How to embarass NATO

12 februari 2010

What NATO Secretary General Fogh Rasmussen asks the Dutch government is to contribute a new, smaller mission, focused on training, until 1 August 2011. Our lead role will end and otherwise we will continue to do a little less of what we were doing and a little more training. Rasmussen promises that another nation, "with which the Netherlands is familiar working," will take over the lead responsibility for Uruzgan on 1 August 2010. Diplomatic sources I contacted wonder who that could be. Americans, Canadians and Brits are busy fighting the Taliban in Helmand. Everyone likes the idea of training. We like to imagine a group of young and enthusiastic Afghan boys from the countryside in a classroom eager to learn about humanitarian law and fighting. Or a group of young police recruits learning how to patrol neighbourhoods. Mariette Hamer, chair of the Parliamentary faction of the Labour Party, asserted in a popular TV show that there are six training schools in Afghanistan where Dutch trainers can be employed. She stated that training is acceptable as long as we stop fighting. Such fairy tales show a shocking level of ignorance and political self-righteousness. Training Afghan police and army is one of the most dangerous jobs in Afghanistan. Trainers work with their often illiterate Afghan colleagues in the field. This is true for the army as well as the police. Afghan police are not civilian police but paramilitary police who are trained as such. On the job training means teaching fighting to recruits skills in real-time combat operations. Partnering with the Afghans, as General McChrystal, the topcommander in Afghanistan explains in his new strategy. That’s why training is so dangerous, trainers are scarce and in high demand. That’s also why trainers have to be protected. When they get in trouble, they should be able to call for military assistance. Protecting is best guaranteed by one's own troops, not by relying on another nation. We know that from experience. The idea that we can train but not fight is therefore unrealistic. The request of Rasmussen may be no political coincidence. It is a reasonable request in light of the deterioration security situation on the ground and stepped-up efforts of the international community to reach a political solution. Currently, a new military offensive is being prepared in the neighboring province of Helmand. Refugees have started to pour into Uruzgan; among them are almost certainly also Taliban elements. There is a risk that Uruzgan becomes less stable. The Australian forces rely on the Dutch for medical evacuation and close air support. That is, on military assets. General Evans, the Australian commander responsible for Uruzgan, who was in The Hague a couple of weeks ago, stated that without Dutch military support, Australia could not continue their operations. Australia also relies on Dutch knowledge of the tribal power structures. Knowledge that is vital for the security of their troops. By way of tweets, Labour MP Martijn van Dam was quick to reject the proposal of the NATO Secretary-General. Vice Prime Minister Wouter Bos denied he had been involved in its preparation, notwithstanding statements of Foreign Minister Verhagen to the contrary. The political bickering is embarrassing to NATO. But proving the Labour Party won’t change position on Afghanistan prior to the local elections, e.g. that we should leave Uruzgan by 1 December 2010, seems more important than making an informed decision taking into account the consequences for the Afghans and the international effort in Afghanistan. NATO and the international effort in Afghanistan are subordinate to petty national powerpolitics. So what will happen? Either the Labour Party will have to change position on Afghanistan or we are yet again in deep political trouble. It may be time for a government that takes our international commitments more seriously.