Washington-
— A military investigation into a deadly battle in eastern Afghanistan could lead to punishment of up to three US Army officers amid allegations of "negligence," officials said on Friday.
US defence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AFP a Central Command investigation faults three officers, including a battalion commander, for their role and suggests possible disciplinary action.
Nine soldiers were killed and 27 wounded in the July 2008 battle when about 200 Taliban-
fighters broke through American lines and nearly overwhelmed a remote outpost in Wanat.
The battle in rugged terrain near the Pakistani-
border prompted allegations that commanding officers made careless decisions and raised wider questions about Washington's strategy in the Afghan war.
Commanders of the NATO-led force have since shifted their focus to deploying troops in more populated areas, concluding that missions in remote villages such as Wanat make little lasting impact in the fight against the Taliban.
The investigators did not find that major mistakes were made during the battle but focused on decisions and actions prior to the Taliban attack, US officials said.
The results of the probe have been handed over to Army Secretary John McHugh, his office said in a statement on Friday.
McHugh ordered the head of the largest Army command, General Charles Campbell, to "review the recommendations and take action as he deems appropriate with regard to Army personnel identified in the report."
A U.S.-
Army spokesman declined to comment on the details of the probe, which followed a previous army investigation.
"We remain in close contact with the families of our fallen from this battle, and they will be invited to a comprehensive briefing on the investigation following General Campbell's actions," McHugh said in the statement.
Family members of the US soldiers killed in Wanat had previously urged a thorough investigation into the circumstances around the battle.
US Senator Jim Webb of Virginia had also appealed for further examination of the battle after he learned of "allegations of negligence at senior levels in the chain of command."
One of the dead soldier's parents, retired army colonel David Brostrom, has reportedly voiced concerns that the outpost was poorly managed and senior officers had intelligence on an impending attack.
The Washington Post and other media have reported soldiers at Wanat were short of water and sandbags to fortify their positions on a rocky mountainside. Commanders had also withdrawn a drone aircraft tracking insurgents in the area for tasks elsewhere.
The battle at Wanat remains one of the deadliest for the Americans in the eight-year-old Afghan war.
Source:AFP
Showing posts with label Afghan war a 'disaster'. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Afghan war a 'disaster'. Show all posts
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Australia will fight Afghan execution
KABUL, Afghanistan, Jan. 27 (UPI) -- The Australian government wants to overturn the death sentence an Afghan court has handed to a former Australian soldier, a government spokesman said Wednesday.
A spokesman for Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said his government will do everything it can to see that Robert Langdon, 38, is not executed, The Times of London reports.
Langdon was convicted of fatally shooting an Afghan colleague and trying to blame the man's death on the Taliban.
The incident occurred last May while Langdon was part of a team protecting a supply convoy that was attacked by Taliban insurgents.
"The Australian government will make high level representations to Afghan authorities to oppose the imposition of the death penalty, and vigorously support any clemency bids in this case," the spokesman said.
He added that Australia has been consulting with Langdon's lawyers and his employer about the case.
Source:upi.com/
A spokesman for Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said his government will do everything it can to see that Robert Langdon, 38, is not executed, The Times of London reports.
Langdon was convicted of fatally shooting an Afghan colleague and trying to blame the man's death on the Taliban.
The incident occurred last May while Langdon was part of a team protecting a supply convoy that was attacked by Taliban insurgents.
"The Australian government will make high level representations to Afghan authorities to oppose the imposition of the death penalty, and vigorously support any clemency bids in this case," the spokesman said.
He added that Australia has been consulting with Langdon's lawyers and his employer about the case.
Source:upi.com/
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Riedel '75: Afghan war a 'disaster'
Former CIA officer Bruce Riedel ’75 forecasted a bleak outlook for the political situation in both Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Watson Institute’s Joukowsky Forum, which was packed to capacity Monday night.
Currently a senior foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, Riedel was an influential White House adviser in Middle Eastern affairs until his retirement from government in 2006. Though he is briefly resuming his role as adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan at the request of Pres. Barack Obama, Riedel addressed the audience as an independent speaker.
Riedel focused his talk on terrorism and foreign policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, emphasizing al-Qaida’s presence in the region.
“President Obama has inherited a disaster from his predecessor,” Riedel said, “and faces the most difficult decision, I think, of his administration” — namely, how to deal with the war in Afghanistan and the possible failure of Pakistan to survive its political instability.
The stabilization of both Afghanistan and Pakistan is on the White House’s main agenda, Riedel said.
The course of action Riedel recommends for the U.S. is necessarily “resource intensive,” he said. Deploying one soldier to Afghanistan for a year costs about $1 million, he added. The strategy also involves tripling economic aid to Pakistan, which would make it the largest U.S. economic assistance program in the world.
