I feel we've needed a separate thread on this topic for a long time.

----------------------------------------------------------------



NATO Summit Updates

quote:

On Afghanistan, Bush did win a commitment of more troops to Afghanistan's most dangerous areas, although his national security adviser acknowledged more needs to be done.

"We are not at the level of what at this point in time our commanders looking forward say we need and that's why we said more to do," Stephen Hadley said at the briefing with Rice.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said France will send as many as 1,000 troops to the eastern part of the country, freeing up some U.S. forces to move to the south. Canada had threatened to pull its soldiers out of the volatile south, the front line in the fight against a resurgent Taliban and al-Qaida forces, unless it received 1,000 reinforcements from another ally.

Looks like the new French President actually "gets it", and won't be hiding behind a white flag like his predecessor Jacques-itch.

Taliban's Sanctuary Bases in Pakistan Must Be Eliminated

Rand Corporation | Jun 11, 2008

LINK

If Taliban sanctuary bases in Pakistan are not eliminated, the United States and its NATO allies will face crippling long-term consequences in their effort to stabilize and rebuild Afghanistan, according to a RAND Corporation study issued today.

The study, funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, finds that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate and Frontier Corps have failed to root out Afghan insurgent groups based in Pakistan and, in some cases, individuaos from these Pakistani organizations have provided direct assistance to such groups as the Taliban and Haqqani network.

“Every successful insurgency in Afghanistan since 1979 enjoyed safe haven in neighboring countries, and the current insurgency is no different,” said report author Seth Jones, a senior political scientist at RAND. “Right now, the Taliban and other groups are getting help from individuaos within Pakistan's government, and until that ends, the region's long-term security is in jeopardy.”

The study, “Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan,” is the latest in a series examining insurgency and counterinsurgency, and details how the United States should improve its capabilities for future conflicts. The capstone report of the series, “War by Other Means,” was released in February by RAND, a non-profit research organization.

“Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan” examines the beginning of the country's current insurgency, the most important factors that influenced counterinsurgency efforts and the capabilities the United States should use to wage an effective counterinsurgency campaign.

It finds that while the insurgency has arisen primarily because of governance challenges in Afghanistan, sanctuary and outside support are critical. In addition to the Taliban, Jones says other insurgency groups finding refuge in Pakistan include the Haqqani network, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's radical Islamic Hezb-i-Islami organization, al Qaeda and a number of local tribes and sub-tribes.

The study finds that these insurgent groups find refuge in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas, North West Frontier Province, and Balochistan Province. They regularly ship weapons, ammunition and supplies into Afghanistan from Pakistan, and a number of suicide bombers have come from Afghan refugee camps based in Pakistan.

“Solving this problem will require a difficult diplomatic feat: convincing Pakistan's government to undermine the sanctuary on its soil,” Jones said.

Eliminating the Pakistan sanctuary bases is one of the study's three key recommendations. It also emphasizes the need for the United States and its allies to help build the Afghan security forces, particularly the police, and to improve the quality of local governments, especially in Afghanistan's rural regions.

The report finds that Afghanistan's national police force is in disarray, incompetent and almost uniformly corrupt, and its members are often loyal to local commanders at the expense of the country's central government.

“Corruption within the government is detrimental to the counterinsurgency campaign because it cuts away at the population's support for its leaders,” Jones said.

Jones, who has made repeated trips to regional police training centers in Afghanistan, said coalition forces failed to establish a police force in the early stages of the war. Such a force is critical because its members would know the local population and terrain better than U.S. forces, and would be more familiar with social and cultural conditions.

A strong U.S. role in local security matters could spark a strong nationalist or religious backlash, the study finds.

“For the United States to succeed in Afghanistan, it must focus its resources on improving the capacity of indigenous government and its security forces to wage counterinsurgency warfare,” Jones said.

