Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !

Home Front: WoT

US offers asylum lifeline to Afghan war hero as UK refuses to recognise his military service

2023-06-14

[Independent] Humiliation for Britannia as America — alerted by The Independent — considers safe haven for pilot facing deportation to Rwanda. The US is formally investigating whether to give safe haven to the Afghan pilot UK officials are threatening to deport to Rwanda, sparking fury from top politicians and military figures who called it "shameful" that Britannia should turn its back on the war hero. The former air force lieutenant, who flew multiple combat missions alongside coalition forces, has been living in limbo for months after coming to the UK on a small boat while his wife and child hide from the Taliban ...the Pashtun equivalent of men... in Afghanistan. There was shock at defence secretary Ben Wallace’s refusal to intervene after the pilot’s application to the UK’s Afghan refugee scheme was rejected this week — a decision that left him facing the prospect of a one-way flight to Rwanda. While British officials have refused to intervene to halt the Home Office deportation threat, the US Department of State is now considering the pilot and his family’s asylum application after The Independent first raised his case. General Sir Richard Dannatt, the former head of the British army, said the fact that the pilot had been "cast off" by the British for the US to handle was "a complete abrogation of our responsibilities and our decency". Air Marshal Edward Stringer, commander of RAF air operations during the Afghan conflict, said the UK government was making a "weaselling distinction" over the pilot’s war record. Former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith said that for Britannia to "turn its back on a pilot" and fail to "do what is necessary to keep to the covenant that we protect his life as he helped to protect ours" is "shameful". Sir Iain told The Independent: "Without heroes like this pilot, who is now seeking our help to stay here, we would not be able to fight causes which matter to democratic governments who fight for freedom." He added: "We were allies and comrades in arms to those who helped the coalition, and now they themselves and their families are at risk from the Taliban. We have failed our pledge we gave to stand by them. To see America stand in for us and do the decent thing is galling and shameful." Labour said Rishi Sunak’s government appeared to be applying "Operation Cold Shoulder" to Afghan heroes, describing the intervention by the US as "deeply embarrassing".

Link

Afghanistan

B.O. puts brake on troops surge in Afghanistan

2009-02-09

United States President Barack Obama has demanded that the US defence chiefs review their strategy in Afghanistan before going ahead with a troop surge. There is concern among senior Democrats that the US military is preparing to send up to 30,000 extra troops without a coherent plan or exit strategy. The Pentagon was set to announce the deployment of 17,000 extra soldiers and marines last week but Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, postponed the decision after questions from Obama. The US president was concerned by a lack of strategy at his first meeting with Gates and the US joint chiefs of staff last month in "the tank", the secure conference room in the Pentagon. He said: "What's the endgame?" and did not receive a convincing answer. Larry Korb, a defence expert at the Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank, said: "Obama is exactly right. Before he agrees to send 30,000 troops, he wants to know what the mission and the endgame is." Obama promised an extra 7,000-10,000 troops during the US presidential election campaign, but the military has inflated its demands. Leading Democrats fear Afghanistan could become Obama's "Vietnam quagmire". If the surge goes ahead, the military intends to limit the mission to fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and leave democracy building and reconstruction to Nato allies and civilians from the US State Department and other agencies. The US has been pushing Britain to send several thousand more troops but there is just as much disagreement and confusion among British defence chiefs over the long-term aim. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is set to receive a full briefing this week. General Sir Richard Dannatt, the British army chief who would step down this summer, insisted that troops needed a rest and believed that he could send only one battle group, senior defence sources said. General Sir David Richards, his successor, believed that the two extra battle groups the Americans had asked for was the minimum the UK should send, the sources said.

