Military

SHAPE News Summary & Analysis

17 August 2004

AFGHANISTAN

• According to AFP, Pakistani Interior Minister Faisal Saleh Hayat told an interview Tuesday the United States and other NATO members should adopt “more security measures” in the hunt for Al Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan. “Because Afghanistan is still on the way to building its own security, there are still districts outside state authority where it is very easy for any suspect to hide,” he reportedly told the Arabic daily Al Hayat, adding: “We call on America and (NATO) to exert more efforts and adopt more security measures to surround these elements.”
  
  
• AFP, Aug. 14, quoted COMISAF, Lt. Gen. Py, saying in an interview Saturday Afghan forces must take the lead in providing security for the country’s October presidential elections. According to the dispatch, he said ISAF does not have the numbers to protect the candidates and 5,000 polling stations and insisted that the Afghan government will have to “drive security for the election and candidates.” He reportedly stressed, however, that ISAF would “provide a general framework for security” and “had the capacity to intervene in major events.”

Under the title, “Afghanistan is not Iraq,” Sueddeutsche Zeitung, Aug. 16, carried a question-and-answer interview with Gen. Jones made during a recent trip to Kabul. In introductory remarks, the newspaper observed that “optimism goes with it for Gen. Jones. Despite Taliban attacks and the power of the warlords, he cannot imagine a failure of the ISAF mission.” Gen. Jones believes that democracy and reconstruction will be successful, the newspaper said, adding: “He said Taliban and Al Qaeda will never again play a role in the Hindukush region. However, in order to ensure this, the soon-to-be 8,500 NATO troops will protect the presidential elections on Oct. 9, if necessary by force of arms.” Commenting on reports that Taliban fighters were returning to Pakistan in droves and that highly-equipped U.S. units at the Afghan border could not stop them, Gen. Jones was quoted saying: “It is true, we are not able to secure this border in a way that no Taliban can get through. Nothing is ever perfect. However, compared to the situation in Afghanistan two years ago, this threat is only a fraction of what it used to be then. Of course, there are explosions here and there, occasionally regular attacks. However, we know from experience that these forces are out to impress with such actions before large events, such as presidential elections…. We must not become pessimistic. The Taliban will bring down neither the government nor President Karzai. They will not prevent the elections from taking place either.” Gen. Jones reportedly noted that despite all threats and murders committed by the Taliban, almost 10 million out of about 10,5 million Afghans entitled to vote had registered for the poll. Gen. Jones was further quoted saying: “At least, I dare to say: Afghanistan will not see a rebellion of the kind we see now in Iraq! I cannot rule out other danger--for example, that a few warlords will get up and start a civil war if the balance of power changes. But I do not actually expect anything like this. However, with regard to the radical Islamist fundamentalism, I know: Al Qaeda and Taliban regaining strength in this country—this is over!” Asked whether NATO was prepared in case warlords “hit out,” Gen. Jones reportedly replied: “Anything is possible. We prepare for many worst-case scenarios. That is what military planning and headquarters are there for. It would be better if nothing like that happened. But I never want to have to ask myself: ‘Why did we not think about that?’” Asked whether NATO would resort to the force of arms to protect the elections, he said: “One of our tasks as ISAF is to support this process. If we are attacked, we will react with the force of arms.” Reacting to the newspaper’s observation that due to difficulties in wringing the required troops, helicopters or hospitals for Afghanistan, he had renamed his title “Supreme Allied Supplicant,” Gen. Jones reporting said: “That is true. One reason for this is due to how NATO has gathered its forces so far. In this respect, the connection between the declared political will to take over the operations and the will to pay for it is missing. This gap in the system makes my job, to plan and implement missions that we agreed on, harder. Not impossible, but harder.” Gen. Jones also stressed that often governments provide troops only under certain conditions, making cooperation more difficult, adding: “In the future, I will rather do without such troops than to accept the conditions. However, all of this is the consequence of NATO’s fundamental reconstruction. After the end of the Cold War, the Alliance is currently adapting to the challenges of the 21st century, to operations beyond its own borders. It takes a while to bring such a tanker on a new course.” Asked, against the background of Afghanistan, the Balkans and Iraq, whether too much was being asked from NATO, SACEUR reportedly replied: “Actually, NATO has sufficient means…. But we have to make these capabilities available for use. So far, the principle has been: the operational costs will have to be paid by the nation that provides the respective forces. Here, we will have to find new ways of sharing the burden—and the payment of parts of our mission.”

UNITED STATES-TROOP BASING

• The German government Tuesday played down the negative effects of U.S. troop redeployment in Europe, reports AFP. The dispatch quotes Berlin’s spokesman on transatlantic affairs saying it was unfortunate that thousands of U.S. troops would be withdrawn but also “a success, that together we have met the challenge of the Cold War and ended the division in Europe.” The spokesman reportedly also noted that apart from Britain, Germany remained the “biggest military post for the USA in Europe.” The dispatch adds that meanwhile, the U.S. military in Germany reiterated that no final decisions on numbers had been taken, nor had a timetable for their withdrawal been finalized. “It is important to understand that the president’s transformation plan will take several years to implement. There is no set timetable, nor will implementation be a ‘big bang’ event, with changes occurring all at once,” EUCOM reportedly said in a statement. Another AFP dispatch reports NATO played down the significance of the U.S. move, saying it was logical not to want to maintain huge land forces in Europe so long after the collapse of the Soviet Union. “It’s not a surprise. The only news is the timetable,” a NATO source reportedly said on condition of anonymity.

Media center on President Bush’s announcement that the United States plans to bring home up to 70,000 troops from Europe and Asia within a decade.
According to AFP, analysts said Tuesday the U.S. decision will add pressure on European governments to boost long-flagging military cooperation plans and is also not good news for NATO, which is still battling to heal deep divisions triggered by the Iraq war. “The U.S. is stepping up its departure from Europe at a time when NATO is still groping for a purpose,” writes the Financial Times
In an op-ed in the Financial Times, former SACEUR ret. Gen. Ralston and former Chairman NAMILCOM ret. Gen. Naumann, who co-chair a project on European Defense Integration at The Center for Strategic and International Studies, insist that Europe must now integrate its defense. Confirmation that the U.S. intends to withdraw up to 70,000 troops—or almost a third of its military presence—from abroad, most of them from western Europe, should focus minds in London, Paris and Berlin about the EU’s role in global security policy, they write, adding: “Europe has a global security role to play and needs the kind of military forces that will enable it to play that role. Unfortunately, its existing military capabilities, on the whole, do not provide the necessary tools.”
German media highlight that the impact of the U.S. plans is likely to be felt most acutely in Germany—especially in smaller towns whose economies depend on the U.S. presence.

BALKANS

• AFP reports KFOR began this week introducing improved security measures, in the wake of ethnic riots five months ago for which they were severely criticized. In a bid to prevent a repetition of the violence, the UN and NATO are stepping up security procedures around “sensitive areas,” such as minority Serb communities and Serbian Orthodox churches. A new center of operation has also been created to coordinate joint operations involving KFOR and UN police. The enhanced security measures will be put to the test in October, when Kosovo is scheduled to hold legislative elections, says the dispatch.