We're Asking the Impossible in Afghanistan

Nick Clegg, Daily Telegraph July 9, 2009

When I visited British troops in Afghanistan last year I was, like everyone else, hugely impressed by their professionalism and courage. That admiration only deepens when news comes, all too regularly, of the death of someone serving there. Lt Col Rupert Thorneloe, who helped organise my visit, was killed last week alongside Trooper Joshua Hammond, in a vehicle unable to withstand a roadside bomb. We owe it to them to ensure their sacrifice is not in vain.

As leader of the Liberal Democrats, I have been keen to maintain the cross-party consensus on Afghanistan that formed after September 11, and has not faltered since. But recent events have led me to question, for the first time, whether we're going about things in the right way. I am concerned that we are simply not giving our troops the means to do their difficult job. We must not will the ends without being prepared to will the means.

I am a Liberal interventionist, who believes military action is justified when supported by reason and the law. I support the aim of our mission wholeheartedly: to stop Afghanistan reverting to a haven for terrorism, with its people oppressed and impoverished. To achieve that, military forces need to create enough space for stability and good governance to take root.

But we need to ask whether the Government has the will, strategy or tactics to do the job properly.

First: equipment and troop numbers. If you send people to war, you must supply the resources they need, or you should not send them at all. Otherwise you are betraying the fundamental covenant between a nation and its armed forces. I am appalled that so many of our soldiers have been killed because of inadequate equipment, and disturbed to hear from experts that we don't have enough forces to hold and rebuild territory once it has been won.

The US seems to have come to the same conclusion, and has deployed its own forces in Helmand, relegating us to the background, as in Basra. I can only imagine how demoralising it must be for our troops to feel they have to be bailed out by Uncle Sam.

But as Paddy Ashdown has been arguing, military action will never be enough. We need a co‑ordinated political strategy. For too long, governments, international agencies and NGOs have been incapable of speaking with one voice. Britain's lukewarm support for European co-operation in defence and security planning has contributed to the fragmented nature of operations. Our soldiers' lives are being thrown away because our politicians won't get their act together. To help them, we need a single individual or institution with a strong mandate, co-ordinating the actions of all international players.

Finally, there is the issue of corruption. If the Taliban are to be defeated, the Afghan people need to learn to trust state institutions – a huge challenge in a country that's never had effective central government. Yet progress is made impossible by corruption. We all hope to see free and fair presidential elections next month, but there are growing concerns that the candidates could be too compromised by their pasts. Rooting out corruption at all levels must be given a higher priority. Afghanistan will never prosper until peasant and president alike are subject to the rule of law.

The future of Afghanistan is of huge importance, but it will never be secured with troop and equipment shortages, an un‑coordinated political strategy and a blind eye turned to corruption. We must think again – not about pulling out, but about doing things differently. There are many options: the only one I would rule out is following the current course. It is a halfway house that lets our troops down by asking them to do the impossible. It is time to put real political will behind a new strategy, and a new commitment to Afghanistan. It is our last chance before it is too late.

Comments: 22

It's the forgotten army. MP's are too busy flipping their second home designations in order to avoid capital gains tax. Nick Clegg is just another Blair smooth operator wannabe. Nobody cares what he thinks or says. This country will continue to use its youth as cannon fodder, same as it always has. Nothing has been learnt. How long before conscription? I say repatriate all forces now, trade protection now, European defence force now. To hell with globalism, interventionism and consumerism. We don't need them. Countries will evolve in their own ways at their own rates. A far better intervention would be to stop arms sales to places like Somalia. But that would be effective, can't have anything effective, might end war and then what would the politicians maunder on about. Let wars be fought by politicians and leave the ordinary people alone. Let them all go to an island and fight it out with sticks and leave us in peace.

It is no good blaming others for this.We entered this in order to please the USA.The Eu did not sign up to it.Our troops have been let down by Nu Labour the MOD and those that lead them. We have a first class army and a third class government I hope those generals who are letting our boys down are reading this you can make the changes just speak out for once.

Ted Jeavons: Do you really believe anybody cares what Britain thinks? A number of countries have troops in Afghanistan. Some are pulling out: Canada next year. Germany probably after the German election in Sept.Bush and Blair are to blame. Afghanistan is a failed state: the US and it's foreingn auxiliaries have started a civil war. There is no quick way out, apart from quitting like in South Iraq.

I was agreeing with the author until he threw in "Britain's lukewarm support for European co-operation in defence and security planning has contributed to the fragmented nature of operations" Then I am afraid this article was relegated to the waste paper bin. Can the author name a single European nation, with the exception perhaps of the Netherlands who has put their troops properly in harms way? Where is their contribution to the fighting in Helmand?

Afghanistan is of zero importance when the main terrorist threat is reaching Britain via Pakistan.

I am certain that the main problem here is the insufficent numbers deployed. Let us not forget that practically the whole Russian army was in action in Afghanistan and even they could not hold the lid on internal security operations. How on earth can we expect a few brigades to sort out the trouble.

Ok so our troops are there forever then. To even hope for victory is simply delusional.

British deaths occur, amongst other things, because British troops are in a dangerous part of the country. Other countries� troops are kept safe and sound from deploying to dangerous locations due to the spineless attitude of their governments. A case in point is Spain - which talks the good talk but when it comes to putting troops where the real action is, their government is not interested. Also, British Army equipment is crap, (no matter how much hot air the MOD spouts); the soldiers make do as best they can and do wonders. I can only imagine how well they would do if given the right tools.

When are those bonehead politicians going to learn from history. You CAN'T win an insurgency war with standard forces. Ask the Russians. Our Canadian troops are losing more lads and lasses,per capita, than anyone else. Shame on those who send them into harm's way without the proper equipment.

Heaven defend us against Liberal interventionists and all other manner of interventionists, when they send brave and professional British service men and women to die in far-off lands fighting wars that are no concern of ours. Iraq turned out a costly blunder that has left that benighted country in a worse state than when the Coalition 'liberated' it. Afghanistan is turning out a blunder of the same magnitude - possibly even greater. Why are we there? Another campaign in the global war on terror? There never were any al Qaeda terrorists in Iraq. None of the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 hijackings had been hiding in caves in Afghanistan. All were domiciled in Saudi Arabia, Germany, and - yes, the good ole U S of A itself. And let us not forget which country armed and trained the Taliban. How many more brave and professional British men and women have to be maimed and killed before our political leaders learn to keep their noses out of other countries' business?

Blair's wars on Browns budgets,a succession of third rate Defence Ministers, a useless Parliament, no clear strategy or plan, inadequate equipment, poor senior leadership and a slowness to adapt to a new counter-insurgency environment have all contributed to the dire situation in Afghanistan. But to suggest that somehow things would have been better if we had been more European is a laughable fantasy.

For once I have to agree with most of Mr Clegg has to say.I to am appalled by this governments conduct of this war.Its cowardly to say the least and criminal to say just above the least.Such incompetence I have never seen in my life.Add to that the infighting between Blair ,Brown,pro CND MP's and the only thing that has happened is confused non policy that has resulted in needless death and wounded in our soldiers.Either we are at war or we are not,there is no half way house.Our soldiers in particular need equipment urgently.Our so called Defence Minister said that helicopters were not the answer!I have in all my life heard such rubbish coming from a Minister who sounds as though he is lucky to be able to speak English.Our soldiers need Kit,Kit,and more Kit.I have a vested interest in this as my son is about to take command of his battalion shortly,and I am a retired senior officer myself. Well said Mr Clegg I hope Mr Cameron gets the message as well for as a Tory supporter I think he is becoming untrustworthy on this issue.

"Britain's lukewarm support for European co-operation in defence and security planning has contributed to the fragmented nature of operations" True. If we'd followed the lead of the French and Germans, our troops would be there contributing very much less. For all the talk about maintaining our influence in Europe, the fact is that we have far too little for it to be worth us carrying on with continued integration with the anti-democratic monstrosity that is the EU. The Anglosphere (with exceptions such as the Dutch et al) is doing most of the dangerous work, while our European 'partners' sit back and give us full support, short of actual help.

