed."

Lance Corporal Nicholls, of London, leaves a wife, Angela, a two-year-old son, Cameron, and a newborn daughter named Erin.

2nd Lt Johnson, who lived in Windsor, joined the Life Guards last year and established himself as brave, determined and loyal to his soldiers and superiors, Lt Col Smyth-Osbourne said.

"He was popular, quick-witted and hugely enthusiastic," he said. "His innate energy enamoured him to all ... particularly endearing was his devotion to his men and the time and effort he committed to them prior to their deployment.

"In Afghanistan, he displayed real composure and huge professional competence in a novel, harsh and unforgiving environment - and it was typical that, during the early hours of August 1, he was leading from the front when killed in an ambush in northern Helmand."

The MoD was quick to emphasise that the soldiers had been in a tracked Spartan armoured reconnaissance vehicle, equipped with enhanced protection for operations in Afghanistan.

A Scimitar armoured reconnaissance vehicle, also equipped with enhanced protection, was immobilised in the ambush.

Another soldier was said to be in a "very serious" condition at Camp Bastion, the British base in Helmand province, after the attack, which happened a day after Nato took command of all foreign troops in southern Afghanistan.

This morning, Britain's most senior military officer said it was no surprise the Afghan campaign was costing lives.

Air Chief Sir Jock Stirrup, the chief of defence staff, said he had not expected the operation in Afghanistan to be easy and that the loss of life was "sad but inevitable".

Despite the losses on what was the bloodiest day for British forces since deployment to the region, he said he would not hesitate to send more troops to the country if commanders on the ground felt it was necessary.

"It is turning out pretty much the way we foresaw," Sir Jock told the BBC's Today programme. "I know some people claim that we said this was going to be easy. I certainly never said that, and I certainly never believed it."

    MoD names troops killed in Afghan ambush, G, 2.8.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1835749,00.html

Four British soldiers die as army fights on two fronts

· Three killed in Taliban ambush; one in Basra
· Morale still 'very strong' insists forces commander

Wednesday August 2, 2006
Guardian
Richard Norton-Taylor and Ben Hammersley in Kandahar

Four British soldiers were killed yesterday in Afghanistan and Iraq, driving home a stark reality that the army is now facing an insurgency violently opposed to its presence on two fronts.

In one of the worst days for the army in recent years, three British soldiers were killed, and another critically injured, in an ambush in southern Afghanistan. In Iraq a soldier from the 1st Battalion, Light Infantry, was killed by a mortar fired into the old State Building, which serves as a base for the multinational force in Basra. It is the first time a British soldier in Iraq has been killed inside a base.

He was named last night as Corporal Matthew Cornish, 29, married with two young children. He died in the early hours of yesterday morning as a result of wounds sustained in the mortar attack. The Ministry of Defence described him as a trusted and respected non-commissioned officer on his third deployment in Iraq. On the night of his death he had led his company commander around some of Basra's most notorious districts in the pitch dark, with little reference to a map, and with an assurance that was a credit to him, according to the MoD.

His commanding officer, Lieutenant Colonel Johnny Bowron, paid tribute to "a great soldier, a fine friend and a marvellous husband and father". Cpl Cornish, a Yorkshireman, was a keen follower of Leeds Rhinos rugby league club and Tottenham Hotspur FC. Lt Col Bowron said his "true passion" was for his wife, Abby, daughter, Libby, and son, Ethan.

He was killed three months into a third tour of Iraq, due to last six and a half months, as part of the 20th Armoured Brigade.

In Afghanistan, two soldiers from the Household Cavalry, and one from 7 Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery, were killed in an operation against what the MoD described as "insurgent forces". It said the soldiers had been on a patrol in the Musa Qala district of Helmand province, the region most affected by recent fighting, when they were attacked by rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns. The MoD was quick to emphasise that the soldiers had been in a tracked Spartan armoured reconnaissance vehicle, equipped with enhanced protection for operations in Afghanistan. A Scimitar armoured reconnaissance vehicle, also equipped with enhanced protection, had been immobilised in the attack.

The MoD has come under criticism because of thinly protected "snatch" Land Rovers in which several British soldiers have been killed. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.

Speaking in Kandahar, Brigadier Ed Butler, commander of British forces in southern Afghanistan, said the ambush had taken place on the first the day of a major operation in the north of Helmand province. It was prompted by intelligence learned about the enemy.

"We've used all the assets available to British forces," Brig Butler said. The operation, which continued after the ambush, involved ground troops, artillery, as well as air support from Harrier jets.

Although yesterday saw the highest number of British casualties since UK troops were deployed to southern Afghanistan, Brig Butler said the battle had not been one-sided. British forces had "inflicted casualties", he said, though the number was not known.

The attack took place a day after Nato took command of all foreign troops in southern Afghanistan. The one injured soldier is said to be in a "very serious" condition at Camp Bastion, the British base in Helmand province. The bodies of the three dead have been recovered, but their names will not be released until today.

Yesterday's killing in Basra puts the number of British armed forces personnel who have died in Iraq since the invasion in 2003 to 115. Nine British soldiers have been killed since they were deployed in southern Afghanistan two months ago.

Brig Butler said the morale of the British forces would not be affected: "We knew that the mission was going to be tough. The morale of the group is very strong."

General Sir Mike Jackson, head of the British army, said he still believed "progress" could be made in Afghanistan.

Speaking to BBC World Service after the deaths of the three British soldiers there, he said: "I think an increased Nato security presence in the south was bound to cause a reaction by the Taliban - it has and there has been some sharp fighting and that may continue.

"So be it - that's part of getting the job done." He said it was important to remember that Nato troops were there at the invitation of the Afghan government, and were "supported by the vast majority of the Afghan people".

    Four British soldiers die as army fights on two fronts, G, 2.8.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1835348,00.html

British general takes command and promises ruthless strikes on Taliban

· 18,000-strong force ready for first land operations
· Nato troops take charge of most of Afghanistan

Tuesday August 1, 2006
Guardian
Richard Norton-Taylor

A British general yesterday took command of an expanded Nato force in Afghanistan, vowing to "strike ruthlessly" against the Taliban as the west's military alliance prepared to conduct land combat operations for the first time in its 57-year history.

Lieutenant General David Richards, commander of Nato's international security assistance force, Isaf, based in Kabul, took over a multinational force in southern Afghanistan where British, US, Canadian, Dutch, and other troops face a dangerous mix of Taliban fighters, corrupt officials, opium farmers and drug dealers.

Over recent weeks US and British troops, mainly from Third Battalion, the Parachute Regiment, have confronted Taliban fighters and their supporters in a surge of violence that has killed an estimated 700 militants and 19 western troops, including six British soldiers. British commanders have been surprised by what they refer to as the "virulence" of Taliban fighters. They have also expressed concern about their soldiers being overextended in forward bases.

Gen Richards, a veteran of successful peacemaking missions in Sierra Leone and East Timor, is the first British officer to command American troops in ground operations since the second world war. Nato officials have described his task as a vital test, to demonstrate the continuing relevance of an organisation set up in 1949 to fight the cold war.

"We will retain the capability and will to strike ruthlessly at the enemies of Afghanistan when required," the British general said.

Nato forces are now deployed in northern, western, and southern Afghanistan. By the end of the year, the US wants Nato troops to take over from American ground forces now deployed in the east of the country. That would leave the US in command of its continuing Operation Enduring Freedom, with its special forces and aircraft trying to track down al-Qaida remnants in the mountains bordering Pakistan.

Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the Nato secretary general, said yesterday: "This is one of the most challenging tasks Nato has ever taken on, but it is a critical contribution to international security, and a demonstration of our commitment to the people of Afghanistan."

Gen Richards said his new command was "in one sense historic". He added: "Also it is important for the world that Afghanistan is not allowed to be tipped back to its pre-9/11 state and allow a Taliban lookalike government with its sympathies to come back into power."

The general continued: "Nato is here for the long term, for as long as the government and people of Afghanistan require our assistance. We are committed to Afghanistan and its future." He referred to malign forces "perpetuating a cycle of oppression, murder and poverty".

Gen Richards has not been afraid to speak his mind in the past, notably over arguments between competing foreign agencies in Afghanistan and the role of private security companies. He has also made it clear that Nato forces are short of equipment, including helicopters and medical support.

He will command some 18,000 Nato troops in Afghanistan, including 4,500 British soldiers based in Helmand province, a centre of opium poppy cultivation where the writ of President Hamid Karzai's central government scarcely runs.

The general's priority will be to set up "secure zones" in southern Afghanistan and build up the local infrastructure - measures designed to show the local population that Nato troops are improving their life in practical ways, for example through building roads and irrigation schemes.

Nato troops are also training recruits to the new Afghan national army as well as its police forces. That programme, and the problem of divided loyalties, is proving difficult, just as it is in Iraq.

In Afghanistan yesterday a bomb in a police car killed at least eight people. The blast occurred in the eastern city of Jalalabad, far from where Nato took over command of foreign troops in the south of the country at a ceremony on a base outside Kandahar.

The bomb in Jalalabad targeted the convoy of Gul Afgha Sherzai, the governor of Nangarhar, as it drove away from a mosque where thousands of people had gathered to offer prayers for a former mujahideen commander, who died last week. Sherzai escaped unhurt, but officials said five police and three children were killed while 16 other people were wounded.

The mission

· Nato forces tasked with combat land operations for first time in alliance's 57-year history

· British general commands US forces on operations for first time since second word war

· Nato international forces in Afghanistan doubled in strength from 9,000 to 18,000

· Nato is in command of all foreign troops in north, west and south of the country. Due to extend its command to include the east this year

· 700 Afghan fighters, about a third Taliban, estimated to have been killed in the past month

· 19 western soldiers, including six from UK, killed in two months

· An estimated 1,700 people killed this year, including civilians, aid workers, Afghan forces and more than 70 foreign soldiers

    British general takes command and promises ruthless strikes on Taliban, G, 1.8.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1834484,00.html

2 British Troops Killed in Afghanistan

August 1, 2006
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 4:27 a.m. ET
The New York Times

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan (AP) -- Two British soldiers were killed Tuesday and a third was presumed dead in fighting a day after a NATO-led security force took command of southern Afghanistan.

Militants armed with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns ambushed a convoy of International Security Assistance Force in the north of volatile Helmand province, where nearly 4,000 British troops are deployed.

''Two U.K. soldiers died, another is missing, presumed killed, and a fourth is seriously injured,'' a spokeswoman for Britain's Ministry of Defense said Tuesday under customary condition of anonymity. She said the battle was continuing.

Afghan officials reported that the heavy fighting in Helmand's Musa Qala district started early Tuesday, but had no further information.

The attack came a day after the NATO force, led by a British general, took command of the south from the U.S.-led coalition, with a mission to stabilize a region wracked by the Taliban-led insurgency and the drugs trade.

At least eight British soldiers have now been killed since they deployed to Helmand in the spring as part of the 8,000-strong force in the south. The force also includes Canadian, Dutch and American troops.

NATO's mission is considered the most dangerous and challenging in the Western alliance's 57-year history. It coincides with the deadliest upsurge in fighting in Afghanistan since late 2001 that has killed more than 800 people -- mostly militants -- since May.

Meanwhile, Afghan and U.S.-led coalition forces arrested four suspected al-Qaida operatives in eastern Khost province early Tuesday. They were captured in a raid launched near Sewakay village, a coalition statement said. Weapons were also confiscated, it added.

The coalition gave no details about the suspects' nationalities. It accused them of coordinating the smuggling of explosives into Afghanistan and planning attacks against Afghan and coalition forces in the east of the country.

