“The Failure Of Alliance Members To Live Up To Their Commitments”
Agencies:
A top Nato official says the failure of alliance members to live up to their commitments is hampering the fight against the Taleban in Afghanistan.
Member states should provide what they had signed up to, Military Committee Chairman Gen Ray Henault said.
He has been meeting Nato military chiefs in Canada to discuss the strain on the alliance over Afghanistan.
The shortage of NATO and Afghan forces is too often setting back efforts to win and hold ground from terrorists.
Gen. Ray Henault, a Canadian who heads the alliance’s military committee, acknowledged the troubles Canadians have faced recently in Kandahar region, where troops are fighting and dying to capture terrain they fought over just a year ago.
“There is every interest in our case to make sure that we consolidate our gains,” Henault said.
“We are aware of instances where we have not had sufficient troops in a particular region … to maintain those gains.”
But as top military commanders from the 26 NATO nations prepare to meet in Ottawa and Victoria this week, Henault hinted at the ongoing backroom tensions – and the charge by countries like Canada that they are bearing a disproportionate share of the danger in Kandahar.
While the alliance is always looking “to fill gaps that might come in capabilities … the gaps are nonetheless very keenly debated,” he said.
He said both NATO military brass and its political leadership are constantly reminding nations of their responsibility “to provide the capabilities that are needed by the commander to do his job on the ground.
“Shortfalls do create additional risks and we try to reduce those as much as possible,” Henault told a news conference yesterday after arriving for the military meeting.
Henault sidestepped the ongoing domestic debate about the future of Canada’s Afghan mission.
But he made his preference clear, noting that stabilizing Afghanistan is a “long-term” effort and expressing hope Ottawa would remain active in the country even after its current military commitment expires in 2009.
“The mission in Afghanistan is a long-term mission. … We don’t know how long the mission will last,” he said.
“We have a mission, we have a requirement to ultimately help the Afghans to develop those security forces and security mechanisms that will allow them to take their security matters into their own hands,” Henault said.
“There isn’t a date you can set on that.”
He said Canada has shown “enormous leadership” in Afghanistan and hoped it would continue.
“It will be a Canadian issue. But we’re certainly hopeful that Canada will find a way to continue operating in Afghanistan,” he said.
But the alliance faces trouble in southern Afghanistan. Of the 26 NATO nations, only a few offered to deploy to the dangerous southern region and now two of those nations – Canada and the Netherlands – could pull out.
“We are seeing very good progress in all parts of Afghanistan, despite some of the tragic losses. But nonetheless we are making a difference … and we hope that all nations that are making that happen, and contributing, continue to do so,” Henault said.
The meeting’s participants include Gen. Rick Hillier, the Canadian chief of defence staff.
The military dignitaries were greeted by a 50-person honour guard, a Canadian Forces band and a demonstration by the Snowbirds aerobatic team. The group meets three times a year – twice in Brussels and once in a NATO member nation.
FRANCE INCREASES COMMITMENT BY 20%
rance will deploy 200 more troops in Afghanistan, the French defense minister said Friday after his meeting with the president of Tajikistan, an ex-Soviet republic bordering on Afghanistan.
Since 2001, 1,000 French troops have been based in war-torn Afghanistan as part of the international coalition force.
Herve Morin said after talks with President Emomali Rakhmonov in Dushanbe, the Tajik capital, that with the new military personnel “the number of French troops in Afghanistan will reach 1,200. We are sending signal officers and military advisers, who will help Afghanistan train its army.”
Morin also said that France planned to redeploy six Mirage fighters from Dushanbe to Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan, as a temporary measure to ensure “better operational efficiency,” as missions take longer from the Dushanbe airbase.
Three French fighters are being sent to Afghanistan in late September, and another three will follow in mid-October accompanied by 150 engineers and air crews. The French Defense Ministry said the aircraft would be used to patrol southern Afghanistan.
French air force personnel have been deployed in Tajikistan since December 2001, providing air support to NATO ground troops in Afghanistan. Six Mirage fighters, three military transport aircraft, and some 450 French troops are currently based in Dushanbe.
The French minister said the units deployed in Tajikistan’s capital were of great strategic and military importance for France, and will remain in place unless “asked by the government” to leave.
Morin and Rakhmonov also discussed the current situation in Afghanistan, and anti-drug trafficking measures, with both parties agreeing that an alternative crop to the poppy was needed to stop drug production increasing. Tajikistan is a major transit route for illegal drugs from Afghanistan, which produces around 90% of the world’s heroin.
The French defense minister also met air force personnel and engineers involved in reconstructing the Dushanbe airfield, before leaving for the Afghan capital Kabul.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
“We have a mission, we have a requirement to ultimately help the Afghans to develop those security forces and security mechanisms that will allow them to take their security matters into their own hands,” Henault said.
“There isn’t a date you can set on that.””
He could have easily been talking about Iraq. Same diff. I don’t know if NATO & co. are smartening up to the real threat posed by the Islamofacists, but one indicator is this guy’s thoughts and the additional support by France.
We’ll see how much resolve the world has in the next year.
September 7th, 2007 at 7:49 pmBut the Canadian general’s statements are on the money.
And we should be surprised… why?
In the Balkans (an operation I fully supported, by the way), NATO called on the charter and we responded.
In Afghanistan, we called on the charter, and exactly what the foxtrot have they done?