Coalition forces also must help build and improve the quality of local governments, especially in rural areas of Afghanistan. The study finds that a poor security environment has kept development and reconstruction efforts from reaching outlying areas far from larger populated regions.

Moreover, provincial reconstruction teams are too geared toward military personnel at the expense of civilian reconstruction and development experts.

“U.S. strategy has repeatedly ignored or underestimated the importance of locals in counterinsurgency operations,” Jones said. “The counterinsurgency battle will be won or lost in the local communities of rural Afghanistan, not in urban centers such as Kabul. This means the counterinsurgency must find ways to reach these communities despite security concerns.”

Forces Readying to Push Back Taliban

June 17, 2008
Deutsche Presse-Agentur

KANDAHAR - NATO-led Canadian forces were preparing an offensive on Taliban-held villages in Kandahar province, while insurgents were planting mines and destroying bridges to stop it, officials said June 17.

NATO aircraft dropped leaflets on several villages in Arghanadab district, some 20 kilometers north of Kandahar city, on Monday night warning the villagers to leave the region before the operation to push out the militants, Haji Gholam Farooq, a tribal leader in the district, said.

Up to 500 Taliban fighters captured several villages in the district without resistance on the night of June 15, posing a threat to Kandahar city, and a strategic town that links the capital to southern and western provinces of the country.

Farooq said thousands of local residents were already fleeing the district towards the city.

"The villagers are very worried about the possible airstrikes by the NATO forces," Farooq said.

Thousands of Afghan army forces were rallying near the district to push back the militants out of the area, Defence Ministry spokesman General Zahir Azimi said.

"We are sending fresh troops from Kabul by planes to the area," Azimi said. "The number of army forces in the area reaches to thousands of soldiers."

Afghan and NATO forces also erected several checkpoints around the district, checking every passing vehicle in the region.

NATO General Carlos Branco confirmed that international forces were redeploying in the area.

Police in Kandahar said the insurgents were planting mines and destroying bridges to slow the government offensive.

Two militants were killed June 17 when the mine they were trying to plant on a roadside exploded prematurely, said Mohammad Noor, a police official.

Taliban spokesman Qari Mohammad Yousif Ahmadi said rebel fighters were ready to face the Afghan and NATO forces in the area.

"We see Afghan and Canadian forces flying over Kandahar city in a very panicky way, now they are trying to save Kandahar city," he told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa by phone from an undisclosed location.

"We are well-prepared for any operation. We have your guns and rockets on our shoulders and are waiting for them."

The latest development followed a rebel attack on Kandahar city's main prison June 13 that freed about 900 inmates, including 400 Taliban militants.

Ahmadi said that the Taliban prisoners had already joined the fighting groups in the region and "some of them are in Arghandab district."

Afghan, NATO troops kill 36 Taliban near Kandahar

LINK

ARGHANDAB, Afghanistan - Afghan and Canadian forces moved into villages outside Kandahar on Wednesday to root out Taliban militants, killing at least 36 insurgents, while an explosion elsewhere killed four British soldiers, officials said.

Troops in Arghandab district just outside of Kandahar, southern Afghanistan's largest city, exchanged fire with militants during "a few minor contacts," NATO spokesman Mark Laity said.

The Afghan Defense Ministry said more than 20 Taliban fighters had been killed in Tabin, a village in Arghandab, while 16 fighters were killed in Khohak, also in Arghandab. Two Afghan soldiers also were killed, the ministry said in a statement. The 12 other militants killed were in nearby Maiwand district, the ministry said.

A top provincial official in Kandahar, Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, said hundreds of families had fled to the city, and that some of the villages had already been cleared of Taliban.

Helicopters and jets patrolled the skies and smoke rose from fields after exchanges of fire, an Associated Press reporter at the scene said. A helicopter landed in a field near the fighting and appeared to evacuate a casualty, he said. Large Canadian military vehicles and Afghan police trucks were moving through the region.

Afghanistan's Ministry of Defense on Tuesday said between 300 and 400 militant fighters were operating in Arghandab — a lush region of pomegranate and grape fields that lies 10 miles northwest of Kandahar city, the Taliban's spiritual home.

Canadian military officials who patrolled through Arghandab over the last day reported "no obvious signs" of insurgent activity. But that didn't mean there were no Taliban there, a NATO news release said. Pentagon officials said reports of hundreds of Taliban in Arghandab were being overstated.

However, Karzai, the director of the provincial council, said more than 1,500 families had sought refuge in Kandahar out of fear, many staying with relatives. He said at least 100 Afghan troops were engaged in the fighting.

Germany Plans to Send 1,000 More Troops to Afghanistan

(Source: Deutsche Welle German radio; issued June 24, 2008)

The German government plans to send 1,000 additional troops to Afghanistan by the end of this year, Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung announced on Tuesday, June 24. The issue is likely to be a political hot potato.

The increase would bring German soldiers serving with NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) to 4,500. The extra soldiers are needed to fulfill Germany's mission in the country and for their own security, Jung said.

"The increase is necessary to give us more flexibility to respond to challenges," Jung said.

The German defense minister said he would be informing the German parliament, which has to sign off on the plans, later in the day. The Bundestag is set to vote on a mandate for the German Bundeswehr mission in Afghanistan this autumn.

As of July 1, Germany will take over responsibility for the rapid deployment forces in order to protect ISAF operations in northern Afghanistan. The German military would also like to increase involvement in training of Afghan soldiers.

Approval Sure To Spark Debate

Any increase in troop numbers would require the approval of Germany's lower house of parliament, the Bundestag. Under the current parliamentary mandate, Germany is allowed to send no more than 3,500 troops to Afghanistan. That limit has been reached in recent months and Jung wants it increased when the mandate comes up for renewal in October.

He also wants the new mandate to run until December 2009, a move which would prevent the issue from being debated during the middle of next fall's election campaign.

While the left-right ruling coalition has approved past troop increases, the issue remains sensitive in Germany. Some opposition parties are critical of the mission and opinion polls show a large proportion of the German population against increased involvement.

Allies Keep Up Pressure

NATO partners, particularly the United States, have pressured Germany to send more troops to Afghanistan. They also want more German soldiers sent to the dangerous south to help fight a resurgent Taliban. The parliamentary mandate does not allow German soldiers to take part in combat missions.

Jung said German troops would remain focused on the north. But the new mandate would also send 40 communications specialists in the south, a mission that Germany would share with Denmark.

There are about 60,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan, most of them part of the NATO-led ISAF force. Yet despite the heavy NATO involvement, some 6,000 people were killed in 2007, the deadliest year since the Taliban was forced from power in 2001.

German NATO General Egon Ramms this week said he urgently needs an additional 5,000 to 6,000 troops in Afghanistan.

-ends-

NATO general calls for 6,000 more troops in Afghanistan

Agence France-Presse | Jun 23, 2008
LINK

BERLIN: A German NATO general said the alliance needed up to 6,000 more soldiers to stabilise strife-wracked Afghanistan, in an interview broadcast Sunday.

Egon Ramms told German public radio station Deutschlandfunk that the situation would only worsen later this year when US forces withdraw some of their troops from Afghanistan if NATO did not send more troops.

"We are talking about a total of 5,000, 6,000 soldiers," he said.

"But we need these soldiers now and very soon as we need to hold onto certain areas because we need to create trust among the Afghan population and because we want to hand over this responsibility in 2010, 2011 or 2012 to the Afghan forces when they are prepared.

"In other words, the forces that I am now lacking could delay the withdrawal of NATO and ISAF," the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force.

Ramms said NATO also needed to speed up the training of Afghan police forces, adding that it had fallen two-and-a-half years behind the training of the Afghan army.

He also called for more contact between ISAF and Afghan civilians, saying it would undermine the power of insurgents.