With NATO taking charge in the south, the coalition, first deployed nearly five years ago to unseat the Taliban regime for harboring Osama bin Laden, now is focusing on eastern Afghanistan, where al-Qaida and the Taliban are active.

At Monday's ceremony in Kandahar to mark the hand over, ISAF commander British Lt. Gen. David Richards, warned the force would ''strike ruthlessly'' against Taliban rebels when necessary.

However, NATO hopes to bring a new strategy to dealing with the Taliban rebellion: establishing bases rather than chasing militants. It is also wants to win the support of locals by creating secure zones where development can take place.

Given the level of violence, questions remain whether it can achieve the stability required to let aid workers work in a lawless and impoverished region, where about a quarter of Afghanistan's huge opium crop is grown.

The changeover in the south followed three days of intense fighting that left nearly 60 suspected Taliban fighters dead.

    2 British Troops Killed in Afghanistan, NYT, 1.8.2006, http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Afghanistan.html

Accidental victims flee homes for filthy camp

July 25, 2006
The Times
From Tim Albone and Tahir Luddin in Lashkar Gah

THEY came in their hundreds to the tented camp on the outskirts of Lashkar Gah in southern Afghanistan, fleeing the aerial bombardments in their villages to the north.

The bombs, which were dropped on the command of British soldiers under siege from Taleban rebels, killed hundreds of Taleban, but scores of civilians died as well.

There are more than 2,000 refugees in Lashkar Gah alone, less than two miles (3.2km) from the British base. The International Organisation for Migration estimates that at least 4,000 have fled the troubled areas. They are the civilians caught in the middle of an increasingly bloody and indiscriminate insurgency. Left without homes by the bombings, they blame the British for their predicament.

Those who fled to Lashkar Gah arrived with nothing. Many do not have shoes and they sleep 20 to a tent. During the day they endure searing heat, with the temperature rising higher than 45C (113F), without access to fresh water.

This is not an official camp. It is a dusty patch on the outskirts of town and the only space they could find where they thought they would be safe. Their hair is matted and flies buzz around their dirty faces. They are hungry and thirsty, and the smell of raw sewage is overpowering.

In a poor country, these are the poorest of the poor. They are desperate and they are abandoned. This was not how it was meant to be. The arrival of British troops in the southern province of Helmand was supposed to signal the beginning of an extensive programme of reconstruction and development without a shot being fired. Yet in this dusty, rancid camp refugees from the towns of Sangin, Naushad, Kajaki and Musa Qala know nothing but despair.

“My son, Sadar Wali, was killed by the British. He was 16,” Taj Gul, who was unsure of his age but looked to be about 60, said. “What have the British done in terms of reconstruction? Nothing. In terms of stability? Nothing. They have only brought destabilisation and insecurity.

“Before the British we had no problem. We prefer the Taleban. They brought us peace and security.”

Taj Gul fills his days by scavenging. “We have no drinking water and no food,” he said. “We are human beings, not donkeys.” The refugees believe that they have been left to fend for themselves. Despite their proximity to the British base, there has been no contact with the British military and no attempt to ease their plight.

“The British have never been here,” Ahmad Shah, 40, said. He has three wives and until two weeks ago was the father of 16 children. Then his son Muhammad Wali, 12, was killed in a British airstrike.

“The British were meant to be here as peacekeepers, but all they have brought is destruction,” said Shanaz Shah, Ahmad’s mother. “The Taleban forced us to give them shelter and food. What could we do? Then the coalition started bombing our village and we had to come here.”

The pattern has been repeated many times. Taleban insurgents force their way into houses, demand food and shelter and then launch attacks from the homes they have seized. The British respond with airstrikes and mortar fire. The Afghan campaign is brutal and the people in this camp are among those who are suffering the most.

“I don’t know why we have been forgotten by God,” Wali Jan, a man in his fifties, said. “We have failed to protect our children.” His son, Hazart Mohammad, 13, had a small cut on his leg that was being treated by a doctor at home. Since his family moved to the camp the wound has been untreated and become infected. When The Times visited the camp the wound was black and so painful that Hazart was unable to move. Our driver took him to a nearby Italian-run hospital. The car had to crawl because every bump elicited a scream from the boy.

The prognosis was not good; doctors feared that the leg would have to be amputated. His father, however, was touched by the gesture of help when so few were forthcoming and kissed The Times photographer’s hand in gratitude.

The outlook for these refugees is bleak, with fighting between the British and Taleban taking place only nine miles away. There is no prospect of aid, and a return to their villages is impossible. The Afghan Government’s displaced-people department in Lashkar Gah blames a lack of funds for its inability to provide assistance. Al-haj Abdul Satar, who runs the department, revealed that his concern was negligible. “To be honest, these IDPs [internally displaced persons] have sympathy with the Taleban,” he told The Times.

Captain Drew Gibson, a spokesman for British forces in Helmand, said: “We have done a civilian military co-operation group assessment and we are looking at projects such as drinking water and shelter.

“We are aware of the camp and the ball is rolling and we are trying to get things sorted but you know things don’t happen overnight. People are probably having a moan but we are in the process of trying to get things sorted for them.”

    Accidental victims flee homes for filthy camp, Ts, 25.7.2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2283620,00.html

Afghanistan close to anarchy, warns general

· Nato commander's view in stark contrast to ministers'
· Forces short of equipment and 'running out of time'

Saturday July 22, 2006
Guardian
Richard Norton-Taylor

The most senior British military commander in Afghanistan yesterday described the situation in the country as "close to anarchy" with feuding foreign agencies and unethical private security companies compounding problems caused by local corruption.

The stark warning came from Lieutenant General David Richards, head of Nato's international security force in Afghanistan, who warned that western forces there were short of equipment and were "running out of time" if they were going to meet the expectations of the Afghan people.

The assumption within Nato countries had been that the environment in Afghanistan after the defeat of the Taliban in 2002 would be benign, Gen Richards said. "That is clearly not the case," he said yesterday. He referred to disputes between tribes crossing the border with Pakistan, and divisions between religious and secular factions cynically manipulated by "anarcho-warlords".

Corrupt local officials were fuelling the problem and Nato's provincial reconstruction teams in Afghanistan were sending out conflicting signals, Gen Richards told a conference at the Royal United Services Institute in London. "The situation is close to anarchy," he said, referring in particular to what he called "the lack of unity between different agencies".

He described "poorly regulated private security companies" as unethical and "all too ready to discharge firearms". Nato forces in Afghanistan were short of equipment, notably aircraft, but also of medical evacuation systems and life-saving equipment.

Officials said later that France and Turkey had sent troops to Kabul but without any helicopters to support them.

Gen Richards will also take command of the 4,500-strong British brigade in Helmand province at the heart of the hostile, poppy-growing south of the country when it comes under Nato's overall authority. He said yesterday that Nato "could not afford not to succeed" in its attempt to bring long-term stability to Afghanistan and build up the country's national army and security forces. He described the mission as a watershed for Nato, taking on "land combat operations for the first time in its history".

The picture Gen Richards painted yesterday contrasted markedly with optimistic comments by ministers when they agreed earlier this month to send reinforcements to southern Afghanistan at the request of British commanders there. Many of those will be engineers with the task of appealing to Afghan "hearts and minds" by repairing the infrastructure, including irrigation systems.

Gen Richards said yesterday that was a priority. How to eradicate opium poppies - an issue repeatedly highlighted by ministers - was a problem that could only be tackled later.

General Sir Mike Jackson, the head of the British army, said recently: "To physically eradicate [opium poppies] before all the conditions are right seems to me to be counter-productive." The government admits that Helmand province is about to produce a bumper poppy crop and is now probably the biggest single source of heroin in the world. Ministers are concerned about criticism the government will face if planting over the next few months for next year's crop - in an area patrolled by British troops - is not significantly reduced.

Kim Howells, the Foreign Office minister responsible for Afghanistan, told the Guardian that the immediate target had to be the biggest poppy cultivators and dealers who control the £1bn-plus Afghan drug trade.

The strategy should be: "Go for the fat cats, very wealthy farmers, the movers and shakers of the drug trade" and their laboratories, he said. Asked about the concern of British military commanders that by depriving farmers - and warlords - of a lucrative crop, poppy eradication would feed the insurgency, Mr Howells admitted: "It's a big problem for us."

Backstory

Hamid Karzai was elected president of Afghanistan in October 2004 and a new constitution was signed and a parliament was inaugurated in December 2005. But he has not been able to exert much authority beyond the capital. The Taliban have re-emerged as a fighting force and hundreds of people have died in clashes over the past year.

In June this year a US-led force of 11,000 launched the biggest anti-Taliban offensive in southern Afghanistan since 2001. The UK government has said the deployment of the 3,000-plus strong British brigade, based in Helmand province, would last for three years.

The following month it said an extra 850 soldiers would be deployed. Six British soldiers were killed in southern Afghanistan in less than a month and 700 people have died over the past few weeks.

Afghanistan is now one of the poorest countries with an economy and infrastructure in ruins.

    Afghanistan close to anarchy, warns general, G, 22.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1826479,00.html

Afghanistan — when will we ever learn?

July 11, 2006
The Times

Sir, It seems that Britain has not learnt any lessons from history, not so much from the three Afghan wars that we lost, but from the most recent war the Afghans fought against the Russians.

I worked in Afghanistan and lived with the Afghans in the early 1990s. By that I mean I have eaten with them, slept with them, drunk out of the same glass and eaten yoghurt from the same spoon as them, even shared fleas with them.

I have great admiration for the British servicemen but I think they are in a no-win situation. They are fighting on the Afghans’ home ground. There are Pashtun people on both sides of a very porous border with Pakistan, which after all is only a line drawn by Europeans on a map, and cuts across the tribal areas. The Afghans do not like foreign soldiers on their soil.

They don’t mind taking casualties, and there is a limitless supply of volunteers who don’t mind dying. They have mobile phones, satellite phones, motorbikes and plenty of money, maybe some of it coming from sympathisers in this country. The terrain is on their side. They spend their lives running up and down mountains, they are very fit, very resilient and very determined. Another asset the Afghans have is time and plenty of it.

Most importantly, never presume to know what the Afghan is thinking. To send two female officials for discussions with conservative Afghan leaders was madness. This shows a lack of understanding of the culture. Their own women would not even be allowed in the room with men there. I have known Afghan commanders refuse to shake hands with women expat aid workers and walk out of the room.

It’s a lot easier for a country to get involved in a conflict than to extricate itself. It will be a costly affair. The huge amount of money would be better spent elsewhere.


WILLIAM MILLER
Excideuil, France

Sir. Is there a way of making Ben Macintyre’s article on Afghanistan (“Written again in British blood”, July 7) compulsory reading for the entire British Government?


NIGEL DOUGLAS
Barfrestone, Kent

Sir, The suggestion that the Taleban will eventually weaken as a force in Afghanistan is overly optimistic. The Taleban are not a finite group who can be systematically defeated. They are an amorphous group fed by recruits from both Afghanistan and Pakistan, able by the simple expedient of removing their black turbans to melt back into the communities from which they arise.

Over recent months the numbers of the Taleban have surged, partly because of widespread propaganda in Pakistan and partly because of support from the Pakistan military and intelligence services. Unlike in the north west of Pakistan where the Pakistan Army has been aiding the US in the unsuccessful hunt for the al-Qaeda leadership, in the south west of the country the Pakistan military is engineering the Talebanisation of Baluchistan, as it engineered the Talebanisation of Afghanistan a decade ago. In return the Taleban are providing the Pakistan Government both with the possibility of a friendly government in Kabul at some point in the future and are curbing the present tribal uprising in Baluchistan which threatens oil and gas pipelines. Pakistan is the key to stability in Afghanistan and unless it is pressured, and if necessary given additional means, to shut the Taleban down on its own soil, British and Nato forces will be ground down in a battle they cannot win.


