• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

British troops in secret truce with Taliban

Kirkhill

Puggled and Wabbit Scot.
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
12,826
Points
1,160
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2383232,00.html

British troops in secret truce with the Taliban
Michael Smith
 
BRITISH troops battling the Taliban are to withdraw from one of the most dangerous areas of Afghanistan after agreeing a secret deal with the local people.
Over the past two months British soldiers have come under sustained attack defending a remote mud-walled government outpost in the town of Musa Qala in southern Afghanistan. Eight have been killed there.

It has now been agreed the troops will quietly pull out of Musa Qala in return for the Taliban doing the same. .....

Some commentators are questioning whether this is just the traditional winter pause but then there is this......

"... there are clear signs of the commitment of the people of Musa Qala to the deal, with one Talib who stood out against it reportedly lynched by angry locals."

Democracy in action indeed.

The rest of the article is pretty good as well.


 
tomahawk6 said:
Or else its the UK's new policy of casualty avoidance ?

Unfortunately that's probably closer to the mark.

The Army wants another battalion or two for a reaction force.  They aren't getting the one that Tony apparently promised them. NATO isn't ponying up. Tony won't let them shift the Iraq commitment into Afghanistan.......And to top it all off they got lumbered with a policy of too many FOBs, too widely dispersed and too undermanned.  Time to punt?

On the other hand maybe the locals really do want to see the Taliban out of town.  If they really do see the Taliban as foreigners as much as the Brits then there might be something to this.

I am guessing that the locals in these areas see foreigners in the same terms that Campbells saw MacDonalds as foreigners. Anybody not from their valley is a foreigner. There was a tale in one paper just recently of a tribal leader wondering why it had taken these Russians so long to come back - he hadn't received his baksheesh for a while.  Apparently the word hadn't got round to him that the Russians left 20 years ago.  Mass communication is not a forte over there.



 
Can anyone confirm this, or is it just another load of bull?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2383232,00.html

British troops in secret truce with Taliban

BRITISH troops battling the Taliban are to withdraw from one of the most dangerous areas of Afghanistan after agreeing a secret deal with the local people.

Over the past two months British soldiers have come under sustained attack defending a remote mud-walled government outpost in the town of Musa Qala in southern Afghanistan. Eight have been killed there.

It has now been agreed the troops will quietly pull out of Musa Qala in return for the Taliban doing the same. The compound is one of four district government offices in the Helmand province that are being guarded by British troops.

Although soldiers on the ground may welcome the agreement, it is likely to raise new questions about troop deployment. Last month Sir Richard Dannatt, the new head of the British Army, warned that soldiers in Afghanistan were fighting at the limit of their capacity and could only “just” cope with the demands.

When British troops were first sent to Afghanistan it was hoped they would help kick-start the country’s reconstruction. But under pressure from President Hamid Karzai they were forced to defend Afghan government “district centres” at Musa Qala, Sangin, Nowzad and Kajaki.

The move — opposed by Lieutenant-General David Richards, the Nato commander in Afghanistan — turned the four remote British bases into what Richards called “magnets” for the Taliban. All 16 of the British soldiers killed in action in southern Afghanistan have died at Musa Qala, Sangin or Nowzad.

The soldiers risk sniper fire and full-scale assaults from experienced Taliban fighters who can then blend into the local population after each attack.

The peace deal in Musa Qala was first mooted by representatives of the town’s 2,000-strong population. About 400 people living in the immediate area of the district centre compound have been forced to evacuate their homes, most of which have been destroyed in the fighting.

Brigadier Ed Butler, the commander of the British taskforce, flew into Musa Qala 18 days ago, guarded only by his military police close-protection team, to attend a shura, or council of town elders, to negotiate a withdrawal.

Butler was taken in a convoy to the shura in the desert southeast of Musa Qala where the carefully formulated proposals were made. The British commander said that he was prepared to back a “cessation of fighting” if they could guarantee that the Taliban would also leave.

The deal — and the avoidance of the word ceasefire — allows both sides to disengage without losing face, an important aspect in the Afghan psyche. Polls suggest that 70% of the population are waiting to see whether Nato or the Taliban emerge as the dominant force before they decide which to back.

