This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/18/hammond-uk-forces-afghan-attacks
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| No change in UK-Afghan patrols after latest 'insider attacks', says Hammond | No change in UK-Afghan patrols after latest 'insider attacks', says Hammond |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, was forced to go before the Commons on Tuesday to clarify the UK's approach to supporting Afghan troops, following reports that joint patrols and training had been suspended in response to a wave of attacks on Nato forces. | The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, was forced to go before the Commons on Tuesday to clarify the UK's approach to supporting Afghan troops, following reports that joint patrols and training had been suspended in response to a wave of attacks on Nato forces. |
| Following a scramble of phone calls between the chief of the defence staff, General Sir David Richards, and General John Allen, commander of International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Afghanistan, the minister insisted that no major strategic change had been made in policy towards Afghan allies. | Following a scramble of phone calls between the chief of the defence staff, General Sir David Richards, and General John Allen, commander of International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) in Afghanistan, the minister insisted that no major strategic change had been made in policy towards Afghan allies. |
| Hammond insisted that future UK joint patrols and mentoring would continue but operations below company level would, on a temporary basis, have to be approved by Major General Gurganus, the US Isaf commander in charge of the Helmand region, where most UK troops are based. | Hammond insisted that future UK joint patrols and mentoring would continue but operations below company level would, on a temporary basis, have to be approved by Major General Gurganus, the US Isaf commander in charge of the Helmand region, where most UK troops are based. |
| The Ministry of Defence (MoD) extracted a statement from Isaf forces that Gurganus approved the current level of patrols, implying there is no change in the UK approach. | The Ministry of Defence (MoD) extracted a statement from Isaf forces that Gurganus approved the current level of patrols, implying there is no change in the UK approach. |
| But the episode, and impression of disarray, was deeply embarrassing to Hammond as he had formally briefed MPs the day before that there had been no change in patrolling strategy, insisting that the joint patrols were essential to the UK's plan for British troops to end its combat role by the end of 2014. | |
| MoD sources conceded that the change in the authorising structure for patrols had been made on Sunday, but Hammond was only informed of the revision in a video conference with UK military on Monday afternoon, after he had made his statement to MPs. The military did not flag up the change in the briefing as significant. | MoD sources conceded that the change in the authorising structure for patrols had been made on Sunday, but Hammond was only informed of the revision in a video conference with UK military on Monday afternoon, after he had made his statement to MPs. The military did not flag up the change in the briefing as significant. |
| Hammond appeared to accept that omission, saying the change was a tactical shift and did not mark a change in strategy, on which he would have been consulted. "I do not seek to involve myself in the tactical decisions that military commanders make. It is wrong for us to do so," he said. | Hammond appeared to accept that omission, saying the change was a tactical shift and did not mark a change in strategy, on which he would have been consulted. "I do not seek to involve myself in the tactical decisions that military commanders make. It is wrong for us to do so," he said. |
| "There had been no strategic change here whatsoever. This is a tactical decision that will be reviewed and reversed as soon as the situation has been stabilised." | "There had been no strategic change here whatsoever. This is a tactical decision that will be reviewed and reversed as soon as the situation has been stabilised." |
| Hammond sought to blame the BBC for misinterpreting an Isaf statement issued on Monday, but the Ministry of Defence conceded the statement might have been unclear. | Hammond sought to blame the BBC for misinterpreting an Isaf statement issued on Monday, but the Ministry of Defence conceded the statement might have been unclear. |
| But the former Conservative defence secretary Liam Fox said the timing of the Isaf statement was unfortunate, saying: "We need to redouble our efforts to make it very clear to the forces of terror that they cannot push our strategy off course." | But the former Conservative defence secretary Liam Fox said the timing of the Isaf statement was unfortunate, saying: "We need to redouble our efforts to make it very clear to the forces of terror that they cannot push our strategy off course." |
| He added: "Mentoring was one of the most important ways we have increased the capability of Afghan forces." | He added: "Mentoring was one of the most important ways we have increased the capability of Afghan forces." |
| Other Conservatives, including many opposed to the war, claimed the change in arrangements was further proof that UK forces should leave Afghanistan before the formal exit date of 2014. | Other Conservatives, including many opposed to the war, claimed the change in arrangements was further proof that UK forces should leave Afghanistan before the formal exit date of 2014. |
| MPs on both right and left were fiercely critical of any suggestion of continued attempts at nation-building in Afghanistan. The Labour MP Dennis Skinner made probably the most brutal intervention, saying: "Now that it has been revealed that the allies are unreliable, Karzai is useless and the Afghan forces are treacherous, it is time to get out." | MPs on both right and left were fiercely critical of any suggestion of continued attempts at nation-building in Afghanistan. The Labour MP Dennis Skinner made probably the most brutal intervention, saying: "Now that it has been revealed that the allies are unreliable, Karzai is useless and the Afghan forces are treacherous, it is time to get out." |
| Another Labour MP, Paul Flynn, was expelled from the Commons after he refused to withdraw claims that ministers had lied about Afghanistan. | Another Labour MP, Paul Flynn, was expelled from the Commons after he refused to withdraw claims that ministers had lied about Afghanistan. |