Link

Britain

I’m no hero, says Prince Harry

2008-03-02

LONDON - Prince Harry, pulled out of a 10-week tour ofduty in Afghanistan for security reasons, wants a swift return to the frontline, he said an interview published Sunday, insisting he is not a hero. You're a soldier. That's good enough for all of us. But as the 23-year-old spent his first night on British soil since mid-December, the head of the British Army dealt his ambitions an immediate blow, saying he was unlikely to return to the fray in the near future. The young prince said he was “slightly disappointed” about having to come home early, after a US website broke an embargo agreed between British media and the defence ministry not to publish his whereabouts for security reasons. And he said he was now waiting to hear from his superiors about his future role but was still keen to rejoin his regimental colleagues. “As far as I see it, yeah, I would love to go back and I’ve already mentioned it (to my commanding officer) that I want to go out very, very soon,” he added. But the Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt, said while Harry’s ambitions and enthusiasm were understandable, he could not see that happening for at least 18 months. “He’s just had a deployment, we wouldn’t expect to send any young officer in the normal course of events who has just had — albeit 10 weeks and that quite quickly — for another tour,” he said. “So, actually the immediate prospect of Prince Harry going anywhere else is some way off in the future. It actually is hypothetical for the next 12 or 18 months whether he would or wouldn’t deploy again.” In interviews soon after his return, Harry spoke matter-of-factly about his work calling in air strikes, patrolling and firing at insurgents in Helmand province, in southern Afghanistan. “You do what you have to do, what’s necessary to save your own guys. If you need to drop a bomb, worst case scenario then you will, but then that’s just the way it is,” he said. “It’s not nice to drop bombs... but to save lives that’s what happens.” But he rejected the tag of “hero”, amid fulsome praise for his work from British political and military leaders and the media. “I wouldn’t say I’m a hero at all. I’m no more a hero than anyone else. If you think about it there’s thousands and thousands of troops out there,” he said. Two unconscious, badly injured soldiers — one of whom lost an arm and a leg to a landmine — were on his plane home, he told reporters. “Those are the heroes,” he said. He also said that during his time at an operating base just 500 metres (1,600 feet) from Taliban positions, he felt secure because there was “no place safer” to be than in the presence of Gurkhas. “Everyone is really well looked after here by the Gurkhas, the food is fantastic — goat curries, chicken curries ... it’s really good fun,” he added.

Link

Britain

UK general: forces 'can't carry on like this'

2007-11-18

The head of the Army has warned that years of Government under-funding and overstretch have left troops feeling "devalued, angry and suffering from Iraq fatigue", The Sunday Telegraph can reveal. General Sir Richard Dannatt, the Chief of the General Staff, reveals in a top-level report that the present level of operations is "unsustainable", the Army is "under-manned" and increasing numbers of troops are "disillusioned" with service life. Gen Dannatt states that the "military covenant is clearly out of kilter", and the chain of command needs to improve standards of pay, accommodation and medical care. "We must strive to give individuals and units ample recuperation time between operations, but I do not underestimate how difficult this will be to achieve whilst under-manned and with less robust establishments than I would like." The report, a copy of which has been seen by this newspaper, reveals for the first time the general's concerns on virtually every aspect of the Army, from levels of pay to the quality of food in canteens. worrisome details at the link

Link

Iraq

British general hints at Iraq pull-out

2007-08-28

Comments by the head of the British army, General Sir Richard Dannatt, that his forces are stretched in Afghanistan and cannot deploy any more soldiers will only increase pressure on the British government to hasten its withdrawal from Iraq. At the same time, the British plan to withdraw to a kind of redoubt at Basra airport is being mocked both by the militant cleric Moqtada Sadr, whose Mehdi Army militia has harried British troops in southern Iraq, and by those US military thinkers who want more commitment in Iraq, not less. General Dannatt, speaking on a visit to Afghanistan, did not repeat the statement he made in October last year that Britain should "get out [of Iraq] sometime soon", but the thrust of British military thinking is clear enough - the key campaign is now in Afghanistan, and anything that can reduce and even eliminate the British commitment in Iraq can help in that task. "The army is certainly stretched. And when I say that we can't deploy any more battle groups at the present moment, that's because we're trying to get a reasonable balance of life for our people" he told the BBC. Britain is now down to about 5,500 troops in Iraq (compared to 7,000 when General Dannatt made his remarks last year), and intends to pull them back to the airport and hand Basra province over to Iraqi control, possibly this autumn. The policy was defended by a British spokesman in Basra, Major Mike Shearer. "This is not a new plan at all. It's good for the Iraqis, it's good for us and we will eventually see here Iraqi solutions for Iraqi problems and that has to be the way ahead," he said. This move has been derided by Moqtada Sadr, who regards American and British troops (and al-Qaeda fighters) as invaders. "The British are retreating. They know they will be leaving soon. They have realised this is not a war they should be fighting or one they can win," he told The Independent newspaper. And in the United States, there are signs of a backlash against the British at a time when the Bush administration is shaping up to continue with its so-called surge of troops into Iraq. The Sunday Telegraph reported that the senior British officer in Basra, General Jonathan Shaw, got short shrift when he started lecturing American officers on counter-insurgency. "It's insufferable, for Christ's sake," was the reported reaction of one senior figure closely involved in US military planning. "He comes on and he lectures everybody in the room about how to do a counter-insurgency. The guys were just rolling their eyeballs. The notorious Northern Ireland came up again."' In some quarters, the British pullback is seen as unhelpful to the surge. Stephen Biddle, a senior military commentator at the US think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations, said that the British withdrawal would be "ugly and embarrassing". Mr Biddle has previously called for a policy of getting even more involved in Iraq or getting out. He wants the US to reduce the training of Iraqi forces, and to support some forces in Iraq's civil conflict and oppose others, instead of trying to hold the ring. Meanwhile more than 100 leading foreign policy experts in the US have been surveyed about the war in Iraq and other security issues by the Center for American Progress and Foreign Policy magazine. Oh gee, let me guess the results of the survey ... A summary of the findings stated: "[The] experts see a world that is growing more dangerous, a national security strategy in disrepair, and a war in Iraq that is alarmingly off course." More than half say that the surge is "having a negative impact on US national security," according to the summary. In mid-September, Washington will disclose its next moves, with a report being drawn up on the advice of its commander in Iraq General David Petraeus and its ambassador Ryan Crocker. However, the indication is that President Bush is not inclined to put the brakes on yet. In a telling phrase in his weekly radio address on 11 August he stated: "The surge is still in its early stages." The Americans could probably live with a British pullback. They would probably object to a British withdrawal.