PROFESSOR SHAUN GREGORY
Department of Peace Studies
University of Bradford

Sir, Those seeking an apt quotation from Rudyard Kipling might try the lines from his story The Drums of the Fore and Aft: “An Afghan attacked is far less formidable than an Afghan attacking: which fact old soldiers might have told them” — and which, from the reports of your own correspondents, is still true today.


T. A. HEATHCOTE
Author The Afghan Wars 1839-1919 (2003)
Camberley, Surrey

    Afghanistan — when will we ever learn?, Ts, 11.7.2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,59-2263932,00.html

Taliban use beheadings and beatings to keep Afghanistan's schools closed

Published: 11 July 2006
The Independent
By Tom Coghlan in Kabul

The letter pinned overnight to the wall of the mosque in Kandahar was succinct. "Girls going to school need to be careful for their safety. If we put acid on their faces or they are murdered then the blame will be on their parents."

Today the local school stands empty, victim of what amounts to a Taliban war on knowledge. The liberal wind of change that swept the country in 2001 is being reversed. By the conservative estimate of the Afghan President Hamid Karzai, 100,000 students have been terrorised out of schools in the past year. The number is certainly far higher and many teachers have been murdered, some beheaded.

In the province of Zabul a teacher and female MP, Toor Peikai, said yesterday: "There are 47 schools in my province but only three are open." Only one teaches girls. It is 200 metres from a large US military base in the provincial capital.

Across the south, schools burn during the night. According to a bleak report released by Human Rights Watch today at least 200 have been destroyed in the past year and half. Their blackened shells, many of them new buildings constructed with foreign aid money, are visible from the ever more dangerous road south to Kandahar.

The fate of the mixed-sex Sheikh Zai Middle School, on the outskirts of a community in the mountains of Maruf district is sadly not atypical. A local witness told Human Rights Watch what happened when the Taliban came: "They went to each class, took out their long knives .... locked the children in two rooms, where the children were severely beaten with sticks and asked, 'will you come to school now?'"

The six teachers later told residents what happened to them. They were taken out of school and blindfolded, then they were continually hit and were taken to nearby mountains on foot.

All six were separated and nobody knew where the other was. The Taliban asked them individually, "Why are you working for Mr Bush and Karzai?" They said, "We are educating our children with books -we know nothing about Bush or Karzai, we are just educating our children." After that they were beaten and let go.

The beatings were sufficiently serious that they remain handicapped. One of them had his leg broken and he cannot walk or work. One of the others still has problems with his hand and cannot use it.

The headmaster was later targeted. He was beaten with a gun butt and later shot in the thigh.

This summer, across the south of Afghanistan, the Taliban have returned. They boast the same medieval world vision but their numbers are unprecedented, their weapons abundant, and their coffers full of money from wealthy Pakistani and Gulf State patrons and from the proceeds of drug trafficking.

And what was, until this year, characterised as an increasingly vicious "low-level insurgency" has become a war. A palpable terror grips the south of the country, where overstretched Western forces battle an enemy that melts in and out of the local populace at will, and anyone associated with the foreigners or the central government is a target for violent reprisals.

Faced with collapsing security and insurgents who are flowing back and forth from safe havens in the tribal areas of Pakistan, the Western forces in the south are resorting to more extreme measures.

Yesterday, Operation Mountain Thrust, the 11,000-strong coalition offensive in the south, claimed to have killed another 40 insurgents in a strike on a house in Uruzgan. The two months since the start of Mountain Thrust have seen more than 600 killed in the south, the vast majority of them Taliban fighters.

But increasingly figures within both the Afghan government and international community are questioning whether killing such huge numbers of people is quelling the insurgency or simply fuelling popular resentment.

"It is not acceptable that in all this fighting, Afghans are dying," an exasperated and increasingly unpopular Hamid Karzai said in June. "In the past three to four weeks, 500 to 600 Afghans were killed. Even if they are Taliban, they are sons of this land."

In May, the coalition dropped bombs in Afghanistan on no fewer than 750 occasions, more than the ordnance dropped in Iraq. On Sunday night, bombs were again lighting up the sky, amid a dull rumble in Ghazni province.

    Taliban use beheadings and beatings to keep Afghanistan's schools closed, I, 11.7.2006, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article1171369.ece

Britain sends extra troops to Afghanistan

Tuesday July 11, 2006
Guardian
Richard Norton-Taylor

Hundreds of extra British troops are to be sent to hostile southern Afghanistan, the government announced yesterday, as military commanders admitted their forces were being stretched and that the capability of Taliban fighters had been seriously underestimated.

An extra 850 troops will be deployed to Helmand province, where six British soldiers have been killed in less than a month, bringing the total number of British forces there to 4,500.

The moves were announced as Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, the chief of the defence staff, admitted Britain's armed forces were "stretched" and that this was causing "some pain for families".

Reinforcements include 60 soldiers from the 1st Battalion Royal Irish Regiment and more than 100 from the 2nd battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, based in Cyprus and primarily on standby for Iraq but now part of what military chiefs call Britain's Pan Middle East Reserve.

Other reinforcements will include medics, engineers, Royal Marine commandos and Viking tracked armoured vehicles originally procured for operations in the Arctic. British commanders also said they were desperately searching for more helicopters to back up the 10 now ferrying troops around an area four times the size of Wales. They were considering taking Lynx helicopters out of Northern Ireland, the Falklands and the Balkans after failing to persuade Britain's Nato allies to provide stocks. In the meantime, they are having to look for spare parts for the ageing and overworked fleet.

The defence secretary Des Browne told MPs the reinforcements were needed because the commanders on the ground had "grasped an early opportunity", adding: "They saw the chance to reinforce the position of the local governor and the Afghan army and police by going into northern Helmand and challenging the impunity of the Taliban there."

But a senior British commander, speaking on condition he was not named, said that Taliban fighters had been "more virulent than expected" and were using intimidation and extortion. He added that Afghan security forces had been "less resilient than we had hoped in northern Helmand".

But Mr Browne said in his statement to MPs: "We knew that the Taliban, the drug lords and certain tribal elements would resist any attempt to bring security to the people of Helmand. Yes, we have taken casualties, but we have overmatched the opposing forces every single time we have faced them. They have tried to block our deployment and failed." He said the government's mission to rebuild Afghanistan and prevent it from reverting to a "haven for terrorists" had not changed.

A senior Foreign Office official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said these objectives could not be achieved "without tackling the problems of southern Afghanistan, the centre of Taliban country and a heartland of the drugs trade which has been left to its own devices since 2001".

The official said there was no doubt that Pakistan could do more to "tackle the Taliban leadership problem".

But a top military commander said British troops were not responsible for stopping the drugs trade. "We are not there to eradicate opium poppies," he said, describing the situation as "extremely complex".

The shadow defence secretary, Liam Fox, demanded more information on how Britain's objectives would be achieved. The price of failure was intolerable, he added.

The Liberal Democrat defence spokesman, Nick Harvey, said: "In the aftermath of the Iraq war the UK and US turned their backs on Afghanistan with obvious consequences. What is needed is a clear operational strategy with achievable objectives."

Human Rights Watch says in a report published today that the crisis of insecurity in Afghanistan was predictable and avoidable. The international community, led by the US, has consistently failed to provide the economic, political and military support necessary for securing the most basic rights, it says. A power vacuum has been exploited by the Taliban and other armed groups, using tactics such as suicide bombings to instill fear in ordinary Afghans.

Meanwhile officials said an American plane dropped four bombs on a militant hideout yesterday, killing more than 40 suspected Taliban. One Afghan soldier was killed and three coalition forces wounded in the fighting in Uruzgan that followed heavy clashes over the weekend which left 20 militants and one Canadian soldier dead.

    Britain sends extra troops to Afghanistan, G, 11.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1817601,00.html

5.30pm update

UK to send more troops to Afghanistan

Monday July 10, 2006
Guardian Unlimited
Matthew Tempest, political correspondent

Nearly 900 extra military personnel will be deployed to Afghanistan in the wake of the deaths of six British soldiers in the past month, the government announced today.

It will increase the size of the UK taskforce in the southern Helmand province to around 4,500 by October, from the current level of 3,600.

Additional support helicopters - probably Chinooks and Lynxs - will also be made available, the defence secretary, Des Browne, told MPs in an emergency statement on the state of Afghanistan.

The announcement came on the day that a former defence minister, Doug Henderson, broke ranks to criticise the lack of clarity of the UK mission, declaring British troops were a "sitting target" until clearer political objectives were set out.

The prime minister, Tony Blair, this morning conceded that the mission was "tough" and "dangerous".

Speaking in No 10 after talks with the Latvian president, Mr Blair said: "This has always been a tough task and people have always understood that it was going to be dangerous and tough for a very simple reason.

"For the first time we are going into southern Afghanistan where the Taliban and the terrorists are trying to get a foothold back."

In the Commons, Mr Browne specified that the 845 extra personnel will include 320 engineers from 28 Regiment, Royal Engineers would be deployed along with a company from 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines from September.

An infantry company, drawn from 2nd Battalion, the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, and two platoons from 1st Battalion, Royal Irish Regiment would also be deployed to provide "additional force protection".

He said the engineers would be sent to help improve local infrastructure and the company from 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines would provide protection for them.

There will be small increases in headquarters staff, more medical and logistical support and more support helicopters. Around 400 reservists will be called up.

The shadow defence secretary, Liam Fox, gave Tory support for the objectives of the mission but demanded far more detail of how it would be achieved. The price of failure was "intolerable", he said.

The Liberal Democrats' defence spokesman, Nick Harvey, welcomed the extra troop numbers, but warned:" What is needed is a clear operational strategy with achievable objectives."

The former Tory defence spokesman, Michael Ancram, accused the government of "overstretch" between Iraq and Afghanistan.

But Mr Browne insisted the battalion commander in Helmand now agreed that there were enough resources available.

But this morning the former defence minister Doug Henderson cautioned that currently "our soldiers are sitting targets for any insurgent who wants to take a pop at them".

Speaking ahead of the Commons announcement of more troops, Mr Henderson - one of Mr Blair's first ministers at the MoD - said: "I'm not against reinforcements, and I'm not calling for withdrawal, but until we have a political purpose our soldiers are sitting targets and should stop patrolling the streets and withdraw to their barracks.

"They are [currently] neither a peacekeeping nor a fighting force.

"We need to know what the political purpose of this force is, then what the military purpose is. Is the political purpose to get to province leaders to work with [Afghan president] Hamid Karzai, or to impose his men on them?

"Until that is revealed our soldiers are sitting targets for any insurgent who wants to take a pop at them."

Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence has consistently denied that there is any ambiguity of purpose in the UK's mission in Afghanistan.

Today it was announced that more than 40 suspected Taliban fighters had been killed in a US and Afghan raid near Tarin Kot, 110 miles north of Kandahar.

Mr Henderson - unaware at the time of that attack - nevertheless warned that UK troops are being confused with US forces in the field.

He said: "The US has been bombing insurgents for the past two weeks. Are we expecting that insurgents can distinguish between US and UK troops?

"Currently we are neither a peacekeeping nor a fighting force. The UN needs to be more clear about who they are trying to build alliances with [in the south]. Who would you sign a peace agreement with?"

