UK

3° London Hi 11°C / Lo 3°C

This is a political as well as a military surge, says PM

Brown confirms Afghan reinforcements and admits presence of special forces

By Nigel Morris, Deputy political editor

At least 500 members of the special forces are operating in Afghanistan alongside regular troops, Gordon Brown disclosed yesterday as he confirmed extra soldiers would be sent to the country within days.

He announced that another 500 servicemen and women would be deployed before Christmas to reinforce the 9,000 already facing the Taliban insurgency in Helmand province.

The Prime Minister caused surprise in a Commons statement by discussing the number of special forces in Afghanistan, indicating there were at least 500 in the country.

Their presence takes the total British military presence in Afghanistan to more than 10,000, he told MPs.

"I believe the British people have a right to know and deserve the assurance that our highly professional, widely respected and extraordinarily brave special forces are playing their full role not only in force protection but in taking the fight directly to the Taliban, working in theatre alongside our regular forces.

"And I want the whole country to pay tribute to them. Taking into account these special forces, their supporting troops and the increases announced today our military effort in Afghanistan will be in excess of 10,000 troops."

Although British special forces are known to have been operating in Afghanistan since the invasion of 2001 – and to have suffered deaths and injuries – their presence has never before been acknowledged by the Government. They are believed to focus on tracking down insurgent groups and capturing their leading figures.

Last night, Whitehall sources said the Prime Minister's reference to the special forces had been cleared with the Ministry of Defence.

Mr Brown was speaking on the eve of today's expected announcement by President Barack Obama that more than 30,000 extra US troops are to be flown into Afghanistan.

Shortly after Mr Brown finished speaking, the Ministry of Defence announced the death of another British soldier. The serviceman, from 1st Battalion Coldstream Guards, died from the wounds he received in an explosion in the Babaji area of Helmand.

The Prime Minister's statement came more than two months after he first set out plans to deploy another 500 troops to Helmand.

At the time he laid out three conditions that had to be met before the reinforcements could be sent.

They were a guarantee that the extra troops would be properly equipped, a promise from other Nato countries to commit more forces and an assurance that the Afghan government would shoulder more of the burden.

Mr Brown told MPs that all the conditions had now been met and the additional 500 soldiers could be sent.

"The extra troops will deploy in early December to thicken the UK troop presence in central Helmand and from late January will make the transition to a partnering role." The Prime Minister also disclosed that eight other Nato countries have offered to send extra manpower.

He has set a target of coalition partners committing 5,000 more soldiers in addition to the American deployment.

Mr Brown declined to list the eight countries, but they are understood to be mainly central and eastern European nations such as Poland.

He told MPs the "military surge" would be complemented by a "political surge" with more Afghan police, a police reform plan and more effective and accountable local administration in Afghanistan.

The Prime Minister confirmed that an international conference on the country's future would be held in London on 28 January. Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, and Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary-general, will be among those who attend.

He argued that the Government would be "failing in our duty" if it did not work with coalition partners to counter the threat posed by the Taliban and al-Qa'ida and help to ensure a "safer Britain".

He said: "As long as the Afghan/Pakistan border areas are the location of choice for al-Qa'ida and the epicentre of global terrorism, it is the Government's judgement that we must address the terrorist threat at its source."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Two of a Kind
[info]stickytruth2 wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 07:07 am (UTC)
Blair and Brown, are made in the same cast, decide, destruction and death, however, there maybe light at the end of the tunnel, the Scots want to be independant, so if they do, we will ship Blair and Brown back to the highlands
"We owe it to the Afghan people?"
[info]find_empire wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 07:08 am (UTC)
60% of Afghans want "foreigners" to get the hell out.

Malalai Joya: The woman who will not be silenced


The Independent, July 28, 2009

The warlords who make up the new "democratic" government in Afghanistan have been sending bullets and bombs to kill this tiny 30-year-old from the refugee camps for years – and they seem to be getting closer with every attempt. Her enemies call her a "dead woman walking".

The Afghan public, she adds, are on her side, pointing to a recent opinion poll showing 60 per cent of Afghans want an immediate Nato withdrawal. Many people in Afghanistan were hopeful, she says, about Barack Obama – "but he is actually intensifying the policy of George Bush...what is important for the world is not whether the President is black or white, but his actions. You can't eat symbolism."
We should be able to kill some more people with this policy
[info]deimosp wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 10:38 am (UTC)
Seems what politicians are about these days. Send in troops with guns and start killing people. So the human race continues killing each other. We can put people on the moon, can alter the climate of our planet, can construct incredible machines yet when we disagree with another country or religion we just go in and start killing each other. We can split the atom and have access to vast energy reserves and we use it for mass destruction. And to maintain this ongoing killing vast industrial resources are used to develop and manufacture arms. Yet we have people dying from all sorts of treatable conditions because they cannot obtain treatment. We have people dying from malnutrition, but money and resources are not available to them because we need more weapons and more wars. Do we have a future as a race ?

And what is so frustrating is that most people in the world are really against all these wars and killing. I seems to be something the political class insist on undertaking (but of course they stay well away surrounded by personal security guard). Whilst we have such leaders can we progress as a race ? Personally I doubt it - which is kind of disappointing.

But then, in my lifetime the leaders I see will just keep using killing others as a means to negotiate and resist often in the name of some god of some essential policy - but it all comes down to killing the opposition.

What is needed is a change of leadership all round. Maybe if those leaders who cause this are brought to account (maybe start n the UK where there is now at least one very wealthy ex-leader waiting for a war crimes trial or deserving of a war crimes trial). If the leaders felt they would be held to account then they might be more reserved about starting all these wars.
Withdraw troops
[info]cossack1 wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 11:56 am (UTC)
The Russians pulled out after 20 years. Will we stay beyond that time? Why have our soldiers to fight an unfair war and many beeing disabled for occupaying a far away country?
Because of our aggression we are now told we are not even safe in our own country!
What an achievment!
Again ...
[info]deimosp wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 12:21 pm (UTC)
In revealing the presence of Special Forces Brown has added to their risks. Brown has put a political announcement above the safety of our troops. Revealing the 500 Special Forces does not make us more effective in Afghanistan, does not persuade the US of our commitment (as they already knew about them) - all it does is help Brown politically as he needed to include them to get to the 10 000 number. Disgusting that he is seeking political gain over troop safety.
BROWN HAS LOST OUR RESPECT:
[info]bgarvie wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 03:58 pm (UTC)
Nobody believes a word Brown says. He pontificates like a demented dictator, demanding things be done. He does not realise the Pakastini forces have been immersed in counter insurgency work for years and have lost thousands of troops fighting terrorists in their difficult lawless tribal, border regions. How dare Brown dictate to them how to fight. His comments were frankly an insult to those involved in this difficult war.
Re: BROWN HAS LOST OUR RESPECT:
[info]dydor wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 08:13 pm (UTC)
'How dare Brown dictate to them how to fight'. Indeed. They're clearly doing very well without his input.

Most popular in UK News