Link

Britain

Prince Harry to quit army ("in a couple of years")

2007-06-09

PRINCE Harry has decided to quit the army early over the debacle of his deployment to Iraq. The 22-year-old, who is on a training exercise in Canada, has told friends he "just couldn't face the humiliation" of being withdrawn from frontline service again. Instead, the prince hopes to join his father and grandmother to become a full-time working member of the royal family. He also plans to travel extensively in Africa and develop Sentebale, the charity he set up in memory of his mother which supports AIDS orphans in the poverty-stricken kingdom of Lesotho. A source close to the prince said: "Harry has wanted to serve in the army since he was a small boy and the debacle over his deployment to Iraq hit him hard. "The poor lad really is beside himself and more than a bit depressed. "He keeps up nearly by the hour on what is happening with his boys in the Gulf. "He knows in his heart of hearts that pulling him out was the death knell for his army career. "He has decided he will devote his time to charity work and travel. Harry has a list that his mother once made of things she wanted to help to change in the world and he wants to check all of them off.'' Reconnaissance officer Harry was due to go with his 12-strong troop from the Blues and Royals to Iraq to begin a six-month tour of duty at the beginning of last month. But the head of the army, General Sir Richard Dannatt, reversed the decision after receiving intelligence that to send Harry to the war zone would put him and his men at "unacceptable'' risk. One insurgent group had threatened to kidnap the young royal. The prince is now on exercise with the British Army Training Unit in Alberta, Canada, in preparation for a possible deployment to Afghanistan this summer. He is said to be encouraged by the move but concerned because there is already talk that the posting is in jeopardy due to rising casualties on the battlefield. Sources say the prince will probably stay for another couple of years as a face-saving exercise but is likely to quit after that.

Link

Britain

Prince Harry may still get a chance to see action

2007-05-29

Prince Harry could still fulfil his dream of serving in a war zone after Army chiefs drew up plans for him to serve with UK forces in Afghanistan this summer. Desperate to salvage some credibility from the debacle of his cancelled mission to Iraq, top brass are considering sending him with fellow officers to help train the Afghan army. The young prince was due to deploy as a troop commander with his Blues and Royals Regiment to southern Iraq this month, until the head of the Army General Sir Richard Dannatt decided it was too dangerous both for him and his fellow-soldiers. The 22-year-old prince has been trained to lead a 12-strong armoured reconnaissance unit, but he would instead join a small group of fellow officers - including some from his own regiment - in Afghanistan. Senior defence officials hope commanders would be able to keep Harry away from the public gaze, allowing him to carry out a meaningful role without facing excessive risks. It is hoped he could travel to Afghanistan unannounced, spend a few weeks there and return without attracting publicity. The plan would ease his bitter disappointment at not being allowed to serve with his unit - which is now in Iraq being led by a stand-in junior commander - and could even keep alive Harry's dream of a long-term Army career. One Army insider told the Mail: "I'm sure Harry will jump at the chance. It may not be the same as going to Iraq with his own guys, but it's better than sitting at home 'on his a***', as he put it. Clarence House declined to comment, saying: "Operational deployments are a matter for the Ministry of Defence." The MoD declined to comment on security grounds. But senior commanders are all too aware of how sensitive the plans are, say insiders, and a final decision from Sir Richard is not expected for some weeks. It was three weeks ago that Sir Richard announced an 11th hour U-turn over Harry's planned deployment to Iraq. He said "specific intelligence" meant the risk to the prince and to his fellow soldiers would be too high. Commanders had learned of plots to seize Harry and smuggle him across the border to Iran -raising the nightmare prospect of a royal hostage crisis. An insurgent sniper had also been ordered to assassinate him as a "priority". The decision was a crushing blow for Harry, who had said publicly there was no way he wanted to "haul his sorry a***" through Sandhurst only to be left behind while his men went off to war. Publicly he accepted the decision and Clarence House played down talk of him quitting the Army, but in private he told friends he still hoped to be able to serve in a combat zone.

