After weeks of Downing Street dismissing the need to deploy more troops to help
the already over-stretched British army in southern
Afghanistan, Tony Blair government last month made a 180 degrees turn as Defence
Secretary Des Brown announced July 10 that an extra 900 troops and equipment
will be sent to the war-torn in Helmand province where 3,600 British troops
found themselves fighting a much tougher and larger Taliban forces than what
their Political masters in London have lead them to believe.
Following an urgent request from commanders on the ground, the first troops were
rushed in mid July from Cyprus within days. The new troops will be a mix of
engineers, Royal Marines, infantry battalions and headquarters staff boosting
the number of British force to 4,500 by October.
The week that preceded the announcement saw the death of six British troopers in
clashes with the Taliban who supposed to have been routed in the US lead war in
2001.
At least 20 coalition troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the start of
Operation Mountain Thrust, a campaign aimed at driving
resurgent Taliban forces from mountain and desert hideouts. Mr. Blair, it
seemed, was in denial that his Foreign policy and that of
US President George Bush has lead to the critical situation in Southern
Afghanistan.
Observers believe that Iraqi campaign has diverted attention from developments
in Afghanistan, which, they argue, is the main threat to western liberal values
and democracy.
Intelligence agencies have warned for months that the re-emergence of the
Taliban/al-Qaeda was imminent, but political decision makers took little notice
until a number of coalition troops killed (six British soldiers in as many
weeks) became a public debate.
While trying desperately to put a brave spin on the daily torrent of bad
news from Iraq (insurgents setting up road blocks at will, dragging passengers
out of buses for sectarian and ethnic kill; Iraqi security forces locked in
fierce battles trying, unsuccessfully, to disarm several militia who took over,
once stable, Basra; random sectarian attacks adding to Qaeda daily suicide
bombing terror, while Baghdad morgue figures counted over 6000 bodies died
violently in the first five months of 2006 ), and admitting to earlier mistakes
in the war, Blair and Bush project is coming unstuck in Afghanistan, where NATO
and Afghani troops are increasingly coming under attacks and, suicide bombing.
To enlist more troops from more countries and increase its forces from 9,000 to
18,000, NATO billed its replacement of American forces in southern Afghanistan
as a major stabilisation and reconstruction effort.
Instead, the 6000 NATO forces, ( the main bulk are 3,600 British troops deployed
in Helmand province and the rest are Canadian, Dutch and Romanian) are fighting
their way out of an unprecedented Taliban offensive that has claimed 430 lives
between May 17 and July 11.
With the spring thaw, the Taliban and a couple of associated insurgent groups
re-emerged from their sanctuaries either side of the border with Pakistan far
stronger than anyone had predicted. The Taliban, who were routed four and half
years ago, enabling the Bush administration to claim early ' victory' in phase
one of the Third World War, (i.e. war on terror) have regrouped proving to be
more than just than just a headache. Their increasing counter attacks are
getting bolder, killing Afghan aid workers; car and suicide bombings are
becoming depressingly familiar as part of Taliban/al-Qaeda assassination
campaign against religious and community leaders. Schools and other public
services centres are shut by the dozen fearing attacks by the Taliban.
Mullah Dadullah, the Taliban's operational commander, claims to control 20
districts of southern Afghanistan, the Taliban's heartland, with 12,000
fighters. In reality his men cannot hold any ground against coalition troops,
and coalition officials claim Dadullah's fighters were less than 6,000. While
the British 16th Air-Assault Brigade, which spear-heads the attack against
Taliban can deliver a powerful punch, they are very short of equipment,
according to Tory MP Tobias Ellwood, a former soldier who has just returned from
the area, they only have 12 helicopters to cover an area twice the size of
Wales.
With the coalition only have 6000 troops, but once they clean an area and move
to the next, the Taliban return. The result is the mullahs control much of the
four southern provinces much of the time.
Across the south, the Taliban dish out Islamic justice in sharia [strict Islamic
penal code] courts. A public execution was held in May by the extremists in the
central province of Daikundi. Farther south, in Helmand, the Taliban man
roadblocks in the Sangin valley. The Americans have tried to make Zabul into a
paragon of an orderly southern province, picking competent locals to run it,
sending 1,000 soldiers to the capital, Qalat, and spending $17m on development
projects. Once you leave the centre of towns, the Taliban operate with impunity.