Fighting in Afghanistan traditionally takes place in the summer and there are concerns that the Taliban could simply use the “cessation of fighting” to regroup and attack again next year. But there are clear signs of the commitment of the people of Musa Qala to the deal, with one Talib who stood out against it reportedly lynched by angry locals.

“There is always a risk,” one officer said. “But if it works, it will provide a good template for the rest of Helmand. The people of Sangin are already saying they want a similar deal.”

There is frustration among many British troops that they have been unable to help on reconstruction projects because they have been involved in intense fighting. An e-mail from one officer published this weekend said: “We are not having an effect on the average Afghan.

“At the moment we are no better than the Taliban in their eyes, as all they can see is us moving into an area, blowing things up and leaving, which is very sad.”

The Ministry of Defence announced this weekend that 10 British soldiers had been seriously injured in fighting in the last few days of August, bringing the total number of troops seriously injured in the country this year to 23.

A total of 29 British servicemen have lost their lives in southern Afghanistan in the past two months, including 14 who died when their Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft crashed on September 2.

A new poll published last week revealed a lack of public confidence over the deployment of troops in Afghanistan. According to the BBC poll, 53% of people opposed the use of British troops in the region. 
 
well.... at 1st read I'd be inclined to call "buffalo chips" but, if the local population are able to stand up to the Taliban - direct both NATO & Talib to withdraw, then there are some good chances that this is true.  Note that if the Talib come back and settle up with the local elders at a later date... they'll truly be, paying with their heads.
 
Maybe these two articles are related. ;)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51206.0.html

Its probably true. The Brits followed the same strategy in Basra until it blew up in their faces earlier this year.
Now Basra is almost a no go zone for the Brits. When you allow the bad guys to gain strength it makes it that much harder to dislodge them. In the same respect the US hands off policy towards Sadr is costing us every day. In the long run we should have taken him out and maybe some soldiers would be alive today had we done that. Its not too late. But the cost wil be alot higher.
 
Wow, that was odd.  Right before I posted this I searched for " British troops in secret truce with Taliban" just in case someone else already posted it...and it came up with nothing.

EDIT: Even as I search now I get "Your search query didn't return any matches."    Not a big deal though..
 
Can it still be called secret when we're all talking about it already?  :-\
 
i don't know all the facts on this issue but i highly doubt the British military would even think about forming a truce with anyone of those taliban sob's
 
I tend to trust the British Army to (generally) make the proper tactical decisions on the ground; all that has been written in the open press about this "truce" should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Speculating, I wonder if this isn't a deliberate effort to split the resistance in the area.  As Kirkhill points out, there's a report stating that the village elders had killed a Taliban official for insisting on breaking the "truce".  If the Brits can stick to it, they may well be able to convince the locals of the Taliban's true motives.

Blowing the s**t out of things isn't always the solution - let's give the tactical commanders the benefit of the doubt unless something definitive is promulgated by a more reliable source.
 
An interesting post, by dglad, in a parallel thread
Army.ca Forums > The Newsroom > International Situation & World News > Topic: A New Look At The Afghan-Pakistan Problem adds some perspective to this situation.

To summarise, dglad, notes
my emphasis, added
This past weekend, I attended a talk by Nelofer Pazira, an Afghan-Canadian who was the star of "Khandahar" .... she did make some interesting points:

  • among the many competing interests in south-central Asia is a nationalistic desire among the Pashtun people to form a greater Pashtunistan, independent from both Afghanistan and Pakistan.  Somewhat reminiscent of the Kurds in Iraq, no?
  • she believes that the "Taliban" actually consists of 3 fairly distinct factions--the hard-core, ideologically motivated zealots, who are raised on a diet of intolerance and sectarian dogma, mainly in the some 2500 madrassahs in Pakistan; a second group, composed of predominantly ex-mujahadeen and criminal elements who are primarily interested in a power-and-profit agenda; and the largest group, composed of ordinary Afghans, mainly farmers, who see the other two groups as the least of current evils and support them as along as it maximizes their own chances of simple survival. Obviously, the "swing" group is the third one; if they can be "wedged" away from the other two, the "Taliban" as a movement will be seriously undermined.  Interestingly, the second group is probably also subject to changing their ways, simply because mercenaries blow with the wind anyway.  The challenge, of course, is in the "how" of this.

....



This is an interesting hypothesis, one we have read before, because of the 'first hand' nature of it, and its proximity, I have used it.

One wonders several things. First as we have seen on counter insurgency operations, there appears to be several phases. For this purprose they could be identified as...
  • The defeat of any 'regular' enemy. In this case the Afghan Taliban Govt.
  • Second, if not defeating the enemy force, which morphs into a guerrilla force, then at least breaking it's back, ultimately, most likely by removing its sustainment base.
  • Finally the hard core of montagnards becomes criminal or quits; it is hoped that by this time international forces serve as an insurance policy while domestic resources challenge the (by now criminalized) insurgents who are left.
Of course in a perfect world (for the sake of academic argument) one would see clear milestones, perhaps even that the whole theatre, if not parts of it, would transition from one phase to another.

In reality, of course, it is much different. The opposition is never all zealots, as it is it is never all criminal, the hearts and minds of the mainly farmers hang in the balance. In fact I would imagine a measurable fraction of the whole can move through either one of these three groups depending on fortune.

I am just wondering, to what degree are we seeing in the British AOR, the transitions of folks from the zealots & criminals,  to a more neutral or absent role, while the mainly farmers are starting to tip, if not at least toward 'us' then at least more away from the former two.

Anyway, a bit long winded, but taken in consideration that several senior Commanders in the area have stated that the 'next six months will tell' and that the total victory will not be 'militarily won', what are we seeing in this area?
  • a tactical withdrawal,
  • the beginning of the end (to wit, defeat of the zealots who will transition to criminals or quit) or
  • the end of the beginning (to wit, the farmers, voting with their feet (and their lynching ropes) for some sort of normalcy)?

My sense is not that the Brits have been drubbed, but that they realize its time to step back and let the people figure out what to do, having fought the zealots and the criminals to a standstill (and taking full advantage of the winter 'lull'). If so, how many times will we see this scenario in the near future (there's the real kicker eh??)

Thanks to dglad for the source material.
 
Ultimately, isn't success or failure in Afghanistan and Iraq (and for that matter Pakistan) measured on the ability of the locals to keep their "zealots and criminals" under control so that they don't bother the rest of us? 

The rise of Democracy may be nice.  It may even be beneficial, necessary in fact, to maintain stability.  But priority one is to have the locals establish a degree of internal discipline.

If that means that the locals tell both parties to butt out so that they can start receiving aid, are willing to enforce order and keep their own people in line to make that possible, then I think that advances are being made.

The winter season results in a traditional pause.  That presents a window of opportunity that NATO can exploit to bolster the local's view of NATO, to encourage the growth of local authority and control, as well as, hopefully, give the troops an opportunity to rest and recuperate to an extent before a potential renewal of activities by the opposition next summer.

Of course if NATO can maintain a high operational tempo at the same time as the opposition is waiting out the winter then so much the better.
 
Kirkhill said:
Of course if NATO can maintain a high operational tempo at the same time as the opposition is waiting out the winter then so much the better.

Of course if the ISI can maintain a high operational tempo at the same time as the opposition is waiting out the winter then so much the better....
 
One thing about what Kirkhill has said......
The rise of "Democracy".... what is democracy?
who'se democracy based on who'se dafynition?
 
Taliban threat to renew attacks
By Isambard Wilkinson in Islamabad
(Filed: 05/10/2006)



A peace agreement between tribal elders and British forces in Helmand province appeared to be unravelling yesterday after Taliban forces threatened to resume attacks unless British troops withdrew from the area.

The agreement, reached in Musa Qala district two weeks ago, had been trumpeted by Nato as a possible template for future deals across southern Afghanistan.

But it is now in jeopardy, according to a Taliban spokesman, who accused British commanders of not abiding by the terms of the accord by keeping their men in the village, where they have a forward base.

advertisement"We know the UK soldiers have not evacuated the base in Musa Qala," said Qaro Muhammed Yusuf, who claimed to be spokesman for the Muslim militants.

"They must do so by Friday or face renewed attacks by Taliban."

Yusuf also contradicted reports that a tribal council had ruled that Taliban and British forces would withdraw from the area to allow the return of residents displaced by recent fighting.

He said that the Taliban had agreed to the council's demand for a ceasefire to enable British troops to leave.