    UK to send more troops to Afghanistan, G, 10.7.2006, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,1817124,00.html

12.30pm

UK troops in Afghanistan are 'sitting targets'

Monday July 10, 2006
Guardian Unlimited
Matthew Tempest, political correspondent

A former defence minister has warned that British troops in Afghanistan are "sitting targets" and should be confined to barracks until their mission is clarified.

The defence secretary, Des Browne, is expected this afternoon to announce extra deployments of troops after a month which has seen six British soldiers killed in Helmand province.

But this morning the former defence minister Doug Henderson cautioned that currently "our soldiers are sitting targets for any insurgent who wants to take a pop at them".

Speaking ahead of the expected Commons announcement of more troops, Mr Henderson - one of Mr Blair's first ministers at the MoD - said: "I'm not against reinforcements, and I'm not calling for withdrawal, but until we have a political purpose our soldiers are sitting targets and should stop patrolling the streets and withdraw to their barracks.

"They are [currently] neither a peacekeeping nor a fighting force.

"We need to know what the political purpose of this force is, then what the military purpose is. Is the political purpose to get to province leaders to work with [Afghan president] Hamid Karzai, or to impose his men on them?

"Until that is revealed our soldiers are sitting targets for any insurgent who wants to take a pop at them."

Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence has consistently denied that there is any ambiguity of purpose in the UK's mission in Afghanistan.

This morning Tony Blair conceded that the mission was "tough" and "dangerous".

Speaking in No 10 after talks with the Latvian president, Mr Blair said: "This has always been a tough task and people have always understood that it was going to be dangerous and tough for a very simple reason.

"For the first time we are going into southern Afghanistan where the Taliban and the terrorists are trying to get a foothold back."

Today it was announced that more than 40 suspected Taliban fighters had been killed in a US and Afghan raid near Tarin Kot, 110 miles north of Kandahar.

Mr Henderson - unaware of that attack - nevertheless warned that UK troops are being confused with US forces in the field.

He said: "The US has been bombing insurgents for the past two weeks. Are we expecting that insurgents can distinguish between US and UK troops?

"Currently we are neither a peacekeeping nor a fighting force.

"The UN needs to be more clear about who they are trying to build alliances with [in the south]. Who would you sign a peace agreement with?"

Mr Browne - who has been criticised for missing a Commons statement last week on British casualties in Afghanistan - is expected to confirm further reinforcements at 3.30pm today.

Mr Browne told MPs last week that he had received a request for more troops from commanders in Helmand province. The 2nd Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers is at present on standby for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

There are reports that they will be joined by elements of the 1st Battalion Royal Irish Regiment, in a 600- to 700-strong force to supplement the 3 Para battle group.

It is thought that the announcement will also include additional helicopter support for the 3,300-strong task force.

The Liberal Democrats - in contrast to their dovish stance on Iraq - have urged greater involvement in Afghanistan.

Their leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, said yesterday that he believed it was essential that more troops were sent, and he warned that their mission could not be allowed to fail.

"We have no option - it's become increasingly clear that the number of troops deployed there is not adequate to meet the task," he said.

"This is a deployment which cannot be allowed to fail ... if this were to fall apart, then it would be deeply, deeply damaging to the stability of Afghanistan and it would also be deeply damaging to the credibility of Nato."

    UK troops in Afghanistan are 'sitting targets' , G, 10.7.2006, http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,1817124,00.html

Hunt for the Taliban trio intent on destruction

Behind the rising death toll of British soldiers in Afghanistan is a shadowy group known as 'the junta'. Now the coalition has them in its sights

Sunday July 9, 2006
The Observer
Jason Burke

The trio are known as 'the junta'. They live in the shadows of southern Afghanistan, masters of bands of determined fighters who want to destroy any outside military presence. And that means destroying the British army in Afghanistan.

Coalition intelligence officers in the country held an emergency meeting last week to co-ordinate the hunt for the three, who are believed to be behind much of the current upsurge in fighting.

As fears in London grew over the spiralling violence in southern Afghanistan, British, American and French officers discussed how to track down, capture and kill the Taliban leaders. They are: Jalaluddin Haqqani, a veteran tribal leader and guerrilla fighter; Mullah Mohammed Omar, the reclusive one-eyed cleric who led the Taliban regime when in power; and the lesser-known Mullah Mohammed Dadullah Akhund, an ultra-violent and media-savvy commander who is emerging as the number-one enemy of coalition and Afghan government forces.

The Observer has learnt that an air strike in the Musa Qala district of Helmand province, where around 4,000 British troops are deployed, was aimed at Mullah Dadullah. American defence officials have claimed that the strike killed 35 Taliban, including 'senior figures'. But Dadullah appears to have escaped again.

US and British military officials are keen to downplay any focus on individual leaders: 'This is about tackling the roots of a complex and dynamic insurgency, not just taking out individuals,' said one US source in Kabul. Yet few doubt that killing or capturing any of the three leading figures in the Taliban would seriously weaken the militants.

The atmosphere in the leafy compound of the British-run headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul was tense last week. Though Isaf, and thus Nato, which runs it, has yet to assume overall control of military operations in Afghanistan from the Americans, a transfer which should occur in three weeks, the staff officers splitting their time between open-air coffee shop and meetings and briefings are increasingly concerned by the task that faces them.

Estimates of the size of the Taliban forces range from 1,000 active fighters - the number given by Major General Chris Brown to The Observer - to 5,000, the number given by American officials. Coalition bulletins have claimed a total of more than 900 Taliban killed since the beginning of the year. The truth is that no solid figures exist.

Afghan officials in the southern provinces of Kandahar and Helmand, where the insurgents are most active, speak of 'a broad range of actors who are united on an ad hoc basis to carry out individual operations'. Coalition reports now refer to the enemy as 'anti-coalition militants' or 'ACM', rather than 'al-Qaeda/Taliban' or 'AQT' as before. 'It's a semantic change but important evidence of our evolving appreciation of the varied nature of the foe,' said one coalition officer. However, the very complexity of the enemy - which includes religious militants, tribal militias, drug traffickers and bandits - has paradoxically reinforced an emphasis on identifying, tracking and killing leaders. 'At least that gives us something to shoot at,' said one senior soldier.

Intelligence reports and interviews in Kabul and Kandahar reveal that the new 'Taliban triumvirate' was put in place in the spring when Mullah Omar, who founded the original Taliban in 1994, appointed Haqqani to the command of the eastern sector of the insurgency, along the border with Pakistan, and gave Dadullah control of the militants battling the British in Helmand province.

All three men share similar backgrounds, though Haqqani is by far the oldest and most famous locally. All fought the Soviets before taking part in the campaigns of the mid-Nineties that saw the Taliban impose a rigorous rule on the anarchy that was Afghanistan at the time. 'They are good men, good Muslims and good mujahideen who have proved themselves,' said one Taliban supporter in the bazaar in Lashkar Gah, a few hundred yards from the British base there.

Both Dadullah and Omar received a low-level religious education and have lost legs to mines. All three are from Pashtun ethnic tribes that straddle the Afghan-Pakistani frontier, all hate America and all have powerful backing in the conservative religious networks that exist in Pakistan. Haqqani, a respected Islamic scholar, has additional lines of financing that reach back to oil-rich fundamentalists in the Gulf. According to several sources, one of Haqqani's wives is a Kuwaiti aristocrat and members of the Saudi Arabian royal family are thought to have contributed to the construction of several large religious schools under his control.

It is from these schools that Haqqani, a senior commander for the Taliban during the war of 2001 who is held in high esteem in his native dusty hills around the eastern Afghan city of Khost, has organised the dispatch of hundreds of young students to fight coalition forces during the summer break in their studies. Dadullah, for his part, has relied on contacts in the Pakistani city of Quetta and the frontier town of Chaman for fighters, many of whom are paid a salary, to bolster his largely local forces in Helmand.

Though the Pakistani government denies any support for the Taliban from within its territory, it is clear that much of the population along the frontier is deeply sympathetic to the religious militant movement. Scores of people gathered recently in the small Pakistani village of Mahmoudabad, a mile from the Afghan border, for the funeral of Abdul Baqi, 24, a local man who was killed fighting coalition forces near Kandahar. Baqi, a student in a madrassa or religious school, joined the Taliban this year and was killed during an attack by American jets on a Taliban stronghold in Panjawi district, just to the west of Kandahar. 'We are proud of him,' Abdul Qadir, his older brother, told reporters.

Much of the limelight has been seized by Mullah Dadullah. After being declared dead by coalition forces, the 40-year-old fighter surfaced last month in a video broadcast by al-Jazeera in which he was seen firing an automatic weapon and dispatching orders to suicide bombers. Dadullah is known as ruthless even among the Taliban. Some video images show fighters decapitating six Afghans they accuse of spying.

Though Dadullah is believed to be behind much of the resistance in Helmand, where six British troops have been killed, a classified American intelligence briefing on narcotics reveals that the fierce resistance to the attempt by troops to establish a presence in the hills in the north of the province owes as much to a powerful desire to protect drugs industry profits as it does to religious fervour.

The report details the close links between drug traffickers and Taliban leaders and alleges high-level corruption in the Afghan government. It also reveals the existence of mobile heroin laboratories in Pakistan which process large quantities of Afghan opium. The drug is then smuggled to Iran, Turkey and finally to Europe along routes that pass through the valleys where British troops are currently fighting.

The British military still hope that reconstruction may win over 'hearts and minds' despite the fierce fighting. Brigadier Ed Butler, the commander of British forces in Afghanistan, has reportedly requested engineers to aid building projects. Yet the overall reconstruction context is not promising.

Two years ago, The Observer travelled to the village of Sangesar, the birthplace of the Taliban and at that time still under government control - or at least government-friendly warlords. When asked what they wanted, local people replied: 'Security and a well.' Last week Engineer Asadullah, the head of the Ministry for Rural Development (DRD) in Kandahar province, said that Sangesar district now has dozens of wells - 32 were completed last year. Yet Sangesar, like so many other districts locally, is now strongly Taliban. 'You could say it's too little too late,' said Asadullah bitterly. 'Most of the money that was pledged from the West for reconstruction has not been spent on projects but has gone on experts and rents in Kabul,' Asadullah said.

Observers say the British government is over-estimating the impact even a successful mission would have. 'The UK element is part of a broader military strategy that is part of a national political strategy that itself is heavily influenced by a regional situation,' said one Western diplomat in Kabul. 'Even if it works 100 per cent, it will not be the answer without a huge effort elsewhere.'

The result may be that Haqqani, Omar and Dadullah - 'the bad, the ugly and the uglier', as one intelligence officer put it - are likely to be at large for some time yet, along with as many Taliban as they can put in the field.

    Hunt for the Taliban trio intent on destruction, O, 9.7.2006, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1816361,00.html

Extra troops head for volatile region

Sunday July 9, 2006
The Observer
Mark Townsend and Ned Temko

Hundreds of extra troops will be sent to Afghanistan this month amid dramatic projections that more UK soldiers will be serving in Helmand province than in Iraq by next summer as the region becomes increasingly volatile.

Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, will confirm tomorrow that fresh service personnel, the majority from the Royal Engineers, will be deployed to southern Afghanistan from this week. Responding to requests from British army commanders in Afghanistan, Browne will also announce a significant increase in Chinook and Lynx helicopters to transfer troops across the mountainous terrain, along with more Apache gunships to provide air-cover as British forces cope with an unexpectedly obdurate Taliban resistance.

