Military

SHAPE News Summary & Analysis

21 June 2004

IRAQ

• A NATO force including up to 3,000 British troops will be deployed to Iraq to support the new government as it takes over the running of the country, under a plan being drawn up in London and Washington, wrote The Guardian, June 19. The force would consist of NATO’s Allied Rapid Reaction Corps based in Germany, under the command of British General Sir Richard Dannatt, reinforced by a British battle group, the newspaper claimed. It quoted unnamed officials saying Friday the corps would be “temporarily extracted” from NATO to make it more politically acceptable to members of the Alliance that were opposed to the war, as well as Russia and many Iraqi leaders. According to the article, the new force would not be deployed under a NATO banner, but would be described as a British-led international force. The plan is expected to be formally agreed at the Istanbul summit. A deployment of 18 months is envisaged. The international force is likely to include troops from several members of the Alliance. Turkish Daily News writes meanwhile that negotiations continue in the NAC on the scope of NATO’s involvement in Iraq but an agreement has apparently emerged among allies not to seek massive troop contributions at the Istanbul summit, although NATO is not to stay away. The article quotes Germany’s Ambassador to the Alliance, Wolf Ruthart Borns, saying options considered include NATO enhancing its assistance to Polish forces operating in Iraq, providing security to the UN mission in Iraq, and training future Iraqi armed forces. The article adds that, according to observers, discussions in Brussels aim at preventing an image of split within the organization.

In a contribution to the Washington Post, Ivo Daalder and Robert Kagan, respectively a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, insist that in Iraq, “the Allies must step up.”
“NATO officials, as well as some allied countries, argue that with the Alliance already involved in Afghanistan, taking on Iraq as well is beyond the organization’s capacity,” Daalder and Kagan observe, adding, however: “But the truth is, if NATO cannot take on a mission such as Iraq, when the U.S. is providing 90 percent of the forces, then why should Americans continue to value the organization? …. Now that the Security Council has opened the door to internationalization in Iraq, the Europeans would be wise to step through. Allied leaders meeting in Istanbul should agree to take over the security training and equipping mission immediately, with a country such as Germany, which is already involved in training some police, perhaps taking the lead. They should also agree that NATO will take command of the Polish-led sector in southern Iraq immediately and begin planning for eventually placing the entire multinational force under NATO command. It will be a deadly blow to transatlantic relations if NATO does not become involved in providing security in Iraq…. Do Europeans really want to sever their strategic ties to the United States? If not, they need to understand that the ball is now in their court.”
Noting that one reason NATO is not rushing to help the U.S. in Iraq is the Alliance’s difficult experience in securing Afghanistan, the Wall Street Journal comments: “NATO is under pressure to furnish more troops and hardware in Afghanistan just when the Bush administration is trying to get the Alliance involved in Iraq. The Alliance’s military limitations pose a more practical problem and raise questions about NATO’s ability to sustain several operations at once and to expand its theater of operations beyond Europe.… The problems of Afghanistan and Iraq spotlight a broader debate about the future of NATO and its ability to fulfill its increasingly ambitious missions.”

AFGHANISTAN

• Welt am Sonntag, June 20, reported that after last week’s attack on a Bundeswehr jeep in Kunduz, which cost the lives of four Afghans, the German armed forces want to improve the protection of their soldiers in the North Afghanistan province. Armored “Dingo” vehicles will be shifted from Kabul to Kunduz it the near future, stressed the article, noting that up to now, Bundeswehr soldiers had been traveling only in unarmored vehicles. Commanders have reportedly also ordered that for the time being, soldiers in Kunduz are to leave their camp only in convoys of at least two vehicles. The article quoted retired Gen. Klaus Naumann, a former Bundeswehr Chief of Staff and Chairman NAMILCOM, saying: “Before the elections in Afghanistan, matters will certainly get even worse. People in the Defense Ministry must think thoroughly about how one can safeguard protection for the soldiers deployed in Kunduz in so-called PRTs. It must also be reviewed if and how one can support and evacuate the PRTs in case of emergency.”
  
  
• Reuters writes attackers fired rocket-propelled grenades at a UN election office south of Kabul early Monday, damaging several vehicles and underscoring the risks to polls due in September. Jean Arnault, the UN Special Representative to Afghanistan, is quoted saying the attack showed the need for the international community to do more to protect the electoral process. According to the dispatch, he urged NATO to send more troops quickly.