He also echoed a view expressed by the British task force commander, Brigadier Ed Butler, that British troops had been severely tested in Musa Qala both in terms of combat and logistical supply.

Senior British commanders have indicated they have sought a way to pull out that would not signal a victory to the Taliban, with one proposal being to put Afghan security forces in the platoon houses.

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provision of the Copyright Act.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/05/wafghan105.xml

More to follow.......
 
BUT THEY DIDN'T.......................


Paras almost retreated under Taliban assault
By Tom Coghlan
(Filed: 02/10/2006)



British forces in southern Afghanistan came within hours of retreating from a key base because they suffered a critical shortage of helicopters, the task force commander has disclosed.

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Telegraph Brig Ed Butler said Taliban fire was so heavy and accurate at Musa Qala, a key forward base in northern Helmand, that Army helicopters faced a serious risk of being hit.

 
Brigadier Ed Butler, commander of British Forces in Afghanistan
He said the loss of such crucial equipment — together with the political impact of a large loss of life — meant he came close to ordering his soldiers to abandon the base.

Brig Butler said he had warned his superiors early last month that the intensity of Taliban attacks was such that mounting air supply and casualty evacuation missions was likely to lead to the loss of Chinook helicopters.

The brigadier, who leaves his posting at the end of the week, said: "The strategic significance of losing Musa Qala would have been huge, but that was set against the likelihood of helicopters being lost. The political impact, particularly so soon after the loss of the Nimrod, was also going to be huge."

A Nimrod was lost with 14 crewmen, apparently because of technical failure, over southern Afghanistan on Sept 4. There are only six British Chinooks in theatre, with two more on their way, and commanders have made repeated pleas to Nato allies to send additional aircraft.

"We were not going to be beaten by the Taliban in Musa Qala," said Brig Butler, "but the threat to helicopters from very professional Taliban fighters and particularly mortar crews was becoming unacceptable. We couldn't guarantee that we weren't going to lose helicopters."

The paratroopers were within 36 hours of abandoning the base before tribal elders approached the Afghan government to negotiate a ceasefire between British forces and the Taliban in the area.

"I told them 'you tell the Taliban to stop firing at us and my soldiers will stop firing back at you'," said the brigadier. He called the ceasefire, which has held for 16 days, an "Afghan solution".

"We are bidding for people's minds here. The people here are sick of war and they are turning to the Afghan government to end it.

"I am pragmatic about this. We won't turn Afghanistan around overnight as some people continue to believe. Moral, legal and ethical compasses of some people may be tested by this process, but the repercussions of failure are too great to be contemplated."

 

Brig Butler defended the decision to commit forces to "platoon houses", isolated bases in the north of Helmand, which tied down almost half the available British infantry and became the focus of continuous Taliban attacks.

"We didn't plan to occupy the platoon houses, President Karzai and Governor Daoud wanted British forces to hold north Helmand," he said. "But the unintended consequence of going into the platoon houses is that we have defeated the Taliban for this year, tactically, in north Helmand, and from this an opportunity has emerged."

Following the Musa Qala ceasefire, there has been a reduction in violence. Brig Butler said tribal elders from other districts were also negotiating with the provincial government to establish similar deals.

Addressing the men of 3rd Bn the Parachute Regiment yesterday afternoon as they prepared to leave Afghanistan, Brig Butler said: "What is important is that this was a battle of attrition and the Taliban blinked before we did.

"They capitulated, they made the fatal error of thinking that the Parachute Regiment would cut and run."

But he acknowledged that other factors may be at play. The new poppy planting season began two weeks ago, which requires high levels of agricultural labour, men who might otherwise be fighting.

The Taliban and the opium economy rely heavily on hired labour from the mass of unemployed in the south.

Fighting is also a largely seasonal activity that drops away as winter approaches, when the Taliban retreat to regroup and rearm.

"I fully acknowledge that we could be being duped; that the Taliban may be buying time to reconstitute and regenerate," said Brig Butler.

"But every day that there is no fighting the power moves to the hands of the tribal elders who are turning to the government of Afghanistan for security and development.

"That is the glimmer of an opportunity which could be deliverable if we seize it. It is about people power and it could gain momentum."

He said troops would now press ahead with redevelopment work that was the focus for the original British plan.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/02/wtroops02.xml

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.
 
Back
Top