British forces currently have just 16 helicopters to control the Helmand region, four times the size of Wales, a number dismissed by commanders as inadequate.

In addition, an increase in armoured vehicles to provide protection from ambush by Taliban fighters is also expected following concerns over the vulnerability of the Snatch Land Rover used by the army in Afghanistan. Last month a Snatch in Afghanistan was attacked with a rocket-propelled grenade, leaving two British soldiers dead.

The extra influx of British troops, understood to be between 500 and 700, will bring the UK deployment in Afghanistan close to a ceiling of 5,700 after Browne last week admitted that there were already 5,000 service personnel in Afghanistan. Currently there are 7,200 service personnel in Iraq, although last week Tony Blair announced that 'significant' numbers of British troops could leave Iraq within 18 months. Britain is planning to hand responsibility for the Iraq province of Muthana to the Baghdad government this week, a move signalling the beginning of the end of the presence in UK troops in the country.

Military sources believe it is feasible that, during the next 12 months, the size of the British army in Afghanistan will outnumber troops in Iraq. The extra servicemen are expected to start arriving by the end of this week with the entire deployment arriving in Afghanistan within a month.

This week, members of the 3rd Battalion The Parachute Regiment battle group, will continue expanding their 'security bubble' across Helmand province. However there is concern over the precise size of the enemy they are expected to encounter. Military sources admit they have no idea how many Taliban are willing to fight UK troops.

Official Ministry of Defence estimates quantify the Taliban as possessing around 1,000 fighters in the south of Afghanistan. Latest figures from the United Nations in Afghanistan estimate, however, that there are up to 2,000 illegal armed groups with a collective strength of up to 100,000 members in the country.

    Extra troops head for volatile region, O, 9.7.2006, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1816335,00.html

Winning in Afghanistan means telling home truths

Sunday July 9, 2006
The Observer
Leader


The battle in Afghanistan is one that must not be lost. It is a fight to stop the country becoming a base for international terrorism, to show that democracy can be built in one of the most inhospitable countries in the world, to sustain the battered credibility of the entire international community. Victory, however, will not be easy and will require much clever diplomacy, military will, deft handling of Afghan politics and, above all, a far greater commitment than the West has so far shown.

Over the past few weeks, it has become evident that Nato has a real war on its hands. An alliance of Taliban militants, tribal militias, drug traffickers and bandits are fighting hard in Afghanistan's long ungoverned southern provinces. They man roadblocks, control territory, administer summary justice, intimidate villagers and are well-financed from the export of opium poppies.

Six British soldiers have now died in the last month in Helmand's Sangin Valley, where British troops are taking a lead role. They are well-briefed and well-trained but 3,330 soldiers are covering a region four times the size of Wales. Reinforcements are imperative.

Afghanistan is not Iraq. Westerners were welcomed into the country five years ago and the international coalition still has much support. In many parts of the country, significant improvements, especially in women's education, are evident. The north and west are by and large stable. Afghanistan's terrible economic and political isolation has ended. But the pace of reconstruction has been painfully slow. For many, grinding poverty remains a daily reality; a government that cannot guarantee order and justice or offer the prospect of better life will lose its popular base. President Hamid Karzai is under intense and growing pressure; disillusion is growing.

The war currently being fought in the south was avoidable. As in Iraq, a hard job has been made much harder. America and Europe left the southern provinces to stew for four years, hoping that the difficulties there would somehow just go away. And though the money pledged to reconstruction sounds considerable, one recent study found that international aid to Afghanistan equals £30 per person, as compared with £400 in Bosnia and £130 in Iraq.

Yet success is possible. It will need much more money, much more political attention, many more troops than anyone has previously admitted. Having a coalition that is truly international - not just composed of Americans and Europeans - will help. So, too, will addressing regional issues that currently destabilise Afghanistan. However, enough men on the ground backed by sufficient aid and an effective diplomatic effort, can achieve much. The Afghans do not want the Taliban back. They just want security and a measure of prosperity and dignity.

But the West's political leaders must be explicit about what is at stake and what is needed. They must win popular support at home. This will be particularly vital if the effort needs to be sustained, maybe over decades. Yet, only recently, the Americans halved their aid budget and cut troop deployment. It hardly indicates long-term serious intent.

In Britain, senior politicians must explain the situation truthfully and clearly, along with their projected solution. The Prime Minister made a start last week. And on Friday, Defence Secretary Des Browne spoke not just of the danger to British troops, but also of the desperate need. Both men will need to make such arguments repeatedly and to back them with action. Losing in Afghanistan would cost all of us very dear.

    Winning in Afghanistan means telling home truths, O, 9.7.2006, http://observer.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,,1816256,00.html

UK has boosted Taliban, admits defence chief

Minister says Afghan mission will be 'very, very difficult and dangerous'

Saturday July 8, 2006
Guardian
Patrick Wintour and Declan Walsh in Camp Bastion, Afghanistan

Des Browne, the defence secretary, conceded yesterday that the deployment of 3,300 British forces into the Taliban heartland of southern Helmand has "energised" the Taliban.

His sombre assessment came after a week in which a sixth British soldier was killed in the province, and as he prepares to announce next week the dispatch of reinforcements to the country, including extra air cover and engineers.

Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Tootal, the officer in charge of British troops in the region, also admitted the resistance was proving unexpectedly tough. He said: "If we were honest, we didn't expect it to be quite so intense. But at the same time, we have trained for it. "

In an interview with the Guardian, Mr Browne said: "It is certainly the case that the very act of deployment into the south has energised opposition, and the scale of that opposition and the nature of that opposition became apparent when we were deploying". But he insisted the attacks on British troops were foreseen, and the original package had been an impressive fighting force, including artillery, Apache helicopters and paratroopers.

In the first sign of a crack in the effective all-party consensus on the Afghan deployment, the former defence minister Doug Henderson called for British troops to be confined to barracks until the purpose of the mission was clarified.

He told GMTV: "I think until a political strategy has been worked out and agreed ... then in some senses there should be a withdrawal of British troops to barracks". He claimed troops did not know what they were doing or for how long.

But in an interview with the Guardian, Mr Browne warned: "Some opposition politicians cannot resist the temptation to exploit an alleged confusion for short-term gains, but they put at risk our troops on the ground. If the message of confusion, or suggestion that in fact we are there to do something entirely different as a primary purpose, is played back by the Taliban into local communities, and then they think the British troops are coming to starve them or attack them, then that is putting our soldiers at a level of unnecessary risk".

"The objective is clear. It is to let the writ of the Afghan government run in the south, against a background that these provinces have been largely lawless for three decades, leaving the Taliban, drug warlords and militia to act with impunity and brutalise local communities ...

"We have always explained this was going to be very, very difficult and dangerous, and we have also explained that the purpose was to create the security space for reconstruction of the country. People who criticise us have to ask themselves whether they want us to do it at all. There is overwhelming support internationally for this mission. We are doing this not just to secure Afghanistan ... but also to deny that space for al-Qaida to deliver violence back to our communities."

Colonel Tootal denied that troops had been deployed prematurely into remote areas. "We are taking the campaign into the backyard of the Taliban. We are having an effect just by being there. We show support for the government, guarantee security and will be hopefully be at the leading edge of development.

"We came here not wanting to take casualties, but were prepared for the fact that they were likely. That does not mean to say it's not tragic when you lose a soldier, but its part of the business we are in."

    UK has boosted Taliban, admits defence chief, G, 8.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1815736,00.html

Interview: Des Browne

'No one ever suggested it was going to be easy'

Saturday July 8, 2006
Guardian
Patrick Wintour

Des Browne, the defence secretary, is due to announce an expansion of the increasingly controversial British mission in southern Afghanistan to MPs early next week after completing negotiations with the Treasury, he told the Guardian.

Mr Browne insisted yesterday that the extra troops did not betray an original underestimate by the Ministry of Defence of likely Taliban resistance. He angrily dismissed politicians who said the mission's purpose was cloudy as "not just seeking short-term political gain, but putting troops on the ground at risk". Six British troops have been killed since the deployment, with reports that the force is insufficient and lacks air support. He said: "It was always the case that troop numbers were going to be reviewed and that we would not reach full operational capability until the end of last month. There is no one who has said to me the nature of the response is different to what we expected.

"The deployment was always going to inform us better than the pre-plan part of the assessment." He added that the fact that part of the request from the chief of the defence staff relates to engineers and enablers showed that reconstruction in some areas was going faster than envisaged. The aim was to create "inkspots" in which areas of security expanded, followed by trade and justice, making it possible to free the province from drugs and the Taliban. "The objective, supported by the international community, is to let the writ of the Afghan government run in the south and east, as it has increasingly in the north and west, against a background that these provinces have been largely lawless for the past 30 years, with the result that Taliban drug warlords and other militia elements have been able to act with impunity."

He claimed that many poppy fields were cultivated by "organised criminals on the basis of slave labour using a mixture of debts and threats. Many of these families do not want to grow opium."

Mr Browne acknowledged that it was difficult to win over villagers while seeking to persuade them to abandon such a profitable crop, but added: "Narcotics and Afghanistan do not just go together. The Helmand area used to be the breadbasket of Afghanistan. There was a time when a substantial number of the grapes we ate came from Afghanistan. The valley is hugely fertile and productive, so if we could get their markets to operate through better infrastructure, we start to change the economy. There is a fiction that Taliban reduced poppy harvest. It is not true: they simply stockpiled.

"It is eminently apparent that the Taliban are interlinked with this whole trade which is why they are fighting so viciously to protect the status quo."

He rejected a parallel between Afghanistan and Iraq, arguing there was no sign of sophisticated weaponry or rising-up of the local people. "Overwhelmingly people are welcoming us because we bring the prospect of security. That is why it is important we resist the attempts to drive us out of these communities once we have gone into them, we need to sustain it. If you lived in one of these villages and were subjected to this form of brutalisation, you adjust your lifestyle to live with it. They have to know it will be sustained.

"If there are suggestions of confusion, or ... that we are there primarily to do something entirely different, that is played back by the Taliban into their communities and people think these British soldiers are coming to starve them or attack them, then that is putting our soldiers at a level of risk that is unnecessary.

"This is very, very difficult and dangerous. And I understand every loss of life is an individual tragedy, but if we don't generate security, then the alternative is that all the work we have done for Afghanistan and for our own security will unravel. No one ever suggested it was going to be easy."

    'No one ever suggested it was going to be easy', G, 8.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1815799,00.html

Desert of death takes its toll on beleaguered troops

British forced to give up hearts and minds mission to stay alive in Afghan outpost

Saturday July 8, 2006
Guardian
Declan Walsh in Camp Bastion

Locals call it the "desert of death" - a stark landscape of burned flats, furnace-like heat and choking dust storms that sprawls across Helmand province. But the wry nickname for the neighbourhood around Camp Bastion, Britain's main military camp, has started to acquire a more sinister meaning.

At dawn on Thursday a Chinook helicopter returned to base carrying a mournful cargo - the remains of Private Damien Jackson, a cheery 19-year-old paratrooper who died in a Taliban firefight hours earlier. Commanders shut down the camp's satellite internet system to prevent word of the fatality leaking out before his parents were informed.

Still, the bad news gusted across the camp as fast as the scorching desert wind. Six British deaths in three weeks - the previous fatalities just four days earlier - brought home the perilous reality of "peacekeeping", Helmand style, to many British soldiers.

"This latest one has hit the lads quite hard," said Corporal Kelly Buckley, 27. "They know it's part of their job, what they signed up for. But nothing really prepares you for when it happens."