Beside the Canadians, that is. Having served with some Canadian REC/CE’s I can tell you they are some of the best guys in the world. The rest of the NATO forces are not worth the beer they drink. They might as well wear blue helmets and wave the white (no, blue) UN flag.
September 7th, 2007 at 8:33 pmall this time and france was only committing 1,000 troops?more troops died in the first hours of D day freeing them,and all they can give is a 1,000?oh,sorry 1,200 now
September 7th, 2007 at 8:45 pmWhy doesn’t this guy GET SPECIFIC?!! If you have over 20 nations that aren’t living up to their promises and commitments , then call em out on the carpet! Name the countries. If you look at Afghanistan and see the ratio of Nato troops killed in comparison to the death tallies for the Taliban over the last 9 months, you have to scratch your head on this one. I mean, if we cannot get these countries to even take this minimal risk, what can we expect if things get way out of control in another land?
These spineless members of NATO are more concerned about a gaggle of old women standing outside their parliament with picket signs than they are in keeping their very countries free and safe.
I say piss on em all. Tell the French that they can take their 1000 troops and head home and tell the world that they were sent packing because you can’t run a War without a commitment. Tell em all, “if you don’t believe in the mission or have the backbone to stay the course” then get out and let the real men get down to business.
September 7th, 2007 at 9:40 pmradgy and fight 4,
our army staff is professional and only numerous of 70 0000, counting the gendarmerie ; you also know that includes the vacations times
our comitting is also deployed in Lebanon, Kosovo and Africa : Senegal, Ivory coast, Chad, Central Africa… and next, Darfour
so it will be difficult for us to send more troops in Afghanistan
and yes some of our men were killed in Afghanistan too, I don’t remember the exact number but it is quite a few according the lot over there
a suggestion, we’ll send you our surburb youngs, they like fighting, but, we’ll leave up to you to train them
September 7th, 2007 at 11:40 pmsorry, 70 000 is the effective number on duty
http://www.rfi.fr/Fichiers/Mfi/PolitiqueDiplomatie/1883.asp
September 8th, 2007 at 12:08 amthats would be o.k,were used to doing the hard parts for ya anyway…but it would be some help at least
September 8th, 2007 at 12:28 amFrance the retour,
Yes France could send more troops to Afghanistan. France has only several thousand troops severing abroad either with the U.N., NATO or independently. France has a military strength of over a few hundred thousand and is one of the largest in Europe. You have a population of over 60 million, twice that of Canada, yet Canada has twice the amount of troops in Afghanistan. Funny isn’t it. France, as well as Germany, have “national caveats” in regards to giving assistance to other NATO members in combat. That is totally ridiculous. There is no excuse for many NATO members acting as they are, or not acting as is the case.
We gave so many thousands of lives for Europe, and probably the most for and in France over the last 100 years. Yes, I’m sure France has suffered some casualties which is never good, but it pales in comparison to our losses. It would be nice if our “allies” could support us in our time of need.
September 8th, 2007 at 12:38 amWait a second…that post was a joke. Vacation time and crazy kids from the suburbs…lol no one from France would put that in a serious post.
September 8th, 2007 at 12:47 amJJ26, you can’t read the link I posted, it explains why we can’t put more troops
as far as Canada, they are not involved in Africa,
as far as our military budget, it is non existing comarating yours :
http://www.globalfirepower.com/list_mil_exp.asp
as far as my suggestion, yes I was joking, sorry
September 8th, 2007 at 1:41 amFrance, I’ve often thought the same about our inner-city ‘yutes’. Instead of shooting each other everyday over here go over there and shoot them all over there.
September 8th, 2007 at 2:33 amI think I am gay.
September 8th, 2007 at 3:09 amto the connard who borrows my pseudo :
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7097/proutkm7.gif
John, yes, I thought too that could have been a solution, but unfortunately, they are too in use of idleness and for a part of them of dealing drugs
September 8th, 2007 at 3:17 amFrance the retour
I know, I got that you were joking at the last minute.
Still, with the size of the French military, which is larger than that of the UK, there should be more French involvement in Afghanistan under NATO. I read the article you posted (my French isn’t that good) and with the active duty and reserve components of the French military, there are enough troops to commit on the same level as at least the Germans.
I do realize the power and spending disparity between the US and France (or Europe as a whole). However, I believe that providing one brigade, about 4,500 combat ground forces, with commensurate support forces and air forces are more than doable.
I know that it is difficult for any military other than that of the US to operate in several different areas of the world at any significant strength. It is just a reality of the world we live in.
This is why the UK is building two brand new aircraft carriers and I believe France is a part of that too. Europe needs to not only strengthen its military to help share the burden in NATO, but to also provide for its own defense more so than it has.
But back to my point. France the retour, do you think that the French people would spend more on defense? Because that is what it’ll take I believe. The best way to put it into perspective is that the US can support well over 175,000 troops in combat all over the world where France can barely support about 9,000. This is a huge problem.
So it seems it really comes down to money.
September 8th, 2007 at 3:29 amJJ26,
the budget of our defense was keeping to be lowered till now, I don’t know if our new government will find more money, our state is in deficit on each important goal, as well for universities ; the spending in administration for the past decades still cost us money. I expect the situation will improve in the next years though : the persons in administration will not be replaced for half of them
September 8th, 2007 at 3:43 am[…] “The Failure Of Alliance Members To Live Up To Their Commitments” — Pat Dollard […]
September 8th, 2007 at 5:59 am