"The key to success in fighting the Taliban is with the local population," he said, adding that in regions where ISAF enjoyed the trust of residents, it was better informed about planned attacks.

Despite the presence of about 70,000 international troops from some 40 countries mainly operating under NATO, an insurgency aimed at toppling the US-backed government in Kabul has gained pace in the past two years.

German Defence Minister Franz Josef Jung said Saturday he favours bolstering Germany's military presence in Afghanistan -- currently fixed at 3,500 troops -- by another 1,000 soldiers.

Parliament is to decide later this year on prolonging Germany's participation in the NATO force and reshaping its mission amid repeated NATO calls for it to bolster its presence in the country.

Reports Detail Progress in Afghan Security, National Forces

(Source: U.S. Department of Defense; issued June 27, 2008)

WASHINGTON --- A pair of Defense Department reports published today on Afghanistan describe progress with regard to the country’s security and national forces.

The studies, which analyze results of Operation Enduring Freedom through March, were mandated by Congress and represent the first installment of what are slated to be semi-annual progress updates.

The Report on Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan depicts a “fragile” security environment in much of the country. It concludes, however, that coalition forces’ counterinsurgency approach has demonstrated how a hybrid of military and nonmilitary resources can create stability and connect Afghan citizens to their government.

Underscoring the fragility of situation in Afghanistan and its tendency for rapid change is the fact that some of the report’s assertions about security success -- based on information available several months ago and earlier -- no longer are as solid as once believed.

For instance, the report highlights Khowst province in eastern Afghanistan as an example of a once-troubled region transformed by counterinsurgency operations.

“Khowst was once considered ungovernable and one of the most dangerous provinces in Afghanistan,” the report states. “Today, tangible improvements in security, governance, reconstruction, and development are being made.”

But Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates yesterday expressed concern that attacks in NATO's Regional Command East section of Afghanistan, which includes Khowst province, rose 40 percent from January to May.

Gates, in a news conference yesterday, attributed the rise in violence to militants using Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province as a staging ground for launching attacks in Afghanistan. But the report does not identify threats emanating from the Pakistan-Afghanistan border region -- which Gates called a recent phenomenon -- as a primary security challenge.

Challenges outlined in the report include the narcotics trade and the Taliban. These militants regrouped after their fall from power and have coalesced into a resilient insurgency, according to the report, which notes a rise in insurgent violence in 2007. More that 6,500 people died as a result of suicide attacks, roadside bombs and combat-related violence, it said.

Despite coalition success in combating them, Taliban operatives are likely to maintain or even increase the scope and pace of terrorist attacks and bombings in 2008, the report concludes.

“The Taliban will challenge the control of the Afghan government in rural areas, especially in the south and east,” it states. “The Taliban will also probably attempt to increase its presence in the west and north.”

The security report credits a plus-up of U.S. forces over the spring with reinforcing Afghan and international forces’ momentum, and for enabling the Afghan national security forces to grow quickly – from 70,000 to 80,000 army personnel by 2010.

Meanwhile, the report states, the deployment of a U.S. Marine Corps Marine Air Ground Task Force is bolstering the ability of NATO’s International Security Assistance Forces to maneuver troops in Regional Command South.

The other security and stability highlights outlined in the report are:

-- The Afghan National Army had taken the lead in more than 30 significant operations at the time of the report, and the force has demonstrated increasing competence, effectiveness and professionalism.

-- Since 2001, Afghanistan has made significant progress rebuilding its national political institutions. Afghans wrote and passed a new constitution in 2004, 8.1 million people voted in the nation’s first presidential election, and 6.4 million voters helped reestablish the National Assembly after 32 years without a legislature.

-- The gross domestic product, per capita income and foreign direct investment all are up since 2001. Afghanistan’s domestic revenues have grown considerably, and international reserves have nearly doubled since 2004.