The bloodshed also sealed the formidable reputation of Sangin, where full-blooded battles between Taliban and British forces involving rockets, mortars, machine guns and warplanes, erupt almost every day. A battle-frazzled group flew out of the riverside town on Thursday. Many were exhausted after two weeks with little sleep and nightly gun battles, according to fellow soldiers.

"Yes, we are rough, tough soldiers, but this is one of our mates," said media officer Captain Darryl Ochse.

Helmand is stubbornly refusing to follow the script imagined by British ministers and generals when they agreed to send more than 3,000 troops last January.

Plans to woo villagers with development projects have been frozen because outside the two largest towns, Lashkar Gah and Goreshk, much of the province is under Taliban control. Paratroopers deployed to four northern corners - Sangin, Kajaki, Musa Qala and Naw Zad - to break the insurgents' stranglehold have been welcomed with the rattle of gunfire. At one stage this week the Taliban simultaneously attacked three of the small bases.

But the hostility also appears to come from local villagers. Patrolling soldiers are greeted with sullen looks, spy vehicles that shadow their vehicles, and passers-by who run their fingers across their throats in a slitting motion.

The attacks have not reached Camp Bastion, safe behind a long razor wire fence that cuts through the forbidding desert. Here the biggest battle is against the heat, which hovers around 50C (122fF). Even with air conditioning, the tents are swelteringly hot.

The mood among the paratroopers is mixed. After Iraq - where their battalion was posted to peaceful Maysan province - many were enthusiastic about coming to a theatre with the possibility of action. "The only casualties in Iraq were guys who injured themselves in the gym," said Cpl Buckley.

But Afghanistan has offered a more potent challenge than many wished. "That place is like hell on earth," said one paratrooper, speaking to fellow soldiers about to leave for Sangin. "Just expect the worst. There's no other way to describe it."

Others were more phlegmatic about the possibility of casualties. "You can't just go walking into the Taliban's back garden and not expect to get a punch," said Private Kyle Deerans, a 23-year-old South African sniper who recently fought a two-hour battle.

Afghan interpreters, one of whom was killed in a battle last weekend, are feeling the pressure. To avoid intimidation or murder, most disguise their faces in public. "I don't like it but I have to do it for the money," said Siddique, explaining that his $600 (£325) salary is 12 times greater than that of his civil servant brother.

Senior officers say they are delighted with the performance of their eight Apache attack helicopters. The Apaches, which cost £38m each and are seeing their first combat action in Afghanistan, have ended many Taliban offensives.

"I've been really impressed," said 3 Para's commander, Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Tootle.

But on the ground many soldiers complain about their putative allies, the Afghan police. Untrained and notoriously corrupt, the police flee in the face of battle, one officer said privately, and some are suspected of siding with the Taliban by night.

And some say they are confused about how to achieve their laudable mandate - winning hearts and minds - using deadly force. "I tell you one thing," one said. "We need to decide what our mission out here is - because we can't do hearts and minds and this [fighting]. It just won't work."

Rearguard action

June

11 Captain Jim Philippson, of 7 Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery, becomes first British soldier to die in Helmand province after his patrol is engaged in a firefight with Taliban forces. Two other soldiers seriously injured

24 US forces kill around 65 Taliban fighters in southern Afghanistan

27 Two British soldiers killed during an attack in the Sangin area

28 British deployment reaches full capacity at 3,300 troops. As British troops kill 12 Taliban fighters during an attack on their base in Musa Qala district, Major General Peter Wall, deputy chief of joint operations in Afghanistan, describes Taliban forces as "more virulent" than expected
 

July

1 Two British soldiers killed as their base in Sangin comes under attack. An Afghan interpreter is also killed and four British soldiers are wounded

4 US forces in Helmand kill around 35 Taliban fighters in attack on compound

5 British soldier killed in attack on foot patrol by Taliban forces in Sangin

6 US soldier killed and another injured as Taliban fighters attack convoy

    Desert of death takes its toll on beleaguered troops, G, 8.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1815792,00.html

Opinion - Ben Macintyre

Written again in British blood

There should be no surprise at Taleban resistance in Afghanistan. History is simply repeating itself

July 07, 2006
The Times
Ben Macintyre

ON JANUARY 13, 1842, a lookout on the walls of Jalalabad fort spotted a lone horseman, weaving towards the British outpost, on a dying horse. Part of the rider’s skull had been removed by an Afghan sword; his life had been saved only by the copy of Blackwood’s Magazine stuffed into his hat to stave off the intense cold, which had blunted the blow. This was Dr William Brydon, the sole survivor of a 16,000-strong force that had left Kabul a week earlier, only to be massacred in the mountain passes by rebellious Afghan tribesmen.

Dr Brydon’s dramatic escape was celebrated in Victorian print, verse and paint. Lady Elizabeth Butler painted a tableau of the injured surgeon staggering towards salvation. The retreat from Kabul was the single worst disaster to befall the British Empire up to that point, but the adept Victorian propaganda machine managed to extract a tale of heroism from the calamity.

According to oral tradition in Afghanistan, however, Dr Brydon was not a heroic survivor but a hostage to history: the tribesmen deliberately let him escape so that he might return to his own people and tell of the ferocity and bravery of the Afghan tribes. Battered Dr Brydon was spared as a warning to the British: leave Afghanistan, and never come back.

The British paid no attention, of course. Two more Anglo-Afghan wars followed. Now that we are effectively involved in a fourth, with 3,300 British troops fighting to hold down the province of Helmand, the ghost of Dr Brydon rides again.

On Wednesday Taleban fighters in Helmand killed another British soldier, the sixth to die there in the last three weeks. The response of the deputy camp commander of Camp Bastion was both sad and wise: “We thought we would play the ‘British not American’ card. But it hasn’t been so easy. There’s a lot of history here.”

There is indeed a lot of history in Afghanistan. In Britain we also have a lot of history, but we treat it differently. In Afghanistan, history is not simply a story of past events, but a living, continual experience, to be carefully tended, its meanings, lessons and resentments preserved and nurtured.

What happened in 1842 is as much a part of the present as the events of yesterday. In Pushtun tradition, no guest may be left unprotected, no offence left unpunished: the result is a web of feud and counter-feud, alliances and vendettas, embedded in time and tribal memory. That is the sense of history that Britain faces in Afghanistan: not a schoolbook past of dates and great men, but something far more organic and immediate. In many parts of Afghanistan, people still refer to the British as the “English tribes”. We are woven into Afghanistan’s tribal past. Playing the “British not American” card is an extraordinarily risky gambit.

In 1839 subduing Afghanistan looked like a walkover, just as it did in 2001. The “war” was won with ease and modern explosives (cannon), the ousted warlord emir took to the hills and we installed a ruler more to our taste. Victoria’s Government blandly announced that: “In restoring the union and prosperity of the Afghan people, British influence will be sedulously employed to further every measure of general benefit, to reconcile differences . . . and put an end to the distractions by which, for so many years, the welfare and happiness of the Afghans have been impaired.”

This did not happen. Under-manned, underfunded and with no clear mission, the British in Kabul blithely brought out their memsahibs, staged tea dances and played polo. Their military intelligence was hopeless. Outside Kabul, resentment and resistance built steadily, despite large disbursements of cash to tribal chiefs.

Four months before he was slaughtered with the rest of the British contingent, the government envoy in Kabul told London that the situation was “perfectly wonderful”. That remark has an uncomfortable echo of John Reid’s prediction, as Defence Secretary last year, that Britain could subdue the southern areas “without a shot fired”. Then, as now, the enemy could be identified only vaguely: a mixture of fanatics, tribesmen, bandits and mercenaries, united only by the desire to kill those in British uniforms.

Some of the same mistakes are being played out today. A force of 3,300, with only six Apaches and six Chinooks, seems wholly inadequate for the task of controlling an area four times the size of Wales. That task is itself not easy to discern: to subdue, to root out the Taleban, to stop poppy cultivation, but at the same time to win hearts and minds, to pacify, to make friends. One billion pounds in aid has been spent in Afghanistan but, as ever, an uncounted proportion has ended up in the pockets of the warlords, while the drug trade thrives.

British commanders seem genuinely surprised by the level of resistance they are facing in Helmand. The Ministry of Defence described the Taleban attacks as “unexpected”. Unexpected? This is a country that has been battling foreign forces and their new- fangled weapons, almost as a way of life, ever since Alexander the Great arrived with his elephants. The Soviets were still being “surprised” by the level of Afghan resistance when they finally pulled out in 1989, leaving 50,000 dead and a million dead Afghans.

The British never ceased to be baffled by the arithmetic of Afghanistan, where their highly trained troops with expensive equipment struggled to contain shadowy Afghan insurgents lurking behind rocks and armed only with cheap muskets (jezails). Rudyard Kipling caught the British incredulity perfectly:


A scrimmage in a border station —
A canter down some dark defile —
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail —

Afghanistan desperately desires and deserves peace, but even with more men, more arms, and a clear policy, Britain may not be able to impose it. For the Afghans have a grim, semi- secret weapon: a wounded history, in which Britain played a central part that we have all but forgotten, and they have not.

    Ben Macintyre is the author of Josiah the Great: The True Story of the Man Who Would Be King

    Written again in British blood, Ts, 7.7.2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1068-2259708,00.html

Frustration in the air as sixth British soldier dies

Thursday July 6, 2006
Guardian
Declan Walsh in Camp Bastion

Sunlight swilled through the shuddering helicopter as it skimmed the Helmand desert, banking and circling to avoid possible enemy fire. A platoon of Royal Engineers sat tensely inside, gripping their weapons as they prepared to touch down in Sangin, Afghanistan's most dangerous place.

But at the landing zone five miles ahead the battle was already raging. The Taliban had ambushed a squad of paratroopers sent to secure the landing area, apparently anticipating the helicopter's arrival. As the fighting intensified, the four aircraft - two Chinook troop carriers and two Apache escorts - orbited south of the town. The Guardian was on board as pilots debated with commanders in Camp Bastion 35 miles away. Should they attempt to land?

Moments later the helicopters turned tail and returned to base, where the Engineers exited, slugging bottles of hot water in the intense heat. One said he was "half-relieved, half disappointed". It was the fourth time their mission to reinforce the embattled base had been aborted.

But one soldier would not be returning home. Officers later confirmed that a paratrooper had been killed in the landing zone skirmish, Britain's sixth fatality in three weeks. "It is with deep regret that we confirm that during the incident a British soldier has been killed," said spokesman Capt Marcus Eves. His identity was withheld until next of kin were informed.

Yesterday's ambush came as the 3,150 British troop deployment to Helmand ended its first week at full capacity. It has been a baptism of fire. Commanders insist they were prepared for a fight but few anticipated one this intense.

Over the past fortnight, Sangin, a small district centre notorious for drug smuggling and tribal feuds, has become the focus of their perilous mission. A company of about 150 British paratroopers posted inside a police compound had been attacked six out of the past seven nights. Three soldiers have died, one yesterday and two last Saturday night.

In recent days the town has emptied of civilians as Taliban fighters flood in to take their place. They are proving a tenacious, daring and tactically sophisticated enemy. Every night rockets, machinegun fire and AK-47 rounds thud into walls of sandbags and pepper the police headquarters.

The insurgents perch on nearby rooftops and behind a clutch of trees about 300 metres north of the base, according to soldiers who have served there. "By day we are building our defences and by night we are engaging in contact [fighting]. It's not Disneyland up there," said 2nd Lt Kerry Bull, who left on Monday.