Link

Britain

Harry could be deployed in Afghanistan

2007-05-21

Britain’s Prince Harry, who was last week stopped from joining his regiment’s deployment to Iraq, could be sent to join troops in Afghanistan, a newspaper said on Sunday. News of the World said it had information about plans for the 22-year-old officer to join the fight against the Taliban, but was withholding key details. Harry is a second lieutenant in the elite Blues and Royals regiment of the British Army’s Household Cavalry, responsible for 11 soldiers and four Scmitar reconnaissance vehicles. Army chief General Sir Richard Dannatt blocked him from being sent to southern Iraq, due to threats against his life that would put his men in “unacceptable” danger. News of the World said that insurgents planned to hit both British camps in southern Iraq with chlorine bombs to be certain of getting the prince. Harry is set to be posted to Afghanistan before 2008 and could be seconded to join a NATO command unit, Britain’s biggest-selling newspaper said. He would carry out low-risk operations and earn a campaign medal after serving for 30 days, said the weekly. Meanwhile, The Observer newspaper said revelations about Harry’s deployment in a war zone would be censored if the government agrees to a proposal that would ban media from reporting on such aspects of his military career.

Link

Britain

Prince Harry will go to Iraq: army chief

2007-05-01

LONDON - Prince Harry will deploy to Iraq, the head of the British army said on Monday, after speculation that he may not go because of fears he could be targeted by insurgents. Henry Tudor was probably subject to the same sort of speculation. But General Sir Richard Dannatt also said he could yet change his mind, if circumstances change. “I have taken the decision as chief of general staff. It’s my decision as chief of general staff. I have full command of everyone in the army, including Prince Harry,” he said in a statement. “The decision has been taken by myself that he (Harry) will deploy with his regiment in due course.” Dannatt said the decision had been taken after the “widest possible consultation.” Asked the queen if he could go, huh? “I will of course keep that decision continually under review and if circumstances are such that I change that decision, I will make a further statement,” he told Sky News. Go git 'em, Harry, and keep yourself and your troops safe. He's obviously a man. Now he'll get to show whether he's a good man.

Link

Britain

British Admiral: 'tinpot' armed services

2006-12-24

Britain's beleaguered Armed Forces are in danger of being turned by the Government into a "tinpot gendarmerie" incapable of defending UK interests, according to one of the country's top military figures. Defence cuts and financial infighting at the Ministry of Defence are threatening Britain's status as a world power, said Admiral Sir Alan West in a blistering attack on Labour's defence policy. In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, he said the Government was risking the future security of British interests by reshaping the armed forces to wage long-term "anti-terror" campaigns in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Sir Alan, 58, said the MoD was behaving "like these tinpot countries" that fail to invest in major equipment programmes, and spend defence budgets on running rather than developing their armed forces. "That way is a recipe for disaster for a defence force that has to do all the things that Britain may have to do in the next 50 years," he said. In 10 years' time, the threat facing the UK could be something "far more dangerous than terrorism in central Asia". He added: "All we could be left with is an Armed Forces that is effectively a gendarmerie. And I suppose we would retire to our island and hope that no one gets to us." Sir Alan's comments follow recent criticisms of Government treatment of the Army from General Sir Richard Dannatt and General Sir Mike Jackson, the present and former heads of the Army respectively. The latest attack comes amid speculation that the MoD is about to delay or even cancel its "Carrier Strike" programme to build two aircraft carriers by 2015. Sir Alan, who retired as head of the Royal Navy this year, said he now feared that the £3.5 billion he had ring-fenced for the project was under threat from MoD officials trying to "undermine the programme" so that the money could be used elsewhere in the cash-strapped department. He said: "The carrier programme is the jewel in the crown of the strategic defence review. Yet there are officials within the MoD who are casting lascivious looks at it. There is no doubt that the rats are out there having a nibble. If Britain wants to remain a world power and to operate with a deal of freedom around the world, these two carriers are vital." Sir Alan also criticised the Army for not "going through the pain" of addressing its own financial problems in the way the Navy had done over the past few years. He described the Army's attitude towards cost-cutting as "atrocious" and accused senior officers of attempting to "raid" the Forces' overall equipment budget in an effort to solve its own financial problems.