Nick Clegg, as a fervent Europhile, seems to be advocating that Britain should be more eager to join in a Europe wide military force but when we see our neighbours keeping their troops away from any serious fighting in Afghanistan, and our own forces laying down their lives for the collective good, it's time to consider looking after our own interests above all else. What a legacy that man Blair has left us - no wonder Britain is regarded as "The Little Satan" by those who hate us and yet come among us.

Do you propose to dramatically increase the Defence budget so that our Armed Forces will be large enough to comfortably deploy sufficient manpower in Afghanistan and not be overstretched doing so? Your suggestion that Europe is the answer is absurd - we already have NATO, and notable examples in that (Germany, France) do not pull their weight in that: why would they in an EU force? Furthermore, the UK will loose the power to determine where we deploy our troops if we join such a supernational force - an unacceptable lose of sovereignty.

I don't understand why we cannot just restrict travel.There are 400,000 journeys to Pakistan a year and apparently one can holiday in Somalia while claiming asylum here. Some places are not holiday destinations and if this is home it should be home. It would still be possible to holiday in places where people are counted in and out. We are paying an enormous price so that ar*** can go on Jihadi gap years. We are paying it also while those who should be applauding the sacrifice are spitting on it.

If the current casualty rate continues the people will demand that our soldiers be withdrawn from Afghanistan just like America had to from Vietnam. And remember America had unlimited men, the best of equipment and their troops still took unacceptable levels of casualties. It was and is the strategy that is wrong, in both conflicts.

I have to admit I thought the LibDems made a mistake when they elected Clegg as leader but I say now that he is the most coherent and honest of all the party leaders. History shows that it is impossible to achieve a military victory in Afghanistan. Every Western leader should be made to read the memoirs of Habibullah Ghazi who lasted as King for about nine months in 1929 after his 'victory'. Although the US invasion of Afghanistan is understandable after 9/11 atrocity, it is futile to think that the West will gain a victory. if the truth be told, I doubt if the military really know who the enemy is. Like his honesty on Trident, Clegg is right about Afghanistan. It is not worth the sacrifice of our best young men and women for a hopeless cause. I am getting slightly worried. I seem to agree with virtually everything that comes out of the mouths of LibDems at the moment. If I were 100% convinced they would not enter into a coalition with Labour in a hung Parliament I'd even consider voting for them. But I'd take an awful lot of convincing that the LibdDEms will not jump into bed with Labour at the drop of a hat if the price is right.

�Britain's lukewarm support for European co-operation in defence and security planning has contributed to the fragmented nature of operations.� Would these be the same Europeans shirking battle by skulking around in the safe northern parts of Afghanistan? The EU nations combined spend more on defence than the US but, because there have no political will to fight, the money is wasted. I do not think that the US can afford to lose an ally that is actually prepared to enter the battlefield, Britain, to an EU-controlled force. I think the US is grateful for the �fragmented nature of operations� because Britain is actually doing something rather than hiding. Isn�t the issue of losing British soldiers sensitive enough for you to keep your warped, unauthorised, illegal, immoral and unwanted agenda of EU federalism out of it? Will the British people (not to mention Dutch, French and Irish) ever be consulted about the creation of federal EU-armed forces? Don�t answer, I know already� �To help them, we need a single individual or institution with a strong mandate, coordinating the actions of all international players.� I believe such an organisation exists already. It is called NATO. It saw off the Warsaw Pact without any help from cringing Europhiles like you or your master, the hated EU.

it's the troops who are making the sacrifice not the lamebrain politicians who sent them there.

What concerns (and pains) me is the frequency of British deaths in Afghanistan. Why are we the only European nation to lose so many men. Surely we can not blame it all on faulty equipment. I can only assume that the French and others keep their troops in safer places. Why do we allow them to get away with it?

We're Asking the Impossible in Afghanistan

Related Articles