Both sides have a point to prove. The British want to show they can wrest control from the ruthless insurgents and clear the way for millions of pounds in development aid that will convince sceptical locals that president Hamid Karzai is worthy of their confidence. The Taliban are determined to prove the opposite, even if it means dying in droves. They seem increasingly bold. Whereas the first attacks took place under cover of darkness, yesterday they struck at three o'clock in the afternoon.

"It's an enemy that puts a lot of thought into what it is doing and is extremely persistent," said Lt Bull.

Dozens - maybe more - of fundamentalist fighters have died. Yet, the tolls are difficult to establish because the paratroops rarely leave their base. Under British rules of engagement, they only attack when fired upon - most of the time. "We try to be as restrained as we can, said Major Huw Williams, deputy commander at Camp Bastion. "We are not going out to attack, they are coming to us. We only strike if there is an isolated group that has been identified as the Taliban."

The fighters are a complex mix of armed farmers, paid recruits from other provinces and militiamen linked to drug smuggling, centred on a hardcore of Taliban.

Living conditions inside the Sangin riverside base are mentally and physically draining. There is no escape from temperatures that regularly touch 50C. Neither is there any respite from the threat of attack. Most soldiers try to snatch a few hours rest during the daytime, sleeping inside their flak jackets.

They share the base with a handful of Afghan police drawn from local militias who are untrained, without uniforms and of questionable allegiance. "They assist us in defending but let's say they're significantly less robust than our own forces," said Lt Bull.

Foreign Office officials have ambitious plans for splurging £38m in development aid across Helmand this year. But first, the military must contain the insurgency and overcome deep-rooted suspicions. "We thought we would play the 'British not American' card," said Major Williams. "But it hasn't been so easy. There's a lot of history here and a danger that people will see us like the Soviets."

In places like Sangin the plans have been put on ice. Three weeks ago, for example, officers worried about "hearts and minds" and made plans for a new bridge across the river that snakes behind their base. Now they are just focused on staying alive.

    Frustration in the air as sixth British soldier dies, G, 6.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1813676,00.html

5pm

British military deaths in Afghanistan

Wednesday July 5, 2006
Guardian Unlimited
David Fickling

Six British soldiers have been killed in Helmand's Sangin valley since UK forces took over security patrols in the southern Afghan province at the start of May:

· Unnamed soldier, of the 3rd Parachute Regiment Battle Group, killed on July 5 2006 while on patrol in Sangin valley;

· Lance Corporal Jabron Hashmi, 24, from Birmingham, and Corporal Peter Thorpe, 27, from Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria, both of the 3rd Parachute Regiment Battle Group, killed on July 1 2006 following an incident in Sangin valley;

· Captain David Patten, 38, of the Parachute Regiment, and Sergeant Paul Bartlett, 35, of the Royal Marines, killed on June 27 2006 during a gunfight with suspected Taliban insurgents while on a Special Boat Service operation in the Sangin valley;

· Captain Jim Philippson, 29, from St Albans, Hertfordshire, of the 7th Parachute Regiment Royal Horse Artillery, killed on June 11 2006 during a funfight with suspected Taliban insurgents in Sangin valley.

Seven other British soldiers have died in Afghanistan since the 2001 war.

    British military deaths in Afghanistan, G, 5.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1813352,00.html

Lance Corporal Jabron Hashmi: Born in Pakistan, raised in Birmingham, killed in Afghanistan

Published: 04 July 2006
The Independent
By Kim Sengupta and Arifa Akbar

Jabron Hashmi came to Britain at the age of 12 with his family from Pakistan. He was comfortable as a Muslim and a Briton, proud of his community and, after embarking on a career in the armed forces, keen to serve his country.

L/Cpl Hashmi, 24, was killed on Saturday in Helmand province, Afghanistan, the first British Muslim soldier to die in the "war on terror" in Iraq and Afghanistan. His death, along with 27-year-old Cpl Peter Thorpe, brought the number of British troops killed to five in three weeks, and added to concern over the Afghan mission.

But the life and death of L/Cpl Hashmi is also deeply symbolic at a time when many Muslims feel increasingly alienated by the foreign policy of Tony Blair's Government.

Yesterday, his older brother, Zeeshan, said Jabron was proud to have fought for his country and said he felt his ethnic background and Muslim identity was an advantage. "He personally felt he was in a unique position because of his background and that he could contribute by creating a better environment. He personally considered himself a Muslim first and foremost, and a British Pakistani and was proud of both identities."

Zeeshan said he hoped the memory of his brother as a British Muslim soldier fighting for his country would benefit community relations.

"Jabron, like me, thought that the majority of the problems in British society came down to the absence of understanding of each other's culture and my brother has, by example, proved the fact that in this difficult time we can bridge these gaps. Most of the problems can be solved and he was proud of the fact he joined the military and wanted to use his background in being a Muslim as well as being British to make the world a better place.''

In a statement released last night, L/Cpl Hashmi's family said it had been his lifelong dream to join the Army. "Jabron wanted to join the British Army as a young boy growing up in Pakistan. He was proud of his role as a serving soldier and looked forward to his deployment to Afghanistan.

"He felt privileged to represent the Army as a Muslim British Pakistani who wanted to use his background and position to contribute at a time where there exists a lack of understanding of cultures, ideologies and religious identities."

His brother added: "He was very courageous in committing himself. Unfortunately he ended up giving his life to achieve something positive. My brother and sisters are grateful to Allah to have had him for 24 years."

Jabron Hashmi was born in Peshawar, in the North-West Frontier province of Pakistan, but his father moved to Birmingham in November 1994 with three of his five children including Jabron, Zeeshan, now 27, and their sister Zoubia, now 29. His mother and two younger sisters, Absa and Tajalla, stayed in Pakistan until May 2001 when they were able to get British citizenship as well.

Zeeshan said his father, Ishtiaq Hussain Hashmi, and his mother, Imeiaz Bano Hashmi, had emigrated to Britain in hope of a better life and education for their children. His father had lived in Multan where he was a deeds writer in court but retired when he came to England.

"A major factor in all of us coming to England was so we could have a better education,'' he said.

L/Cpl Hashmi was attached to the Royal Signals and found himself in support of the 3 Para Battlegroup in the Sangin Valley, a particularly dangerous area at the moment with regular attacks from a resurgent Taliban. His commanding officer, Lt-Col Steve Vickery, of 14 Signal Regiment, said: "Enthusiastic, confident and immensely popular, he displayed all the qualities of a first-class soldier. His enthusiasm for the role he had been given was outstanding."

Details of the two men's death emerged as the Government was forced to make a Commons statement on Afghanistan to deny that its mission was "confused" or "unfocused". John Reid, the previous defence secretary, had earlier predicted that the three-year British mission could finish without a shot being fired in anger.

The Defence minister Tom Watson, standing in for the Defence Secretary, Des Browne, said the attacks had always been expected. "That was why we sent an air-mobile battle group, artillery and Apache attack helicopters. We wouldn't have deployed such a formidable package if we didn't think there was a real threat to the safety of our armed forces. We are only at the start of our three-year operation. There is still much to do."

Forces make-up

By Charlotte Reeve

The Government has faced increasing pressure in the past few years to increase the level of ethnic minorities represented in the British armed forces. At present there are 320 people who have declared themselves as Muslims serving in Britain's forces, out of a total strength of 185,000. Altogether there are about 10,000 personnel, approximately 5.5 per cent of the forces, who are non-Caucasian. This includes foreign nationals as well as Britons. The drive came after the discovery that for 20 years, from 1957, the British Army secretly restricted the number of recruits from ethnic minorities. There are approximately 3,000 Fijians estimated to be in Iraq, either for the British or Fijian armies, or on private work. At least 16 have been killed in the past year. The Prince of Wales placed himself in conflict with the MoD in 2001 when he put forward plans to raise a Sikh regiment within the British army. The Prince, the Colonel-in-Chief of a number of regiments, has always taken a keen interest in ethnic minority recruitment, but the MoD feel such a force would be immensely difficult to organise.

    Lance Corporal Jabron Hashmi: Born in Pakistan, raised in Birmingham, killed in Afghanistan, I, 4.7.2006, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article1159274.ece

Afghanistan

Troops 'desperately short of helicopters'

British General appeals to Nato for reinforcements as concern grows that British force is too small and inadequately equipped

July 04, 2006
The Times
By Michael Evans, Tim Albone in Kabul and Philip Webster

ONE of Britain’s top generals has been ordered to press Nato allies to send more helicopters to Afghanistan, where they are desperately needed by British and other troops engaged in fighting the Taleban.

Lieutenant-General John Reith, the Deputy Supreme Allied Commander for Europe, is asking allies to fulfil the pledges they made when the participating countries agreed to expand the force last year. The Nato helicopter force in Afghanistan has a third fewer helicopters than it was promised. “Nato governments were happy to agree with what was needed, but when the time came to offer helicopters we were faced with a big gap,” one Nato source told The Times.

Another said: “Nato members know that helicopters are a prize asset in Afghanistan, but they have just not been forthcoming.” Lieutenant-General David Richards, Commander of the Nato force in Afghanistan, and General Sir Mike Jackson, Chief of the General Staff, both said last week that they needed more helicopters. In a hostile country with few roads and vast distances, they are essential for transport, air cover and evacuations.

Yesterday the Government tried to play down public concerns about the safety of the 3,300 British troops in southern Afghanistan. In particular, there is unease that the force is too small and inadequately equipped to take on the Tal-eban, whose forces have recently killed five British soldiers in the province of Helmand.

Tom Watson, a junior defence minister, told the Commons that no formal request had yet been made by British commanders in Afghanistan to send more troops, helicopters or fixed wing aircraft.

“Commanders have not asked for extra infantry or air cover,” Mr Watson said. He said that the only requests were for support staff and engineering equipment.

But The Times has learnt that last week British military commanders and officials from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development had their first “stock-taking” meeting in Kabul, where they had a “long hard look” at Britain’s deployment plan.

Nicholas Kay, the FCO’s co-ordinator for southern Afghanistan, who headed the group, said yesterday: “We have all recognised helicopters could be more plentiful.” One explanation for the apparent contradiction in the government statements is that Britain has very few helicopters to spare. Britain has provided 16 helicopters for southern Afghanistan, made up of six Chinooks, four Lynxes and six Apache attack helicopters.

With the exception of one Chinook based permanently in the Falkland Islands, the rest of the RAF’s twin-rotor helicopters are based at Odiham, Hampshire. Eight of them, the newest version, the Mark 3, adapted for special forces’ operations, are still grounded because of concerns over their air worthiness since being bought from the United States for £259million.

Mr Watson was drafted in to make yesterday’s statement because Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, stayed in Scotland on constituency business, making the Ministry of Defence look flat-footed in the face of growing alarm at the worsening violence.

The debate reflected that alarm. Tobias Ellwood, a Conservative MP and former army officer who has just returned from Afghanistan, said that the protection of soldiers’ lives had to be made a priority. He called on the Government to send out armoured vehicles to give soldiers the sort of protection that they enjoy in Iraq.

“If we make the honourable decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, it is completely dishonourable of the Government to send them ill-equipped,” he said.

Liam Fox, the Shadow Defence Secretary, referred to the unease of British commanders in Afghanistan and said it was “absolutely vital” that British forces succeeded in Afghanistan. Failure would be a “catastrophic blow” to the cohesion of Nato and would “embolden our enemies,” he said.