Key points from the report titled, “United States Plan for Sustaining the Afghanistan National Security Forces” include:

-- The capabilities of the Afghan National Army are improving steadily, with a long-term army posture that also may include a more robust army air corps capability and a larger force.

-- The Afghan National Police force is making steady progress, but its capabilities still lag behind those of the national army. The current police force has not been sufficiently reformed or developed to a level at which it can adequately perform its security and policing mission; however, coalition governments are working to improve the police capabilities, with a target force size of 82,000 personnel.

-- An independent, capable army and police are critical to counterinsurgency effort, thus it is crucial that coalition partners dedicate the necessary resources and personnel to ensure that the mission to develop the Afghan national security forces is a success.

-ends-

U.S., Afghan Forces Focus on Pakistani Border

By Army Staff Sgt. Michael J. Carden
American Forces Press Service
LINK

KABUL, Afghanistan, July 10, 2008 – The U.S. military’s senior officer and the commander of international forces in Afghanistan met with reporters here today to discuss the situation and threats coalition and Afghan forces are facing.

Insurgent activities and coalition casualties have increased throughout the past months, while June was the deadliest month for coalition troops in nearly seven years of conflict here. Twenty-eight servicemembers were killed.

This is due partly to “coalition and Afghan troops taking the fight to the insurgency” and the rising number of insurgents crossing the border from Pakistan into Afghanistan, said Army Gen. David D. McKiernan, commander of the International Security Assistance Force here.

The lack of ability for the new Pakistani government to successfully monitor their borders have allowed for militant and insurgent groups to find safe havens in the tribal areas there, McKiernan explained.

“I have consistently said that we are seeing an increasing level of violence in Afghanistan, especially in the east and the south,” he said. “I attribute part of that to the fact that there are sanctuary areas to militant groups that are across the [Pakistan] boarder in Fata and the North-West Frontier Province.”

Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, added, “The new Pakistan government has a very difficult challenge and continues to work its way through, but has to enforce making sure foreign fighters don’t exist out there and make sure the insurgents don’t have the freedom of movement across the border.”

U.S. military officials recognize the need for more troops in Afghanistan, but remain reluctant to deploy them because of commitments currently in Iraq, officials said. Officials also realize the need to increase “dwell time” after deployments for servicemembers, said Mullen, who was in Iraq the previous three days visiting troops and meeting with senior leaders there.

“I just came from Iraq, and the conditions continue to improve there,” he said. “I am still very hopeful that those conditions will continue so we’ll have forces available to do other things. The next priority would be to move forces into Afghanistan.”

In early June, President Bush vowed to send additional forces to Afghanistan in 2009. However, there are no specifics about when that may take place, Mullen said.

“Exactly when the increase may occur will be based on decisions made about Iraq in the future,” he added. “From the national perspective, we’re given direction from the president, and it’s the decision of the leadership in [the U.S.] that we prioritize accordingly.”

Mullen noted that the recent addition of two U.S. Marine battalions in Afghanistan -- one training Afghan soldiers and police and the other parti****ting in heavy fighting in the southern regions -- have made significant progress in the fight against terrorism.

However, he said he remains concerned about the number of additional forces from the Northern Atlantic Treaty Organization that member countries have committed to Afghanistan throughout the past year, he said.

“We need that extra capability,” he said. “[NATO] needs to do all they can do, as well.”

Mullen reiterated his concerns about foreign fighters crossing the Pakistani border and their safe havens in the country’s tribal areas. Insurgents flow much more freely into Afghanistan than they did a year ago, he said.

He said the Pakistani government and military have to put more pressure on their border in order for Afghanistan’s government to develop and succeed.

“We all recognize that the challenges here continue to be significant,” the admiral said. “The violence is up, but at the same time, coalition and Afghan forces are aggressively engaging the enemy, and we’ve had significant successes.”

