| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| Nato fails on Afghan troops plea |
| 2006-09-13 |
| No formal offers have been made by Nato states in response to requests by commanders in Afghanistan for 2,500 extra troops, Nato says. Members are meeting in Belgium amid pressure from the International Security Assistance Force, which is fighting in southern Afghanistan. Differing rules of engagement between Nato states are creating difficulties. However, a Nato spokesman said there were "positive indications" some might consider sending forces in the future. There are at least 18,500 foreign, mainly Nato soldiers in Afghanistan in addition to about the same number of US troops deployed. Half of them are in the south where Canadian and British forces are sharing the burden with US aircraft support and special forces on the ground. In the latest violence, Afghan police say they killed 16 Taleban fighters in a fierce gun battle overnight in Helmand province. The fighting came as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned that Afghanistan was at risk of becoming a "failed state". All nations were represented at the meeting in Mons, near Brussels, and Nato's Supreme Command was to solicit offers for a reserve battalion of ground troops. Alliance spokesman James Appathurai told a news briefing that "no formal offers were made at the table". However, he said the extra troops were not needed to complete the continuing offensive in Afghanistan. "Operation Medusa is going well and achieving its operational objective," Mr Appathurai added. Correspondents say Nato will be hoping for a firm commitment by a meeting of alliance defence ministers in two weeks. Nato officials also said there had been a positive signal that some members with troops in northern Afghanistan, under restricted rules of engagement, might be willing to operate more flexibly. "The Canadians, Brits and many others are fighting very, very hard and they're stretched thin, and they need overall support," Mr Appathurai said. The Dutch, Australians and Estonians are also in southern Afghanistan but correspondents say many other countries have been reluctant to commit troops to what is currently the most dangerous part of the mission. Earlier, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was of "fundamental importance" to security that the "the job in Afghanistan is done properly". "We should never forget that the reason why our troops are in Afghanistan, along with other Nato countries, is because out of Afghanistan came the terrorism of 9/11," he said. On Tuesday US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Afghanistan's strategic position meant it risked becoming a haven for militant groups. Referring to a US decision to leave the country after the withdrawal of the Soviet Union in 1989, Ms Rice said, "We all came to pay for that." Speaking in Canada, she explained that the US should learn its lessons from Afghanistan. "If you allow that kind of vacuum, if you allow a failed state in that strategic location, you're going to pay for it," she said. Last month, Nato commanders took over from US-led coalition forces but there has been a resurgence of Taleban attacks, above all in the south. |
| Posted by:john |
| #4 The USA needs to look to its own interests. We need to conserve our resources for our own purposes. No more military support to NATO, and no more UN peacekeeping missions. Cut our financial support to the UN to something more appropriate to its value to us. Foreign aid should only be given where support for the USA is returned. We should face the fact that we are on our own except for the Australia, Israel, snd Japan. And maybe India and Canada. |
| Posted by: SR-71 2006-09-13 21:35 |
| #3 Nato fails There - fixed that for ya'. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-09-13 20:40 |
| #2 From the people who for a little over 45 years lived upon the military welfare of the United States, what do you expect? Just enough of a palace guard to look important, but nothing underneath the hood to do much beyond shooting up the (ex-)colonials. |
| Posted by: Unomomble Thins6414 2006-09-13 20:12 |
| #1 The Little Red Hen . . . |
| Posted by: ex-lib 2006-09-13 18:15 |