Stuck in Afghanistan

Whilst I never accepted that there was a valid case for the war in Iraq, I have always been firmly of the opinion that Afghanistan, under the Taliban, was a rogue state that promoted and exported terrorism and as a result, our military actions there were worthy of support. I was also deeply aware that many of those in the Taliban were not Afghans and they Taliban were themselves referred to as "Arabs" due to the number of them who were from other countries and enjoying something of a free ride running around with guns on Toyota Landcruisers oppressing local Afghans.

So given my support, it is sickening to think that so many of our troops seem to now have the tag of being out there to support a corrupt leader who fiddled his way through an election which was in many way no more legitimate that the recent Iranian election.

The problem now is that the election fiasco and Hamid Karzai's willingness to legitimise and almost encourage corruption in gives succour not only to those who support terrorists, but also to those too spineless in Europe and the UK to realise that confronting terrorism in Afghanistan keeps it off the streets of the UK.

The only winner of the election in Afghanistan is terrorism, and we appear to be stuck there.

Another self inclicted wound - What do headlines like this do for Labour's core vote ?

Is there any way to undermine Labour's core vote than to read headlines saying that the government is going to court to reduce the compensation payout to soldiers severely injured in Afghanistan ?

I can't think of anything which could make the government look less caring and more hypocritical given the current climate and the perceived penny pinching in Afghanistan.

It is symptomatic of this government though (as I wrote yesterday) that they are providing stories for The Daily Mail and The Express which write themselves (that is if the Express can avoid another Madeleine McCann story or link it in some way to Princess Diana.

Whilst there might be reasons for appealing against compensation payouts, irrespective of the mess the government are in politically, is it not the worst time possible from a military strategists point of view to be pursuing a court case in order to claim back what is only around £100,000 ? We have in recent years had something of a recruitment crisis in our armed forces and whilst there are reports that recruitment is easing due to the recessions (something the US forces have relied upon for year whilst recruiting in the poorest parts of the US), it sends a poor message to anyone thinking of joining the army at this moment.

But going back to Labour's core vote, those who were less than enthused about voting Labour last week in Norwich. What does it say to them about Labour's priorities. I always think that the ex local authority housed working class Labour voter are some of the most patriotic voters who take a deep pride n their country. This is why so many of them so happily switched to UKIP in last week's Norwich North by-election. These people might vote Lib Dem where there is a long established Lib Dem presence, they won't switch to the Tories out of a long held antipathy to that party, but UKIP provides a place to put their cross with no feelings of regret.

When Alistair Darling said yesterday that he is still optimistic of a Labour win next year, it really makes you question him on his economic forecasts too.

Labour Minister admits to shortage of helicopters in Afghanistan

The public know it, opposition MPs have raised it and the army are losing soldiers because of it, and finally a government minister has had the gits to admit we do have a shortage of helicopters in Afghanistan.

The sad thing is that it takes a minister who is standing down to finally have the backbone to admit something that is so patently obvious to everyone else.

On the same theme (of sorts) isn't it time, given the shortage of Chinooks in Afghanistan that the RAF considered suspending its Chinook display team and instead sent them and their crews in Afghanistan ?

Troop increase paper of the cracks in NATO

The decision by a handful of NATO member to increase troop numbers in Afghanistan for a "limited period" falls well short of the necessary increase that is needed in troop numbers and serves to highlight that most of our so called European allies are as spineless as ever.

The false idea prevalent amongst our European allies that letting Afghanistan return to being a training camp for terrorists, and that "smaller" European countries who opt out of supporting NATO (the likes of Belgium) is hopelessly naive. The sad fact is though that there are many people in the country too who think that we can simply withdraw from Afghanistan and that the deaths will stop. True, the death of soldiers might stop, but we could soon replace this in far higher numbers withe death on the streets of the UK.

Whilst NATO leaders hail the agreement to send a few hundred soldiers for a few weeks to Afghanistan it does beg the question as to what difference this will make when they go home after their short six week stint.

So why was Binyam Mohamed in Afghanistan ?

Getting away from the fact that released detainee Binyam Mohammad appears to have been tortured by US officials, something which any true believer in democracy is totally opposed to, how many others feel less safe because he is in the country tonight ?

As I understand it he came to the UK from Ethiopia, but despite having no links with Pakistan he travelled there and then on to Taliban controlled Afghanistan, strangely leaving Afghanistan when the Taliban were overthrown and was then captured by the US when trying to use a false passport to travel back to the UK.

Why does someone visit Afghanistan ? Why would he use a false passport ? Why was Afghanistan the sort of place he wanted to be in when Taliban controlled but not the sort of place to be when run by Afghans ?

Do these actions concern you ? They would me, but then we let him back in to the UK.

I don't have the answers, just lots of questions.