If this strategy proves to be effective, the U.S. will be able to work with a more stable region and a weaker al-Qaida 20 months from now, Riedel said, and Afghanistan’s government will be strong enough to deal with the Taliban effectively. If the strategy fails, “the Taliban will take over southern and eastern Afghanistan,” he said, and the ripple effect throughout the region will be disastrous.
Riedel painted a pessimistic picture of the current state of the Afghan war. “Eight years after the fall of Kabul,” he said, NATO “is losing the war.” The rate of bombings in the country has skyrocketed since 2002, he said, and the Taliban have direct command over one-third of Afghan territory.
As a result of its “disastrous” elections, Riedel added, the country has a government that lacks legitimacy in the eyes of both the Afghan people and the world at large. “Karzai and his associates cheated massively,” he said, and the UN did nothing about it.
But Riedel also said the Taliban’s influence over Afghanistan’s people is somewhat limited. “The Taliban aspires to be an Islamist jihadist organization,” he said, but is in fact an organization that seeks to impose Pashtun customs. “There are a majority of Afghans that, by definition, reject it,” he said.
The situation in Pakistan, which Riedel called “the most dangerous country in the world today,” is even more complicated, he said. As the country struggles to transition from a military dictatorship to democracy, “Pakistan is undergoing the most serious violence in its history,” he said.
Riedel also addressed Pakistan’s relationship with the terrorist organizations active on its borders, claiming that the country is hostile toward some groups while on friendly terms with others, like the Taliban.
The war in Afghanistan is placing the U.S. in a vulnerable position internationally, Riedel said. Eighty percent of NATO troops rely on supplies that are shipped in through Pakistani ports, he added.
Riedel wrapped up his lecture by looking to the future: Obama’s speech on the war in Afghanistan Tuesday night. The president has to be sure that his administration fully supports the war, he said, because a half-hearted effort would be insufficient.
“He has to convince you and me that he has totally bought into this,” Riedel said.
Source:browndailyherald.com
Currently a senior foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institution, Riedel was an influential White House adviser in Middle Eastern affairs until his retirement from government in 2006. Though he is briefly resuming his role as adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan at the request of Pres. Barack Obama, Riedel addressed the audience as an independent speaker.
Riedel focused his talk on terrorism and foreign policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, emphasizing al-Qaida’s presence in the region.
“President Obama has inherited a disaster from his predecessor,” Riedel said, “and faces the most difficult decision, I think, of his administration” — namely, how to deal with the war in Afghanistan and the possible failure of Pakistan to survive its political instability.
The stabilization of both Afghanistan and Pakistan is on the White House’s main agenda, Riedel said.
The course of action Riedel recommends for the U.S. is necessarily “resource intensive,” he said. Deploying one soldier to Afghanistan for a year costs about $1 million, he added. The strategy also involves tripling economic aid to Pakistan, which would make it the largest U.S. economic assistance program in the world.
If this strategy proves to be effective, the U.S. will be able to work with a more stable region and a weaker al-Qaida 20 months from now, Riedel said, and Afghanistan’s government will be strong enough to deal with the Taliban effectively. If the strategy fails, “the Taliban will take over southern and eastern Afghanistan,” he said, and the ripple effect throughout the region will be disastrous.
Riedel painted a pessimistic picture of the current state of the Afghan war. “Eight years after the fall of Kabul,” he said, NATO “is losing the war.” The rate of bombings in the country has skyrocketed since 2002, he said, and the Taliban have direct command over one-third of Afghan territory.
As a result of its “disastrous” elections, Riedel added, the country has a government that lacks legitimacy in the eyes of both the Afghan people and the world at large. “Karzai and his associates cheated massively,” he said, and the UN did nothing about it.
But Riedel also said the Taliban’s influence over Afghanistan’s people is somewhat limited. “The Taliban aspires to be an Islamist jihadist organization,” he said, but is in fact an organization that seeks to impose Pashtun customs. “There are a majority of Afghans that, by definition, reject it,” he said.
The situation in Pakistan, which Riedel called “the most dangerous country in the world today,” is even more complicated, he said. As the country struggles to transition from a military dictatorship to democracy, “Pakistan is undergoing the most serious violence in its history,” he said.
Riedel also addressed Pakistan’s relationship with the terrorist organizations active on its borders, claiming that the country is hostile toward some groups while on friendly terms with others, like the Taliban.
The war in Afghanistan is placing the U.S. in a vulnerable position internationally, Riedel said. Eighty percent of NATO troops rely on supplies that are shipped in through Pakistani ports, he added.
Riedel wrapped up his lecture by looking to the future: Obama’s speech on the war in Afghanistan Tuesday night. The president has to be sure that his administration fully supports the war, he said, because a half-hearted effort would be insufficient.
“He has to convince you and me that he has totally bought into this,” Riedel said.
Source:browndailyherald.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)