Wiki Leaks

Guess what, mistakes are made, IED’s are a serious and growing threat, special forces try and kill or capture enemy leaders, there is an increasing use of UAV’s, MANPAD’s are a threat and finally, in what must be the revelation of the century, civilians and soldiers die in a conflict.

What next, revelations that bears do in fact shit in the woods, no doubt we will have an interactive map showing the frequency and location of poo that smells of salmon and call it a sensational expose of the failure of the bear coalition to provide adequate toilet facilities.

Let’s forget the fact that they reveal precisely nothing that isn’t already well known and enjoy the frothing from the left and right.

If things change then I will change my mind but for now it makes for a more interesting diversion than actually creating and executing a coherent strategy after nearly a decade in, billions of dollars/pounds/whatever and thousands of lives.

Anyone got a tin foil hat and a collection of conspiracy theories?

UPDATE:

Perhaps I was over egging it in saying ‘precisely nothing’, there may be some small value to the enemy in pouring over this data but it I still think it is minor in comparison to what they already know, observed by actually being there or obtained by talking to the civilians and ANA/ANP.

The latest revelations about HUMINT sources being in the leaked information self evidently changes everything. On a wider level about the conduct of the conflict, the information reveals nothing that wasn’t already well known but at a human level, this is outrageous and WikiLeaks should step back and question their motives and methods, hard

Talisman on Operations

In our earlier posts on the subject we have lamented the timeliness of the Counter IED programme called Talisman and and asked if it is too little too late.

The MoD has now released some more information on the work it is supporting in Afghanistan.

Scattered throughout Helmand province, these indiscriminate weapons kill and maim both ISAF and Afghan forces as well as innocent Afghan civilians.

However, the British Armed Forces now have a revolutionary new capability called Talisman which is being used to counter the threat.

I don’t mind the occasional bit of bully but come on MoD, revolutionary, you have to be joking.

This life-saving equipment is being used to support combat logistic patrols which can be up to several hundred vehicles in total and trek through the country delivering vital supplies to bases for the troops on the front line. Talisman is also starting to be used in combat infantry roles, such as for deliberate route clearances.

RAF Merlin Recovery in Afghanistan

A US blog, first alerted me to this story a few days ago.

With a keen eye, the author had spotted a couple of images from the USMC media operation in Helmand.

Because there seemed to be no coverage in any UK media outlets I was a little reticent about covering it, fearing that it was combat damage and there might have been a news embargo for obvious reasons.

With news starting to filter out in the UK I have assumed its safe to cover it. Read more…

David Cameron on Afghanistan

This is a hangover from the post before, not sure why only 1 video displayed

Change the Nameplate Above the Door

As we all know, General Stanley McChrystal has had his resignation accepted by President Obama for allowing the now infamous Rolling Stone article to go to print.

There are any number of theories floating around as to why he did this; vanity, a push for political power with an eye on the Presidency, a sneaky means of disentangling himself from the wreckage of his own/President Obama’s failed strategy or simply a good old fashioned cock up.

So depending on your point of view, the General is either relaxing today with a mission accomplished grin or packing up the wreckage of his career after the official ‘interview without coffee’

Of course he had to go but was he any more successful than his also sacked predecessor, General McKiernan, and will he be missed?

Apart from asking serious questions why a General in charge of something as serious as operations in Afghanistan has time for left leaning magazine interviews or why the cult of personality around an operational commander was allowed to grow, the real question is not why it happened but what happens now. Read more…

A Beautiful Strategy

As the new government finds it feet and starts looking at our involvement in Afghanistan it would seem a new strategy is in the offing.

That strategy comprises of two broad elements

1. Get the fuck out of dodge

2. Pretend it was a victory

After years of failure in Afghanistan the new strategy will be to come up with a sensible disengagement. Lets face facts, we have failed.

The government has failed, the MoD has failed and the senior military leadership has failed.

Read more…

Ministerial Statement on Afghanistan

The Secretary of State for Defence (The Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP):

The significant increase in the number of international troops in southern Afghanistan is enabling commanders to make improvements in the laydown and command arrangements of coalition forces in the region. The first of these was the handover of security responsibility for Musa Qaleh district in Helmand province from UK to US troops on 27 March. This transfer allowed UK troops in Musa Qaleh to be redeployed to the population centres of central Helmand where they have increased ISAF’s capacity to protect the Afghan civilian population from the threat posed by the insurgency, and to train and partner with the Afghan National Security Forces.

On 21 May, ISAF announced that Regional Command (South), the ISAF command responsible for overseeing the operational activity of international forces in southern Afghanistan, will be divided into two separate commands: Regional Command (South West), headquartered in Helmand and consisting of Helmand and Nimruz provinces; and, Regional Command (South), headquartered in Kandahar and consisting of Kandahar, Dai Kundi, Uruzgan and Zabol provinces. The division of responsibility for ISAF troops in southern Afghanistan into two regional commands will ensure that ISAF can continue to provide the optimal level of command and control over its forces as they increase in size from around 35,000 in October last year to over 50,000 troops this summer. Furthermore, the separation of the commands along regional boundaries will align the ISAF military structure in the south with the structure of the Afghan National Army, enabling a greater partnering capacity between ISAF and Afghan forces.

ISAF intends for Regional Command (South West) to become fully operational over the course of the summer. The first commander will be Major General Richard Mills of the US Marine Corps, and the US 1 Marine Expeditionary Force, (Forward) which is already based in Helmand, will provide the framework for Regional Command (South West)’s headquarters component. The UK-led Task Force Helmand will come under Major General Mills’ command from 1 June. Subject to final confirmation in due course, the UK and US have agreed in principle that command of Regional Command (South West) will be shared on a rotational basis.