How many times can the Government ignore warnings about equipment problems in Iraq and Afghanistan ?

The resignation of the head of UK special forces ,Major Sebastian Morley, over the inadequate equipment UK forces are having to use in Afghanistan and Iraq will, no doubt, be ignored and brushed under the carpet by the government in the same way as concerns about the armour on Scimitar armoured vehicles, fire warnings on Nimrods, dangers of explosions on Hercules aircraft and the lack of body armour for troops have in the past. Now Major Morley highlight the fact that snatch Land Rovers are useless in theatres of war, yet the government seem to be oblivious to it.

The problem is when the head of the SAS is so disgusted with what his troops are having to use, then we really have got problems.

The Ministry of Defense describes Snatch Land Rovers as protected patrol vehicles for use in "low-threat areas." If the MOD believe that Iraq and Afghanistan are low risk areas, then I suggest we move some junior ministers to these areas to be driven about in Land Rovers for a while. I'm sure they'd take action then !

The end of NATO ?

There is an interesting article in the LA Times which highlights the impotence and failings of NATO and points out that aside from Britain, the US and Canada, great swathes of NATO's members are lettin NATO fail in its mission in Afghanistan.

The article points out that ;

"U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates warns that NATO risks becoming a "two-tier" alliance, one tier consisting of members willing to carry their fair share of the load, the second tier consisting of free riders. His warning comes too late. The two-tier arrangement already exists, with the great majority of member states content to occupy the lower tier. "

It seems to me that NATO is more akin to a club for states wanting to either assume a place at the top table fo discussion, but who bring nothing to the party or countries who want to assert their independence from Russia.

"NATO is no longer a fighting organization. Keeping the Americans in, the Germans down and the Russians out no longer demands the sort of exertion that was required half a century ago. If the alliance retains any value, it is as an institution for consolidating European integration and prosperity. No amount of browbeating by the United States is going to change that.

The Bush administration is kidding itself if it expects Europeans to save the day in Afghanistan. To think of NATO as a great alliance makes about as much sense as thinking of Pittsburgh as the Steel City or of Detroit as the car capital of the world. It's sheer nostalgia.

It's time to jettison the capital letters: NATO has become nato."

In 1982 the USA had an important choice to make when the Falklands war started. They could have stood to one side and potnetially allowed a NATO ally to fail (Britain), but realising that NATO and the US itself would also be the loser, the US backed Britain. IN many ways now the NATO members are at a cross roads, with a choice about whether Afghanistan is allowed to fall in to the hands of foreign terrorists, after all, the Taliban are referred to as Arabs or Pakistani's by Afghans, they are not Afghans), and whether NATO is going to have any credibility in the future.

Sadly too many NATO members are there for the free lunches at conferences.g

I know Brummie accents are annoying, but the death penalty is too harsh a punishment

I hope Iain Dale is proposing the death penalty to traitors fighting for the Taliban and not for anyone with brummmie accents. Although, either of them (or both) might be a vote winner (only joking !)

Do we want a return to the terrorist training camps in Afghanistan ?

I am always concerned when I read people stating that we should withdraw from Afghanistan or when I read about out spineless European allies refusing to send troops to help in Afghanistan because I fear that people don't see the consequences of such actions.

Afghanistan was the most repressive appalling state prior to 2001. Do we remember just how awaful the Taliban were, and they were, in the main, not even Afghans. The Taliban and their al-qua'eda allies were largely from Pakistan or the middle east. Afghans referred to the Taliban as "arabs", which is a term to mean people from west of Iran. Yet we still have people who seem to think that a return to the picture of them destroying the Buddhist statues at Bamiyan , the hangings in the football stadium in Kabul or even the banning of kite flying and music are a good thing ?

The reason highlighted most often for out failure to "win" in Afghanistan is simply a lack of troops and money. The main reason for the lack of troops is a complete lack of will by our so called Nato and mainly European allies to send troops to parts of Afghanistan where they might be shot at. yet do these states realise how many potnetial deaths there might be in Europe should Afghanistan against become a home to terrorist training camps on the scale of 2001 ?

I did not support the war in Iraq because despite the repression there, Iraq was not a sponsor of international terrorism. But Afghanistan was the biggest single factor in the growth of terrorism around the world and we should never forget that.

Sarkozy shows that France is becoming more mature

Throughout my lifetime France has been synonymous with talking the talk, but rarely walking the walk. When it comes to paying for the return of hostages, offering safe haven to Islamists (the Ayatollah), refusing to allow its airspace to be used by other NATO countries or simply being intransigent and anti American at all times, France has shown a degree of immaturity in its dealings with the US and the UK.

Now don't get me wrong, I am no lover of all the things the US government does. but in the case of Iraq and the war in 2003, France had a chance to play a role in halting the war, getting it delayed or even making it clearer that the war was about regime change, not about WMD's. However, at the time the French intransigence allowed the US to paint France as being the bad guys and allowed the US to pursue its course of action without a second resolution by seeking to claim that France would not co-operate. however, things appear to be changing under Sarkozy.