NATO: Militants Sparked Border Clash

July 12, 2008
Associated Press

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - A recent border clash that wounded several Pakistani and Afghan security personnel was sparked by insurgents in Afghanistan who fired at targets in both countries, apparently to stoke cross-border tensions, NATO said Saturday.

The alliance said it responded to the Thursday evening assault with artillery and a bomb, and had verified that its rounds had struck insurgent positions inside Afghanistan.

But the incident has prompted Pakistan to protest to NATO. On Saturday, Pakistan's army spokesman stuck to earlier statements implying that foreign or Afghan forces fired mortar rounds he said wounded eight Pakistani security forces and two civilians.

The clash came amid already high tensions between the neighboring nations, whose border areas have often been the scene of skirmishes between security forces as well as militants.

It also occurred about a month after a high-profile border incident in which Pakistan said 11 of its soldiers died when U.S. aircraft bombed their post.

A NATO official said the alliance suspects insurgents deliberately tried to spark tension by aiming at targets on both sides of the long, poorly demarcated border.

"Because it was very close to the border, we verified that the origins of the fire was within Afghanistan," NATO spokesman Mark Laity said. "And once we got that, we fired on the two points of origin, and aircraft also were called in and put one bomb on target.

"Our assessment is that this was an attempt to create a border incident."

According to Pakistan's army, six mortar rounds appeared to have targeted a military post in Angore Adda in South Waziristan on Thursday, seriously wounding six Pakistani troops, lightly wounding two other troops and also injuring two civilians in a nearby market.

Pakistani forces immediately returned fire. The country also lodged a "strong protest" with NATO's International Security Assistance Force, Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said. Details of the complaint were not immediately available.

Asked Saturday to respond to NATO's statement that militants were responsible for the incident and that NATO had not struck Pakistani positions, Abbas insisted that Pakistan still had its suspicions.

"It was a precision engagement which destroyed the post," Abbas said. "It doesn't make sense that anybody else was fighting."

NATO said it had reports that four Afghan border police were also wounded in the incident.

Afghan and Pakistani troops have skirmished repeatedly along the border over the years, despite urgings from U.S. officials that they improve their coordination.

Foreign forces also have been caught in the confusion.

In the June incident that killed the Pakistani troops in the Mohmand area, U.S. officials said coalition aircraft dropped bombs during a clash with militants. Though they expressed regret over the incident, they have said the action was justified.

The border areas are considered havens for Taliban and al-Qaida-linked militants who often travel between the two countries. Pakistan has been accused of not doing enough to crack down on militants operating on its side.

© Copyright 2008 Associated Pre

Next 18 Months Critical in Afghanistan, McChrystal Says

(Source: U.S Department of Defense; issued June 19, 2009)

WASHINGTON --- The next 18 months will be crucial in Afghanistan, the new commander of NATO and U.S. forces there said today.

“I think that the next 18 months are probably a period in which this effort will be decided,” Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal told Tom Bowman in a National Public Radio interview. “I don't think it will be over. But I think that not only the American people, I think the Afghan people are looking and deciding which way this will go.”

McChrystal took command of coalition and U.S. efforts in Afghanistan on June 15. His job is to carry out the new strategy for the region.

The general said the conflict should not be viewed solely as a military struggle. It is not a question of whether the United States is winning, he said, but whether the Afghan people are winning. The Afghan government is the ultimate deciding factor, and while the government is not winning the war on extremists, “I don't say they’re losing,” McChrystal said.

“That’s an old axiom in counterinsurgency: If you’re not winning, you’re losing,” he said. “And the danger there is that that is true. So we see it as very, very important, probably over about the next 12 to 24 months, that we absolutely get a trend where we are clearly winning.”

McChrystal has spent much of his career in special operations, hunting down and killing or capturing terrorists. “What I learned is that much of the terrorism we fought years ago was very small groups that were finite. They were fanatical, and they could be attacked that way,” he said. “Nowadays, we have to fight the cause of terrorism, because terror is a tactic. You win by taking away from the enemy the one thing the insurgent absolutely has to have, and that’s access to the population.”