| The change in joint patrolling follows a surge in the number of "insider attacks" by Afghan government soldiers and police officers. There have been 36 such attacks this year, which have killed 51 Nato soldiers. The suspension threatens the joint plan to train an effective Afghan army to keep the Taliban at bay after foreign troops pull out. | The change in joint patrolling follows a surge in the number of "insider attacks" by Afghan government soldiers and police officers. There have been 36 such attacks this year, which have killed 51 Nato soldiers. The suspension threatens the joint plan to train an effective Afghan army to keep the Taliban at bay after foreign troops pull out. |
| Hammond had not given any hint of a change in tactics on Monday. "It is essential that we complete the task of training the Afghan national security forces and increasing their capability so that they can take over the burden of combat as we withdraw," he said. "That is what we intend to do, and we will not be deterred from it by these attacks." | Hammond had not given any hint of a change in tactics on Monday. "It is essential that we complete the task of training the Afghan national security forces and increasing their capability so that they can take over the burden of combat as we withdraw," he said. "That is what we intend to do, and we will not be deterred from it by these attacks." |
| General Martin Dempsey, the US chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said the "insider attacks", in which four American and two British soldiers were killed at the weekend, were themselves "a very serious threat to the campaign" against the Taliban. | General Martin Dempsey, the US chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said the "insider attacks", in which four American and two British soldiers were killed at the weekend, were themselves "a very serious threat to the campaign" against the Taliban. |
| There were at least 12 such attacks last month alone, leaving 15 dead. | There were at least 12 such attacks last month alone, leaving 15 dead. |
| Nato said in a statement that "most partnering and advising" would now be at a battalion level and above, a significant withdrawal by Nato forces from working with the Afghan military on the ground. But Hammond said the US had not been partnering above battalion level for some time. | Nato said in a statement that "most partnering and advising" would now be at a battalion level and above, a significant withdrawal by Nato forces from working with the Afghan military on the ground. But Hammond said the US had not been partnering above battalion level for some time. |
| Joint operations at a lower level would be "evaluated on a case-by-case basis" and only happen with the approval of regional commanders. | Joint operations at a lower level would be "evaluated on a case-by-case basis" and only happen with the approval of regional commanders. |
| Nato said that in some places all on-the-ground collaboration would cease and foreign military advisers would be "stepping back to advise from the next level". | Nato said that in some places all on-the-ground collaboration would cease and foreign military advisers would be "stepping back to advise from the next level". |
| The US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, described the attacks as the "last gasp" of a weakened Taliban. But the admission that Nato troops are no longer safe from the forces they are relying on to contain the Taliban after the final US pullout in two years' time is a severe blow to Washington's plans. | The US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, described the attacks as the "last gasp" of a weakened Taliban. But the admission that Nato troops are no longer safe from the forces they are relying on to contain the Taliban after the final US pullout in two years' time is a severe blow to Washington's plans. |
| Under the strategy members of the 350,000-strong Afghan security forces gain experience patrolling and fighting alongside US and other foreign soldiers. But the killings have led to a collapse in trust. | |
| American, British and Afghan officials have become increasingly alarmed at the attacks because of their impact on troop morale and public opinion in the US and Britain. | American, British and Afghan officials have become increasingly alarmed at the attacks because of their impact on troop morale and public opinion in the US and Britain. |
| Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, asked why Hammond made no mention of the move when he faced MPs in the Commons on Monday in response to an urgent question from the former Labour minister Denis MacShane. He said there were "very serious questions" for the government to answer. | Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, asked why Hammond made no mention of the move when he faced MPs in the Commons on Monday in response to an urgent question from the former Labour minister Denis MacShane. He said there were "very serious questions" for the government to answer. |
| Alexander told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "This announcement begs more questions than it answers. Why did Philip Hammond not even mention it yesterday when he addressed MPs in the House of Commons? Was it that he didn't know or did he choose not to tell MPs? | Alexander told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "This announcement begs more questions than it answers. Why did Philip Hammond not even mention it yesterday when he addressed MPs in the House of Commons? Was it that he didn't know or did he choose not to tell MPs? |
| "But sitting beyond that question is the deeper question: does this represent a temporary tactical response by military commanders on the ground or does it represent a more strategic shift in the mission? | "But sitting beyond that question is the deeper question: does this represent a temporary tactical response by military commanders on the ground or does it represent a more strategic shift in the mission? |
| "If we are in a position where a regional commander is generally unwilling to grant the authority for troops to go out on patrol with Afghan soldiers, that would severely compromise the capacity of the mission to deliver its objectives." | "If we are in a position where a regional commander is generally unwilling to grant the authority for troops to go out on patrol with Afghan soldiers, that would severely compromise the capacity of the mission to deliver its objectives." |
| He went on: "The whole of the strategy in Afghanistan now is built around the premise that as the international forces step back, the Afghan forces can step up. | He went on: "The whole of the strategy in Afghanistan now is built around the premise that as the international forces step back, the Afghan forces can step up. |
| "That's why I think there are very serious questions for the government to answer in the hours ahead." | "That's why I think there are very serious questions for the government to answer in the hours ahead." |