Thursday, November 16, 2006

Afstan: Some NATO members must do more

A Dutch and a British MP slam fellow members of the Alliance.

1) "Lack of NATO help slammed[:] Report blasts member nations not carrying load[;] Finger pointed at France, Germany, Italy and Turkey"
While Canadian, Dutch and British troops have been fighting and dying on the frontlines in southern Afghanistan, other NATO nations have refused to send in reinforcements to assist them, a new report charges [full text at link--well worth a look - MC]].

In a biting commentary, a Dutch parliamentarian takes aim at members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization for not providing additional forces to assist in the dangerous mission of combating insurgents.

As well, Bert Koenders slams the rules imposed by some nations on their forces that prevent them from being deployed into action — even as soldiers from other NATO states come under withering attacks...
But note:
The report calls into question Canada's rosy view of the progress that has been made in Afghanistan, warning that few citizens have seen any improvements in their lives, that the insurgency is at its peak and that the drug trade is booming.

"Most Afghans have seen little change in their lives, making it easier for resurgent Taliban to recruit," the report said.

"Failure to bring security or services to rural regions, particularly in the south, has generated deep disappointment among Afghans," it said...
2) "NATO failed Canada in Afghanistan, British MP says"
A British Labour MP [my emphasis - MC] praised Canadian troops Wednesday for their ''superb gallantry and valour'' in Afghanistan, but said they were let down by their NATO allies.

Frank Cook is one of 340 parliamentarians from countries belonging to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization who have gathered here this week for the NATO parliamentary assembly...

After the Canadians drove the Taliban from safe havens in Panjwaii, killing about 200 of the enemy, Cook said, Canada sought help from its NATO allies with troops already in Afghanistan to consolidate the gain.

''Five NATO countries refused,'' he said, explaining they invoked ''national caveats,'' defined by their legislators to limit the scope of their commitment to the Afghan mission. Cook did not identify the countries...

1 Comments:

Blogger Chris Taylor said...

Interestingly, MND O'Connor said more or less the opposite this morning.

It was his impression that the number of insurgent attacks had fallen dramatically this month and that the lives of ordinary Afghans was better in numerous ways: more women being educated, better access to basic medical care, better infrastructure, Afghan economy has tripled in size -- but is still 120 times smaller than ours, mind you -- that sort of thing.

He also seemed to think that the restrictions on other NATO forces would be lifted in time, citing Kosovo as an example. At the time it was first formulated, many nations contibuting to KFOR had restrictions on mission types and AO, and now (according to him) none do. He anticipates the same for Afstan as time goes on.

4:05 p.m., November 16, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home