'' The courts are corrupt, so the people go to the Taliban for justice. They
control most of Zabul,'' says Mullah Abdul Salam Rocketi (who earned his
nickname from his proficiency with rocket-propelled grenades), a former Taliban
commander who got elected to parliament. Like most southern MPs, Mr. Rocketi,
dares not visit his constituency, for fear of assassination.
Public in urban areas became less welcoming to America. A traffic accident 29
May caused by a runway American military truck killing at least five people,
quickly developed into one of the ugliest riots since the fall of Taliban.
Firing on the hostile crowed in 'self defence', nervous US troops killed another
seven. The trouble spread to the rest of the capital Kabul, as protesters
attacked Afghan police and offices of international organisations.
Karzai condemned the American soldiers for using their guns, especially that a
U.S. airstrike few days earlier killed some 34 Afghan civilians.
The incident has damaged relations between international forces, particularly
the Americans, and Afghans, but most still see their presence as an unpleasant
necessity, several US press editorials and columnists concluded warning that
without such commitment, the Taliban message will find wider appeal among
ordinary Afghani.
British and American press editorials urge politicians to increase troops and
make a longer more evident commitment to alleviate Afghans' economic and
lifestyle misery. As much as possible, the aid should be portrayed as obtained
and distributed by the beleaguered government of President Karzai, many advised.
But it is more than just numbers of troops needed. Afghani diplomats and
military commanders have repeatedly asked: `What
is the point of deploying troops who don't fight?'
General James Jones, commander of US and NATO forces in Europe, asked. He is
frustrated with unwillingness of European allies to get their hands dirty in
Afghanistan. European Nato participants impose 71 caveats on their troops'
operation , leading Gen Jones to call the caveats ` Nato operational cancer.'
Mr. Ellwood condemned the lack of commitment by allies saying Ireland
contribution of seven soldiers and Four from Austria are laughable. They should
contribute more, he said in Westminster last month.
Taliban leaders in their hideouts, still follow news and understand debates
going on in European parliaments opposing sending moor troops, a senior State
Department official told the Middle East last month; thus they increase attacks
with maximum publicity. They count on TV camera broadcasting a few bloody
casualties, letting body bags arrive in European capitals, and then seeing the
protests against deployment escalate. This will help anti-war parliamentarians
in the west to argue for abandoning Blair-Bush project in Afghanistan .
Countries such as Italy, Spain, Holland, Germany and others enlisted, have no
stomach for fighting a full-scale guerrilla war, especially with the type of
fanatical suicide bombing against which there is no known effective defence.
Their left wing anti-American dominated media and parliaments restricted their
troops mandate to reconstruction or training, not combat. Internal political
calculations by politicians of public opinion reaction to events could result in
unpredictable decision affecting their commitment to NATO. Spain pulled out of
the coalition in Iraq after the bombing of Madrid trains, while newly elected
Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi considering recalling troops from Iraq.
The Taliban are also testing American resolve. NATO's deployment is part of
Washington's agenda to reduce its forces in Afghanistan. It is pulling 3,000
troops out this summer and possibly more later. Many Afghans see this as the
start of a full American withdrawal. At a time public is loosing confidence in
America's both commitment and management of the situation.
In addition to the Taliban lead insurgency going through its bloodiest phase
since their 2001 routing, promises of Western funding and
reconstruction were never fulfilled, an Afghan diplomat said last month. Having
seen barely any change in their lives Pashtuns, the largest of Afghanistan's
ethnic groups, have reverted to cultivating opium as a means to survive, putting
British troops in Helmand, whose task is to eradicate opium crops and trade, in
direct clash with the people they supposed to help. British commander Lt Colonel
Charlie Naggs told the BBC, the Taliban increased their attack because it is a
poppy harvest season. He also admitted that defeating the enemy will take years.
Western intelligence sources warn that warlords, nominated as governors and
police chiefs in the south by Kabul, indulged in drugs trafficking and abuses of
the worst kind and went unchallenged for too long by the international community
and Kabul.
