The Militant (logo)  

Vol. 73/No. 29      August 3, 2009

 
Afghanistan: troop deaths in
UK-led offensive open debate
(front page)
 
BY JONATHAN SILBERMAN  
LONDON—A debate has opened up within the British ruling class in response to a sharp increase in troop deaths in Afghanistan. British forces are leading a major offensive in Helmand Province in southern Afghanistan.

The operation, dubbed “Panther’s Claw,” is testing the capacity of the military for the tough fight it faces there.

Underneath expressions of “concern” in parliamentary debates and the media about the numbers of troops in Afghanistan and the adequacy of their equipment is an uneasiness among growing numbers of capitalist politicians and sections of the ruling class here about Britain’s role in the Afghan-Pakistan war and its broader military footprint.

This is an important shift from what has marked UK foreign policy for decades—that such military intervention, and close alliance with Washington, is necessary to maintain Britain’s position in the imperialist pecking order. There are still powerful advocates for continuing this course.

The United Kingdom-led operation began June 19 with an air assault described by the Ministry of Defence as one of the largest in recent times. It was timed to coincide with the U.S.-led Operation Khanjar (strike of the sword) to the south, involving 4,000 marines. The operation comes months into the offensive begun in April by the Pakistani government and military against the Taliban and other Islamist forces in the Swat Valley and Waziristan.

Panther’s Claw includes U.S., Danish, and Estonian forces along with Afghan troops, altogether numbering 3,000 soldiers, according to Britain’s defense ministry.

The operation has resulted in the deaths of some 200 Afghans, British forces claim, while 15 of their own forces lost their lives in the space of 10 days, eight in a 24-hour period alone. The majority have died as a result of “improvised explosive devices” or roadside bombs. More soldiers in the British armed forces have now lost their lives in Afghanistan than died in Iraq. The British troop casualties have triggered a major debate in UK ruling circles, breaking the parliamentary consensus over the Afghan war, and witnessing some military top brass engaging in unprecedented public criticism of the government.

Gen. Richard Dannatt, outgoing head of the army, had publicly asked for a long-term reinforcement of 2,000 troops, but the government assigned just 700 for a temporary period leading up to the presidential election. Dannatt has now called for the 700 to stay beyond the elections and issued a “shopping list” of demands for equipment and matériel.

On July 13 opposition Conservative Party leader David Cameron accused the government of the “ultimate dereliction of duty” for “under-equipping” the armed forces.

Liberal Democrat leader Nicholas Clegg wrote, “Lives are being thrown away because our politicians won’t get their act together.” Neither of the two opposition parties supports increased troop deployment.

The goal of Panther’s Claw is to clear and hold the Helmand River valley between two riverside towns currently controlled by NATO forces, Lashkar Gah and Gereshk, and 13 crossing points along the Shamalan canal and waterways. The aim is to do this ahead of Afghanistan’s presidential election in August, seen as key by the occupying forces led by Washington.

Imperialist troops in Helmand have on occasion taken some of the villages but have been unable to hold them. “We have never had the density of forces that would allow us to go into more than fairly limited areas and change the dynamic by actually staying,” said the new commander of U.S. forces, Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Reinforced by 10,000 U.S. troops, the allied forces now aim to take the region. The canal would become the defensive line, according to the plan.

The operation will be carried out with less recourse to aerial bombardment, according to a new tactical directive issued by McChrystal. “The Taliban cannot defeat us militarily, but we can defeat ourselves,” he wrote. “We will not win based on the number of Taliban we kill, but instead on our ability to separate insurgents from the center of gravity—the people.”

Since that directive came into force, calls for close air support for ground fighters have dropped from 35 percent of all engagements to 17 percent.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home