| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| NATO allies deaf to US call for help |
| 2006-09-13 |
| SOME of the US's closest NATO allies have abandoned Washington on the key battleground ofthe war on terror - the bloody struggle against Islamic militants for control of southern Afghanistan. Five years after the world stood "shoulder to shoulder" with the US in the aftermath of 9/11, The Times has learned that many of the countries that pledged support then have now ignored an urgent request for more help in fighting a resurgent Taliban and its al-Qa'ida allies. Turkey, Germany, Spain and Italy have effectively ruled out sending more troops. France has not committed itself either way, but military sources in Kabul said there were no expectations that the French would contribute to a new battle group, especially now they were providing a substantial force in Lebanon. They have rejected an appeal from General James Jones, the American Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, for 2500 more troops to fight alongside American, British, Canadian and Dutch soldiers. The 26-nation alliance has not volunteered a single extra combat soldier. Britain, which has 5400 troops in Afghanistan, has told its NATO partners they must do more if the line is to be held against the resurgent Taliban. The conflict has cost the lives of 33 British troops since June. Battles were raging in Afghanistan yesterday, where NATO estimates 600 Taliban fighters have been killed in its new offensive. Twenty NATO soldiers, including 14 British servicemen who died when their Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft crashed on the first day, have been killed. Only the newcomers to NATO have indicated they would be prepared to send more soldiers. Latvia, with an army of 1817 soldiers, plans to increase its presence in Afghanistan from 36 to 56 people. Neither Norway nor Denmark is planning to send reinforcements. The Netherlands is already playing a significant role in the south. "Terrorism remains a threat to all of us. This is why we are in Afghanistan, the cradle of 9/11," said NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. The muted response from NATO members casts a shadow over solemn tributes in the US and Britain yesterday for the almost 3000 people killed on 9/11. US President George W.Bush travelled from New York to Pennsylvania and finally to the Pentagon for memorial services at the sites where the four hijacked airliners came down. "My job is to protect this country," Mr Bush said. "And I am going to, within the law. And it gets second-guessed all the time by people who don't live in the United States." In a clear dig at his critics abroad, he added: "Let me remind you: September 11th for them was a bad day; for us it was a change of attitude." The tone could not have been more different from the atmosphere five years ago when allies, and even some traditional foes, of the US lined up to offer Washington military assistance, intelligence and diplomatic support, in particular for its aim to destroy al-Qa'ida and overthrow the Taliban regime in Kabul. NATO forces in Afghanistan admitted they were dangerously overstretched, but there was no suggestion the Taliban and its al-Qa'ida allies were winning the battle for control of the country. The Taliban are more ferocious and more determined than at any time since they were overthrown by US-led forces in late 2001. As well as carrying out suicide bombing, they are also fighting hand to hand, occupying and controlling towns and districts for days at a time under the noses of NATO troops. |
| Posted by:Oztralian |
| #9 TW, they may have a couple more of them troops, butall this cost money. The dole recipients are a priority. |
| Posted by: twobyfour 2006-09-13 22:53 |
| #8 I thought we'd concluded that a large part of their problem is they just haven't any more combat troops to send? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-09-13 22:30 |
| #7 Our friends. Should be a big surprise to no one. |
| Posted by: Jules in the Hinterlands 2006-09-13 22:08 |
| #6 The UN, NATO, Red Cross, etc. I *know* you used the word "international", but I feel it is worth pointing out that the American Red Cross is not the feckless and sucky International Red Cross. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2006-09-13 21:54 |
| #5 Red Crescent has weapons deliveries on demand... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-09-13 21:35 |
| #4 Red Cross supplies doughnuts at least..... |
| Posted by: Ulinens Sneck2067 2006-09-13 21:27 |
| #3 Is there an international organization that's worth spit? The UN, NATO, Red Cross, etc. |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2006-09-13 21:25 |
| #2 or better yet just withdraw from NATO and let them defend themselves |
| Posted by: sinse 2006-09-13 21:21 |
| #1 Just withdraw all our forces from, say, Germany, all at once. Let's see them defend themselves. |
| Posted by: Snereting Omeretch6894 2006-09-13 21:14 |