As a further element of ISAF reorganisation in Helmand, and as announced by ISAF last week, the British battlegroup based in Sangin and Kajaki, which comprises in the order of 1,100 troops, will transfer from the UK-led Task Force Helmand to the US-led Regimental Combat Team that is taking on responsibility for the north of the province. Under this arrangement, the battlegroup will not be relocated but for operational purposes it will come under the command of the US. In common with the other changes to ISAF’s command structures, the transfer of command in Sangin is intended to optimise the command support available to the troops on the ground in the light of the increase in the number of ISAF troops and other operational assets. The transfer will occur on 1 June.

The UK has been consulted throughout ISAF’s decision making process and we welcome the changes to the command arrangements that will enable ISAF to make optimal use of the increased forces now deploying in southern Afghanistan.

H/T UK Defence Forum

First Aid Training for the Taleban

The International Committee of the Red Cross has issued an operational update for Afghanistan.

In addition to the numerous good works they have been carrying out, including mentoring the ANA/ANP,  food and seed distribution, water and sanitation projects , limb fitting and physical rehabilitation they have also reported on efforts to improve the care for the sick and wounded.

Nothing wrong with that you might say.

However, what about these

The ICRC also provided basic first-aid training and first-aid kits to arms carriers

That’s the people carrying weapons to kill ISAF personnel, Afghan Security Forces and civilians.

And,

In April, it reached over 100 Afghan security forces personnel, over 70 members of the armed opposition, taxi drivers involved in the transport of wounded people, first-aiders and its own staff.

Is there a precedent for this?

So we are training the Taleban and their weapons carriers to be more effective combatants.

It doesn’t sound like a very good idea to me, especially given that the UK taxpayer and public contribute a great deal to the ICRC. Their 2009 financial report lists the UK government contribution at over £50million and the ‘public’ via the national society, at over £5million.

Of course ISAF and the government are deafening in their silence, best stay neutral in case we upset anyone.

RUSI Capability Questions – A Review

In the latest paper in the Royal United Services Institute Future Defence Review series, Michael Codner (RUSI Director of Military Sciences) presents a series of choices for the new government.

Placing the paper in context he makes the observation that whilst there is some political consensus amongst the new government, principally on the need for a strategic review, there are enough differences to make for an interesting debate. At a higher level and in the context of foreign relations there is a decision to be made on emphasis, do we lean more to Europe or the US and do we retain a nuclear deterrent?

Read more…

Debunking the Poodle Myth

One of the most compelling myths propagated in public life is the presentation of the UK as an American ‘poodle’. Before hammering the nails into the coffin of the UK-US partnership, politicians and their public should not dismiss the sheer historical resilience of the relationship, nor avoid the immutable limitations of an integrated European defence platform. Co-operation between the transatlantic partners will be essential given the potential for a rapid and game changing deterioration in the security context either in Europe or perhaps as a consequence of an extension of the conflict in Afghanistan. Assuming British statesman wish to play a role in stewarding an international system broadly sympathetic to UK interests they need to hold close to the US. Dispelling the ‘poodle’ mythology is essential if Britain is going to rediscover a credible defence posture and emerge from the terrible mess many believe her grand strategy to be mired in. The forthcoming Strategic Defence Review (SDR) is an opportune moment for the new government in London to demonstrate this subtlety of hand and save Britain from being relegated to a third rate power.

Read the rest of this excellent article from lee Bruce, here

Off to Kandahar Then?

The MoD has just released a couple of choice quotes from Liam Fox about Afghanistan.

Speaking about the role of UK troops in Helmand, Dr Fox said:

“I think that we should be having our forces deployed where they are going to have the greatest effect in terms of the overall strategy of the coalition and I don’t think we should be precious about that.

“Our troops have done a wonderful job in Helmand, talking to American commanders there. They are extremely impressed now that they’re on the ground in Helmand and seeing the difficulty of the conditions. They’re very impressed about how bravely and professionally the British forces have operated.”

Reading between the lines (and possibly getting it hopelessly wrong!) that means UK forces are off to Kandahar Province to replace the Canadians who will be leaving in 2011 and the Dutch who will be leaving neighbouring Urōzgān this year.

NATO 2020 – Assured Security; Dynamic Engagement

NATO have just published a new Strategic Concept, the first for a over decade.

With a commitment to the same core values of collective defence but a recommendation to improve missile defence and cyber capabilities it makes an interesting read.

Where do they get the names of these reports though?

Download from here

Canadian Armour in Afghanistan

Some interesting footage of the Leopard main battle tank and Kodiak armoured engineer vehicle in Afghanistan.

The UK has deployed the Trojan combat engineering heavy armoured vehicle but not Challenger 2 citing terrain restrictions in the Green Zone as the main reason for not deploying them There was some talk of a request being turned down on cost grounds a few months ago.

If the UK area of operations does shift to replace the departing Canadians one wonders if the UK might emulate the success of he Canadians and others with the deployment of small numbers of main battle tanks.

They certainly have an intimidatory effect but perhaps our new ‘courageous restraint’ approach might not be compatible with 70 tonnes of mobile firepower.

Beers all round then

Great story from Sean Rayment in the Telegraph about the ‘battle of crossing point one’ in Afghanistan that pitted a platoon of Grenadier Guards against an unknown force of Taleban.

Excellent reporting, however, does anyone else here wonder about a few issues thrown up in the article; lack of Javelins, no close air support and no heliborne counter attack to block and encircle the Taleban.

Nevertheless, an inspiring story and yet another affirmation that the much maligned youth of today are still taking it to the Queen’s enemies, much like their forefathers.

Makes one very proud.

All the Chiefs

All the service chiefs have now set out their stall for the forthcoming strategic defence review at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

The transcripts are available at the links.

Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope

Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Dalton

General Sir David Richards