The latest intelligence assessment warned that Afghanistan could slide into
civil war, as it did after the Soviet pull-out in 1989, which
resulted in Taliban defeating secular factions and taking control of 90% of the
country by 1998, inviting al-Qaeda and the world's most notorious Islamic
jihadists to set bases there. Unless NATO troops keep old factional commanders
quiet, a senior western diplomat in Kabul warned, civil war will break out in a
matter of months.
A western intelligence report seen by the ME, suggested the May 29 unrest was
exploited by an ethnic Tajik faction opposed to president Karzai, hoping to
destabilise a government they accuse of tilting too much toward Pashtuns. The
accident occurred in a neighbourhood close to the residence of Yunus Qanuni, a
powerful Tajik and runner-up to Karzai in the presidential election. Protesters
held posters of Qanuni's old boss, late guerrilla commander Ahmad Shah Masood
who was assassinated by al-Qaeda terrorists posing as journalists in his
headquarters days before 9/11 attack.
The Afghani government is furious that America and Britain failed to respond to
their own intelligence agencies reporting that Taliban and al-Qaeda have found
sanctuary in neighbouring Pakistan. Pakistan's military regime is reportedly
turning a blind eye to
Taliban activities, while Pakistani opposition accuse corrupt elements within
Pakistan security and intelligence apparatuses of helping al-Qaeda and Taliban.
But what can Nato do now when the Americans could do nothing during their high
profile presence in past five years? An Afghani official asked.
Same officials question Bush and Blair claims of their success in ''
micro-managing '' the war on terror. They see the war expanding and fear the
region will face increasing chaos. Afghanistan has become the Lebanon of central
west Asia, an Afghani official said, turning into a battle ground for regional
powers. India and Pakistan are settling old scores on its ground.
Pakistan, in turn, accuses Kabul of facilitating the movement of India's spies
and agents to Pakistan's western borders; and turning a blind eye to Indian
consulates in Kandahar and Jalalabad funding an insurgency in Baluchistan
province.
Interestingly, western diplomats in Islamabad agree, saying Pakistan uses
Taliban presence , to pressurise Karzai, Blair and Bush to accede to its
demands.
While Blair-Bush campaign has so far failed to intercept the movement of
al-Qaeda funds in the direction of Taliban, its operational leader Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri,
has helped reorganise the Taliban, create unlimited sources of funding from the
sale of Afghan-grown opium and forged a new alliance linking the Taliban with
extremist groups in Pakistan, Central Asia, the Caucasus and Iraq.
The cooperation, intelligence reports say, included Al-Qaeda facilitating a
major exchange of fighters and training between the Taliban and jihadists in
Iraq.
As Iran is confronting America and Britain over its nuclear ambitions, it is
investing part of its massive windfall oil income buying support among
disaffected and disillusioned Afghan warlords. A future retaliatory insurance
policy if the US or Israel attack its nuclear programme, by unleashing those
allies on American and Nato forces in Western Afghanistan, opening a new front
separate from the Taliban lead insurgency in the south.
The Taliban/ al-Qaeda defiance and attacks have emboldened others in the region
to stand up to America. Uzbekistan kicked out American forces
last year from its military base, the largest in Central Asia, used as a
launch-pad for its 2001 Afghanistan campaign. This encouraged tiny Kyrgyzstan to
demand a 100 fold increase in rent for the base on its soil used by American
forces. All part, it seems, of a long term Chinese and Russian strategy is to
ensure that America and NATO surrender all their remaining toeholds in Central
Asia.
The centre of global jihadism and the threat it poses to the Middle East and the
rest of the world still lies in Central Asia region, not in
Iraq, intelligence experts say. Regardless, there has been hardly any Nato or
western military presence for five years three of the four
provinces in southern Afghanistan that have become today's Taliban heartland,
and al-Qaeda and the battlefield for the revival of their 1990s alliance.
Regional diplomats criticise the failure of the west to come up with funding to
back Karzai's sensible offer of an amnesty to the Taliban in 2003, which
would have deprived Mullah Mohammed Omar and Dr al-Zawahiri from hundreds of fit
young fighting recruits who could have been on the government side by now.
Unless Blair-Bush lead NATO alliance to adopt a serious, aggressive and
sustained commitment by its member countries, including sending more troops
willing to fight, there is a danger that the war on terror could be lost where
it started five years ago: Afghanistan.