Getting back to the present, Dan Eaton of The Press has a printed report in the Manawatu Standard 31/01/2008 (but it's not online at the MS, or The Press or Stuff (yet?)). There's alot of sub topics being discussed (countries, people, agendas and biases etc). Anyone care to offer their opinions on any particular aspects etc? Or insight into some of the people mentoned and their real thinking or motives etc?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NZ may have to mull Afghanistan pull-out
With Afghanistan sliding into chaos, Dan Eaton looks at the crisis building within Nato and what it means for New Zealand troops.
Kiwi soldiers are facing increasing risks in Afghanistan and it may be only a matter of time before they start coming home in body bags. Concern is mounting that Afghanistan is sliding into chaos amid a brewing crisis within the Nato military alliance. Nato is responsible for the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, where about 130 NZ troops are serving in non-combat roles.
The everyday dangers were highlighted this month when a United States helicopter carrying eight New Zealanders crashed on the way to their forward patrol base in Bamyan province.
All survived, but one trooper received injuries that required surgery and a return to New Zealand. It was a close call, and there is evidence that top brass are becoming increasingly concerned about security.
In a recent briefing in Wellington, New Zealand Joint Forces Commander Major General Rhys Jones spoke of the growing Taliban threat of suicide bombings and attacks on infrastructure in the province where the Kiwis are operating.
Jones was careful not to be alarmist but said the Defence Force was examining several contingencies that would be put to the Government for consideration. The options included boosting NZ troop numbers, reorganising them from a largely humanitarian focus to enable combat patrols and providing more armoured vehicles.
Off the record, serving and former officers say it is only a matter of time before the first Kiwi comes home in a body bag.
Experts warned the US House of Representatives armed services committee last week that Afghanistan was taking a back seat to Iraq and that unless the US and its allies redoubled their fight against Taliban insurgents, the country faced enduring chaos.
With bombings and attacks on the rise, such as the recent deadly attack on a luxury hotel in Kabul, and extremists gaining ground in neighbouring Pakistan, the US needed to make the international mission in Afghanistan a higher priority, they said.
Those expressions of concern follow Australian Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon's warning that the war in Afghanistan would be lost unless Nato and its allies changed tactics.
As of July last year, more civilians had died as a result of Nato, US and Afghan Government firepower than because of the Taliban.
According to United Nations figures, 314 civilians were killed by international and Afghan Government forces in the first six months of 2007, while 279 civilians were killed by insurgents.
Part of the problem was the relatively low number of Western forces on the ground - about 50,000 in all, compared to 170,000 in Iraq - meaning that the West had to rely heavily on airstrikes.
A September report by the UN concluded those airstrikes were among the principal motivations for suicide attackers. Suicide attacks in the country rose sevenfold from 2005 to 2006.
A report just delivered to Nato headquarters and the Pentagon adds to the mounting worry. Former armed forces chiefs from the US, Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands wrote that Nato was at a loss to deal with the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan.
Their radical manifesto said Nato must be prepared to use pre-emptive nuclear strikes to tackle terrorists and the threat of proliferation of waepons of mass destruction. It was written after talks with Nato commanders and policymakers.
Prime Minister Helen Clark, who at the end of last year extended NZ's troop committment to December 2009, has played down the significance of the report, saying Nato chiefs in Afghanistan would be in no doubt about NZ's position.
"It would be very clear that to the NZ Government the concept of first strike is anathema," she said.
"NZ foreign policy .... has been dedicated to working for an ideal, which is a nuclear-free world. We are not about to abandon it because some retired people from some Nato countries think it is not a very good idea".
However, a prominent NZ think tank has warned the Government may need to consider pulling NZ forces out of Afghanistan, given the turmoil in Nato's ranks and its inability to come up with a viable Afghan strategy.
The Christchurch based
Disarmament and Security Centre (DSC) is headed by Kiwi academic and anti-nuclear campaigner Kate Dewes, appointed last month as disarmament adviser to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
Dewes will attend her first meeting of the UN chief's advisory board next month and says the advice being given to Nato is so concerning that it is likely to be a topic at the UN meeting.
Dewes' husband and fellow DSC coordinator Robert Green said the Nato ex-chiefs' manifesto was symptomatic of a growing crisis within Nato, coming as it does in the wake of the latest row over military performance in Afghanistan touched off by US Defence Secretary Robert Gates. Gates indicated the mission in Afghanistan was failing, saying "some allies" seemed unable to conduct effective counter-insurgency operations.
The response of Canada, which has so far lost 78 soldiers in the conflict, has been that if Nato doesn't boost combat troop numbers it will pull out.
"You really do need to bring out the background to this, which is the huge crisis in Nato over Afghanistan", said Mr Green, a former Royal Navy commander and intelligence officer.
"Historically, Afghanistan is the graveyard for Western military expeditionary warfare, and here we go again. The immediate response is to reach for nukes, but of course they are worse than useless, especially against extremists.
"Maybe (NZ) will have to reconsider whether the provincial reconstruction team can stay in Afghanistan - and they certainly shouldn't send any special forces back," he said.