Link

Britain

Blair pledge: 'We won't walk away'

2006-10-17

Tony Blair has pledged that British forces would not "walk away" from Iraq or Afghanistan until their job there is complete. At his monthly Downing Street press conference, the Prime Minister insisted that the British troops in the two countries were carrying out an important mission for world security. He said: "If we walk away before the job is done from either of those two countries, we will leave a situation in which the very people we are fighting everywhere, including the extremism in our own country, are heartened and emboldened and we can't afford that to happen. So we have got to see that job through." His comments follow a warning last week by the head of the Army, General Sir Richard Dannatt, that the British presence in Iraq was exacerbating the difficulties the UK faced around the world. Mr Blair stressed that Gen Dannatt was not calling for the immediate withdrawal of British troops from Iraq. "Of course, it is the case that for some of those areas in Iraq, particularly where the Iraqi forces now want to take control of those areas, it is important that we don't overstay the time that we need to be there," he said. "But in no sense was he saying - and neither should anybody say - that we should get out of Iraq before the job is done."

Link

Afghanistan

Leaked e-mail: RAF Worse Than Useless

2006-09-22

The RAF is giving "exceptional" support to ground forces in Afghanistan, the head of the British Army has said after a highly critical e-mail was leaked. General Sir Richard Dannatt reacted to a leaked e-mail from a major with the main UK battle group, which described the RAF as "utterly, utterly useless". Major James Loden of 3 Para, based in Helmand, said more help was needed. Gen Dannatt, the chief of the general staff, called the comments "irresponsible" and "regrettable". He said in a statement: "The Harriers and the support helicopters have played, and continue to play, a vital role in ensuring the battle group's success," he said. "Irresponsible comments, based on a snapshot, are regrettable," he added. In the leaked e-mail, confirmed as genuine by the Ministry of Defence, Maj Loden said there had been "plenty of tears" following casualties in the intense fighting with the Taleban. He is based in the north of the southern province of Helmand. His e-mail also gave an example of the RAF's failure to provide air support. "... Harrier pilot 'couldn't identify the target', fired two phosphorous rockets that just missed our own compound so that we thought they were incoming RPGs [rocket-propelled grenades], and then strafed our perimeter, missing the enemy by 200 metres," it said. Gen Dannatt countered that he had visited Afghanistan since the incident described, saying: "Following my recent visit... the men of the battle group left me in no doubt as to the value of the RAF's support to their operations." Earlier on Friday, an MoD spokesman said the "tears" Maj Loden referred to were "not tears of exhaustion or frustration". "This is a reflection of the fact these men are under daily attack and sadly there are often daily casualties." The spokesman added that the "moving" and "humbling" e-mail "reflects both how intense the fighting can occasionally be, and the enormous courage, dedication and skill of the British troops" in Helmand. Some were "working to the limits of endurance, but their morale is high and they are winning the fight", he added. Maj Loden's comments about the RAF "do not reflect the view of the vast majority of soldiers", the spokesman said. It had "performed brilliantly in defending coalition forces", he added. BBC defence correspondent Paul Wood said Maj Loden's comments reflected what officers were saying privately, but their tone and emphasis were at odds with the MoD's official statements. Other Parachute Regiment officers had told him they prefer to call in American A-10 Tankbusters for air support when under fire because of what they see as the RAF's ineffectiveness, he added. Liberal Democrat defence spokesman Nick Harvey called on the government to "provide an urgent statement" in response to Maj Loden's "disturbing comments". His e-mail showed "the need for a reassessment of the full range of capabilities required to accomplish the Nato mission" in Afghanistan, Mr Harvey added. "As our troops face increasing violence, we need to see a clear and achievable strategy and an honest assessment of the challenges ahead."

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More