Hunting terrorists still has a place in the war in Afghanistan, McChrystal said, but the overall effort requires a mix of aggression and rebuilding. “I very much lean toward the importance of the building side,” he said.

The population needs to be safe so they can build an economy, build good governance and develop an infrastructure, the general explained. That gives the people something they want to continue and something they want to protect, so “the insurgent, then, becomes a troublemaker,” he said.

“The opposite could be perceived, even with good intentions,” he continued. “If we are just hunting Taliban, we can be perceived as coming into areas and being someone who upsets the neighborhood. But we do need to be able to keep a pressure on the enemy as we push them away. So there's always a balance.”


-ends-

New Rules of Engagement for German Troops in Afghanistan

(Source: Deutsche Welle German radio; issued July 5, 2009)

According to media reports, the German government has dropped some of the conditions of engagement under which its soldiers in Afghanistan had been bound. Bundeswehr troops will in future be able to engage in combat much earlier than has been the case.German News Magazine, Der Spiegel, reported the change in its online edition on Saturday.

The key to the new terms of engagement, Der Spiegel said, is the deletion of one sentence, which said that "the use of deadly force is forbidden as long as an attack has not taken place, or is not immediately imminent."

Now the wording has been changed from “immediately imminent” to "recognizable".

A further phrase, referring to appropriate use of force, was also removed from the Bundeswehr's duty statement, opening the doors for German troops to take a more offensive stance in Afghanistan.

Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung said the new wording would give soldiers the necessary legal rights to deal with combat situations.

There had been recent allegations that soldiers did not have the legal authority to bring adequate firepower to their defense when under attack.

A speaker for the German Defense Ministry responded to the report in the magazine by saying that the rules of engagement are continually under review.

The security situation in the north of the country has been deteriorating, with Taliban attacks on Bundeswehr soldiers on the rise.

In Germany, the coalition government is arguing over whether the mission, which is widely unpopular with the German public, actually means that German troops are fighting a war in the Hindu Kush.

Although Social Democrat Party chief Peter Struck, and much of the German public see it as such, the Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung seems to have a different opinion.

Meanwhile, the Christian Social Union Bavarian parliamentary group head, Peter Ramsauer, has reinforced demands for an exit-strategy for the Afghanistan deployment.

Last Thursday, the German mission to Afghanistan was expanded to include an extra 300 AWACS surveillance aircraft personnel. The German parliament voted on the deployment, with more than 80 percent in favor.

That still does not bring German troop numbers up to the maximum 4,500 permitted under the government mandate.

In total, 35 German soldiers have died in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led ISAF mission since 2002.

-ends-

NATO Considers Beefing up War Support


Unless those troops are allowed to actually fight (like the Brits, Canadians, Aussies and Danes) than it won't mean a whole lot in whether the Taliban's resurgence can be blunted. My assumption is that the majority will be in a 'training only' capacity.

I read how Russia considered renting helicopters to the NATO mission in Afghanistan. That's actually quite ironical in remembrance of how important that country was to the U.S.S.R.'s sphere of influence.

--------
http://home.scarlet.be/td299609/

Brown: UK staying in Afghanistan, but wants reform

LONDON – Prime Minister Gordon Brown warned Afghanistan's government on Friday to take action against corruption, saying he would not risk more British lives there unless it reforms.

Brown said in a speech that success in Afghanistan is vital to Britain's security — but declared that if the Afghan government does not mend its ways it will forfeit the world's support.

"I am not prepared to put the lives of British men and women in harm's way for a government that does not stand up against corruption," he said.

Brown's ultimatum echoes the words of President Barack Obama, who said Wednesday that he told newly re-elected Afghan President Hamid Karzai that "this has to be a point in time in which we begin to write a new chapter" in Afghanistan.


http: //news.yahoo. com/s/ap/20091106/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_afghanistan_speech