US BOLSTERS AFGHAN FORCES

The US is giving $2 billion worth of military weapons and vehicles to equip Afghanistan’s national army

About 200 Humvees and 2,000 assault rifles, the first part of the donation, will arrive by the end of the year

A total of 2,500 Humvees and tens of thousands of M-16 assault rifles will be coming in the future. About 20,000 sets of bulletproof helmets and flak jackets will also be given

The $2 billion funding also covers the building of a national military command center for Afghanistan and is in addition to more than $2 billion already committed by the US for military equipment and facilities to Afghanistan

    Troops 'desperately short of helicopters', Ts, 4.7.2006, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2254749,00.html

2.30pm

No 10 promises Afghanistan reinforcements

Monday July 3, 2006
Press Association
Guardian Unlimited

Downing Street promised today that reinforcements would be sent to aid British troops in southern Afghanistan if military commanders decided they were needed following the death of two more British soldiers over the weekend.

The assurance came from a No 10 spokesman after Britain's commander in the flashpoint Helmand province confirmed today that he had put in a request for extra help.

The defence secretary, Des Browne, will make an emergency Commons statement on the situation at 3.30pm this afternoon.

Brigadier Ed Butler insisted British forces were "well-prepared and well-equipped" to deal with the insurgency after two more soldiers were killed in attacks at the weekend, bringing the death toll last week to five.

But he admitted that force levels were "under review" and that he had asked the Ministry of Defence to send out more equipment in response to "the changing circumstances".

Tony Blair's official spokesman said military leaders would guide the prime minister in any decision to send in extra troops.

He said: "If extra resources are needed, extra resources will be found, but that's first and foremost a matter for military assessment and for military commanders to decide, not for politicians to decide."

The spokesman insisted the cabinet had always known this was a "tough mission" when it approved sending the UK force to Helmand province.

He also stressed the nature of the mission had not changed.

"What's important above all is to remember what the mission is there to achieve. The mission is there to help the democratically elected government of Afghanistan to extend its control into the southern area of the country and to stop the Taliban wrecking that process of building infrastructure, building local economies and building local government," he said.

The spokesman said Mr Blair was taking the review process "step by step" and ruled out a Commons statement. This was before the announcement that Mr Browne would address MPs, following pressure from the opposition for him to do so.

The shadow defence secretary, Liam Fox, had called on the government to make an urgent statement, submitting a question to the Commons Speaker, Michael Martin, that required Mr Browne to come before the Commons this afternoon.

Brig Butler said today that the Taliban was beginning to "suffer" after being defeated in most engagements.

"We knew that it was going to be a tough fight. The Afghan has fighting in his blood," he told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme. "But we are well-trained, well-prepared and well-equipped. In the majority of engagements we have had with the Taliban, we have overwhelmingly defeated him and he is starting to suffer from that attrition."

Asked whether he wanted more troops, Brig Butler responded: "As with any commander, I would always like to have more resources so I can do things faster and quicker.

"But I'm pragmatic about what we have got. In terms of force levels, we constantly keep those under review and I am confident that if I asked for more - and there are some requests which are in staff in process - London would listen to those requests."

Brig Butler confirmed he had made requests for more equipment.

"I have excellent air support from both the RAF Harriers and the attack helicopters, which are both proving to be battle winners. I have put in requests, which are being considered back in London as we speak, to take account of the changing circumstances."

    No 10 promises Afghanistan reinforcements, G, 3.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1811764,00.html

Britain plans extra troops to fight Taliban

Review of tactics as soldiers killed

Monday July 3, 2006
Guardian
Richard Norton-Taylor

Hundreds of extra combat troops will be deployed to southern Afghanistan under plans being drawn up by the Ministry of Defence as part of a review of tactics by British and Nato commanders.

The contingency proposals have become necessary because of the unexpected strength of Taliban fighters who have drawn British troops into a series of clashes. Over the weekend, two more British soldiers were killed in fierce fighting in the province of Helmand, and yesterday British commanders made it clear they want better equipment for their troops, including helicopters and armoured vehicles.

Defence officials said yesterday there were no plans to increase the total number of British combat troops from the 3,300 announced in the Commons earlier this year. However, defence sources said extra infantry could replace 800 engineers who have finished building Camp Bastion, the British base near Lashkar Gah.

Any increase of combat troops is likely to provoke renewed concern about the mission in Afghanistan, and how its terms of reference have changed from reconstruction to fighting. Yesterday Mike Gapes, Labour chairman of the Commons foreign affairs committee, demanded an urgent statement from the government about the objectives British troops were being asked to achieve.

"I certainly feel that our forces there need proper protection and equipment and we need to have a clear explanation of what we are likely to be in over the long term here. There are signs that the tactics that have brought such devastation to Iraq are being replicated in Afghanistan," the committee warned in a report published yesterday.

Two soldiers from the 3 Para battlegroup were killed, and four injured, on Saturday in a firefight at their forward base in the Sangin valley, northeast of Helmand proviince. An Afghan interpreter was also killed.

Military spokesman Captain Drew Gibson said the base was attacked with small arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades. Lieutenant General David Richards, commander of all Nato troops in Afghanistan, has expressed concern in the past week about the size and make-up of his forces there. Yesterday he said: "No general in history has ever had as many resources as he would like. Bottom line, I am content with what I have and I have the resources required to carry out the mission."

However, Brigadier Ed Butler, commander of British forces in southern Afghanistan, warned there would be further casualties in the battle against Taliban forces. He told the BBC that the British presence there was "a very cohesive force and mission."

There were signs yesterday that ministers are becoming increasingly concerned about growing doubts among the public over Britain's mission in Afghanistan. "We can only do things with more public support," a senior defence source said.

However, British commanders say the government's stated mission for British troops - to rebuild the country - cannot be achieved without adequate security and that means fighting insurgents and Taliban fighters, many of whom are being allowed freely to come over the border from Pakistan.

There is concern, too, that the US is dictating tactics. British troops are under US command until next month when they will be part of a separate Nato-led force. The latest British deaths came amid a big anti-Taliban campaign in southern Afghanistan, Operation Mountain Thrust, involving more than 10,000 Afghan and coalition soldiers in the largest military offensive since the Taliban regime fell in late 2001.

    Britain plans extra troops to fight Taliban, G, 3.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1811371,00.html

Generals think again in Taliban onslaught

· 'Spent force' has now killed five British soldiers
· Insurgents' suicidal tactics in face of west's firepower

Monday July 3, 2006
Guardian
Declan Walsh in Islamabad


Until recently, western generals in Afghanistan spoke frequently of Taliban "remnants", suggesting the scrappy remains of a vanquished army. The former Taliban minister Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil chimed in, writing off the militants as a "spent force".

Today such talk has evaporated. A series of firefights in the past six months has refashioned the militants' image as a force that is motivated, organised, armed and unafraid to die. More than 3,300 British troops have barely arrived in Helmand and already five have been killed. Two soldiers died on Saturday in Sangin, a rebel-infested district, after their camp was strafed with rockets and gunfire.

The emboldened tactics seem near-suicidal. Taliban fighters account for most of the 1,100 Afghan combat deaths this year, many crushed by 500lb bombs or strafed by warplanes that can fire 3,900 bullets a minute.

The Taliban regularly lose 20 men for every one Afghan or western casualty, according to unconfirmed coalition death tolls. Yet they keep on coming. In an effort to flush the militants from their mountain and desert hideouts, American commanders recently launched Operation Mountain Thrust, a four-province sweep involving more than 10,000 soldiers. They predict a bloody summer but eventual victory. "I am confident the situation will improve by the end of this year," Lieutenant General Karl Eikenberry told Pentagon reporters last week. But Mountain Thrust is mixed news for British officers, who had vowed to differentiate themselves from the Americans through a softer approach to win hearts and minds. Now they find themselves swept along in an aggressive operation that may crush the insurgency but could also inflame a new generation of anti-foreign fighters.

The Taliban have also taken their campaign to Kandahar, a city the fundamentalists consider their spiritual capital. Iraq-style roadside bombings have killed Canadian soldiers and driven most westerners off the streets. Taliban officials stroll openly through the market and the handful of remaining western aid workers rarely venture beyond the city limits in their bullet-proof vehicles. Local staff of international organisations are intimidated by "night letters" - threatening tracts pinned to their doors under cover of darkness. "It's the worst I've seen it here," said one western official with four years' experience in Kandahar. "We see people growing their beards longer and moving their families back to Pakistan."

Faced with the withering firepower of western warplanes, the Taliban have little chance of controlling urban centres. But in the countryside they are making progress towards wider goals - destabilisation of the south and erosion of President Hamid Karzai's fragile authority.

Frightened and frustrated southerners blame Mr Karzai for woeful leadership over the past four years. Scandals about Karzai-appointed police chiefs and governors with links to drugs, corruption and paedophilia have turned some villagers towards the Taliban, which has set up some Islamic courts. The militants have curried favour with poppy farmers by offering to protect their lucrative crops from eradication. Many communities have abandoned hopes of outside help - the UN operates in just six out of 50 districts, says regional director Talatbek Masadykov.

The militants shelter and resupply in neighbouring Pakistan, where the role of local authorities remains a vexed question. Some diplomats say Pakistani intelligence secretly colludes with the Taliban; others believe President Pervez Musharraf's assurances of doing his best. But it is the role of Iran's Shia-dominated government, previously a bitter rival of the Sunni-led Taliban, that is quietly coming under increased scrutiny. A senior Afghan defence ministry official and two western officials said they had "credible reports" of Iranian agents offering support to insurgents in Helmand and Nimroz. But most funding comes from wealthy Pakistani and Middle Eastern businessmen, analysts and diplomats believe. Western officials in Kandahar say the insurgency is not a simple black and white struggle of fundamentalists versus foreigners. Even the name "Taliban" may be misleading.

"It is a convenient brand name for a very complex situation," said one western official. "This is about narcotics, corruption, tribal tensions, warlordism, illegal armed groups, Arabs, Iranians, Chechens - and all of these factors are interrelated. You never know who you are dealing with. You probably have some guys working for good and bad at the same time."

    Generals think again in Taliban onslaught, G, 3.7.2006,http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1811441,00.html

We're in a war now, says Hague

Monday July 3, 2006
Guardian
Vikram Dodd

The news that two more British soldiers had been killed in Afghanistan yesterday brought new anxiety about the mission in the former Taliban stronghold.

William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, said yesterday that British troops were now engaged in a war. "They are, and with very difficult objectives because they have to win the hearts and minds of the local population while at the same time removing their main source of income," he said in a reference to the drugs trade. He suggested that the United Nations should take a stronger role and that the Afghan people needed to see progress was being made. "Unless it can be shown to the people in Afghanistan that there's an alternative future to growing opium and being with the Taliban ... we are not going to succeed."

Mr Hague said the Tories would continue to raise concerns about the mission, including whether the troops had enough military hardware such as helicopters.

Patrick Mercer, the Conservative security spokesman, appeared to go further and attacked planning for the British deployment to the region. Mr Mercer, a former infantry officer, said the government had not committed enough combat forces to the mission: "When I was instructing at the staff college, if a student had presented me with this plan for Afghanistan, I would have failed him, and failed him comprehensively."

Remarks from the government yesterday were limited to sympathy for the deceased and their families. The defence secretary, Des Browne, said: "My thoughts are with the family and friends of those killed in the attack against UK troops in Afghanistan. Our troops are in Afghanistan to help the Afghans rebuild their country. That means facing down the Taliban, who will go to any lengths to oppose progress. In doing this job we lost two of our troops yesterday and I am greatly saddened by this."

The Stop The War Coalition repeated its call for troops to be withdrawn from Afghanistan as well as Iraq.

    We're in a war now, says Hague, G, 3.7.2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1811446,00.html