For the first time, the French have grasped that whilst Iraq is a disaster, it is Afghanistan where the future fight against terrorism must be fought. he recently told the US congress that French troops would remain there for as long as is needed and on a visit to Kabul yesterday he seemed to hint that France might allow its troops to be used in the more volatile areas where further NATO troops were urgently required.

I had my doubts about Sarkozy, but he seems to lead with a smile on his face, without the usual smugness of a French leader and without the pompous self righteousness of the past.

Welcome France to the 21st Century. It is just a shame you are seven years late.

Did that really happen ?

Watching Simon Cowell's "X Factor" tonight on ITV, I was slightly bemused and confused by a soldier appearing on the show.

As he sang, his father said "If he doesn't get through, he's off to Afghanistan"

Did I hear that right ? A soldier can get time off from fighting (I thought that is what the army did) to take part in a singing competition ?

As it is, he did get through to X Factor "boot camp", which means he is not off to Afghanistan. Don't get me wrong, I have great admiration for the British Army and this soldier had a nice voice, but I just can't help but wonder if he might be of more use to the country in Afghanistan than singing for Simon Cowell and Sharon Osborne.

The Americans kill more British soldiers

Yet another case of US forces bombing their so called allies, this time in Afghanistan, results in three British soldiers being killed and two seriously injured.

Thanks goodness the Americans are on our side. They are on our side, aren't they ?

Another sign of UK forces overstretch ?

The sad death of a UK contractor in Afghanistan highlights other issues aside from the security situation in Afghanistan, most notably why is the defence of UK government staff in the hands of a private security firm and not being organised by the UK military ?

Contractors in places like Iraq and Afghanistan are often accused of working at the very edges of the law, indeed often going beyond it in their possession and use of weapons, and the UK ought to be leading by example here.

I might be putting two and two together and getting 13, but isn't this a sign of UK forces yet again being overstretched to the extent we pay mercenaries to defend UK government staff abroad ?

Utter rubbish from Tam Dalyell about former Labour MP Ron Brown

Firebrand former Labour MP Ron Brown has died after a long illness.

Like other former Labour Scottish MP's, he had something of a penchant for visiting dictatorships (North Korea and Libya), although he drew the line at praising Saddam Hussein.

Whilst he may have had some deeply held views, particularly left wing extremist ones, I am afraid as a politician I could not abide the way he acted or the company he kept. But for Tam Dalyell to laud him as some sort of prophet about Afghanistan, is ludicrous.

To put it in to context, when Afghanistan was a Soviet run left wing dictatorship, Ron Brown visited there, and as Tam Dalyell points out

"But the fact is that Ron Brown was one of the few people to have gone to Afghanistan before the crisis blew up and warned us that it was extremely unwise to back the mujahideen against the Russians."

Firstly, Ron Brown, it appears, would not pass up the chance to visit any communist dictator.

Secondly, what "crisis" is he on about. Afghanistan was in a state of crisis from the moment the Soviet Union invaded in 1979, and for some time before that too. Ron Brown did not visit Afghanistan before the "crisis".

And lastly, are we really to be shocked or surprised that Ron Brown advised people not to oppose a communist government given his own political views ?

He was hardly a prophet. Just a supporter of communism.

Consistent as ever : Our NATO European allies let us down again

Another 1400 UK troops are going to Afghanistan, and more requests for help from our European NATO allies to support operations against the Taliban in Afghanistan go unanswered.

France and Germany refuse to let their troops in Afghanistan operate in any dangerous areas whilst requests for more helicopter support have fallen on deaf ears. Some nations feel they can sit tight and that terrorism will pass them by. On a day when three French people died at the hands of Saudi terrorists, it is clear that this is no policy at all.

I said it in September HERE, and I'll say it again, with a few notable exceptions, our European "allies" are spineless.

Did the delay by Geoff Hoon cost a life ?

The MOD today claimed that the delay in Geoff Hoon ordering the correct amount of body armour for UK troops must be seen in relation to the ongoing diplomatic action at the time in late 2002, early 2003. They claim that ordering body armour might have been seen to "pre-judge" the situation and could have been provocative.

This contradicts the actual evidence that showed that Geoff Hoon simply wrote "more information needed" on the request from the army for more body armour, thus causing a delay of some eight weeks to the body armour order. If Geoff Hoon has just agreed this request immediately, Sgt Steven Roberts would almost certainly be alive today.

It's a shocking indictment of this government again that they send troops to Afghanistan without proper helicopter support, they send ammunition that does not work properly and keeps jamming in machine guns to Afghanistan and they send troops to war in Iraq without body armour.