U.S. Unhappy With Faithful Allies
Published in Nezavisimaja Gazeta
(Russia) on 17 December 2008
by Vladimir Skosirev (link to original)
Having failed to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan, NATO leading members are blaming each other for military misfortunes. The head of Pentagon subjected to criticism the actions of the British troops. London in turn considers that Americans put too much emphasis on using military force and they are converting Afghani people into enemies. It is reported that Prime Minister Brown does not intend to increase the number of British troops in Afghanistan opposing Obama’s wish.
According to the Times newspaper, the U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who will continue working in the new Barack Obama administration, showed deep disappointment with the way the British are fighting the insurgents in Gilmend Province, in the south of Afghanistan. Even though this criticism was not expressed officially, American military experts confirm that the Pentagon is not happy with the contribution the British are making in cracking down on the Taliban. Carter Malkasian, an analyst of a Navy and Marine Corps research center in Washington, stated that Britain’s reputation in the U.S. Department of defense is ruined.
Americans believe that British troops are not equipped well enough and they are lacking a sufficient number of helicopters. American military commanders complain that they regularly have to use their aviation to rescue the British troops ambushed by rebels. Sharp remarks about the allies are in many ways caused by the war in Iraq. According to David Kilcullen, the U.S. State Department advisor, the British were defeated on a battlefield in Southern Iraq in 2006.
This attitude from the coalition partner has offended, if not infuriated the British. A British officer told a reporter: “They (USA – “NG”) have very few allies that are taking part in military actions at all.” An anonymous official in the UK Ministry of Defense said: “We are fighting to the best of our abilities and we are making the second largest contribution among the NATO members. Thus, it is completely unjustified to make us an object of criticism.”
British officers believe that the Pentagon completely ignores their experience of anti-insurgent operations gained during the military actions in Malawi and Northern Ireland. This was indicated by a British Brigade general Nigel Aylwin-Foster.
A behind the scenes exchange of reproaches between the military reverberated on political relations between London and Washington. Prime Minister Gordon Brown visited Afghanistan last week. The UK consulate and the commanders of British troops gave him a gloomy report about the current situation in the country. Brown is not thrilled about sending an additional 2,000 soldiers to Afghanistan, which is what the U.S. insists on. In other words, he does not intend on following Barack Obama’s example, who announced that he would send an additional 20,000 American soldiers to Afghanistan.
London reminds that the UK has 8,400 soldiers in the country. 132 soldiers were killed fighting the extremists. Further increase in the number of British troops might become unacceptable for British public opinion.
NATO’s difficulties were aggravated by a strike of Afghani and Pakistani drivers, who deliver loads for troops from Karachi through the Harbour crossing. They demand to be guaranteed security.
Considering an increasing risk of such transportation, NATO is conducting talks on laying an alternative baseline through Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. However, Washington does not want to depend on Moscow for its military supplies. This is why it is also carrying on negotiations with Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan.
According to the Times newspaper, the U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who will continue working in the new Barack Obama administration, showed deep disappointment with the way the British are fighting the insurgents in Gilmend Province, in the south of Afghanistan. Even though this criticism was not expressed officially, American military experts confirm that the Pentagon is not happy with the contribution the British are making in cracking down on the Taliban. Carter Malkasian, an analyst of a Navy and Marine Corps research center in Washington, stated that Britain’s reputation in the U.S. Department of defense is ruined.
Americans believe that British troops are not equipped well enough and they are lacking a sufficient number of helicopters. American military commanders complain that they regularly have to use their aviation to rescue the British troops ambushed by rebels. Sharp remarks about the allies are in many ways caused by the war in Iraq. According to David Kilcullen, the U.S. State Department advisor, the British were defeated on a battlefield in Southern Iraq in 2006.
This attitude from the coalition partner has offended, if not infuriated the British. A British officer told a reporter: “They (USA – “NG”) have very few allies that are taking part in military actions at all.” An anonymous official in the UK Ministry of Defense said: “We are fighting to the best of our abilities and we are making the second largest contribution among the NATO members. Thus, it is completely unjustified to make us an object of criticism.”
British officers believe that the Pentagon completely ignores their experience of anti-insurgent operations gained during the military actions in Malawi and Northern Ireland. This was indicated by a British Brigade general Nigel Aylwin-Foster.
A behind the scenes exchange of reproaches between the military reverberated on political relations between London and Washington. Prime Minister Gordon Brown visited Afghanistan last week. The UK consulate and the commanders of British troops gave him a gloomy report about the current situation in the country. Brown is not thrilled about sending an additional 2,000 soldiers to Afghanistan, which is what the U.S. insists on. In other words, he does not intend on following Barack Obama’s example, who announced that he would send an additional 20,000 American soldiers to Afghanistan.
London reminds that the UK has 8,400 soldiers in the country. 132 soldiers were killed fighting the extremists. Further increase in the number of British troops might become unacceptable for British public opinion.
NATO’s difficulties were aggravated by a strike of Afghani and Pakistani drivers, who deliver loads for troops from Karachi through the Harbour crossing. They demand to be guaranteed security.
Considering an increasing risk of such transportation, NATO is conducting talks on laying an alternative baseline through Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. However, Washington does not want to depend on Moscow for its military supplies. This is why it is also carrying on negotiations with Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan.