Forgot your password?
Document Actions
Failure is an option: The problems with NATO…
…as presented by NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General John Craddock. NATO’s mission in Afghanistan seems increasingly to becoming one of extracting itself from Afghanistan with some shreds of credibility intact while maintaining the pretence that it is a viable organisation for the 21st century…
ISAF HQ
The General was in London talking at RUSI yesterday and many press articles picked up this pretty damning indictment of NATO’s lack of resolve and commitment in Afghanistan. The article makes the points well enough, but to summarise:
- It takes Nato an average of 80 days to respond to an urgent request for equipment from a commander in the field – according to NATO officials.
- There are more than 70 caveats – restrictions on what individual nations will or will not do in Afghanistan – imposed by national governments on their NATO troops.
-
Craddock asks: "Do we really need to achieve consensus at every level" of NATO decision-making?
- NATO countries were not delivering the number of troops they had promised. Another senior NATO official said: "I want more forces from all nations".
- Craddock described NATO's operations in Afghanistan as "disjointed in time and space".
- Craddock again: "It is this wavering political will that impedes operational progress and brings into question the relevancy of the alliance in the 21st century"
OK, this seems to be a very US-driven agenda imposed onto the alliance, but it seems to me that the surge needed to protect the elections could be achieved if the caveats were drastically reduced (there are a lot of soldiers already in the country but not many actually going out on the ground). Then the UK/US surge of additional troops that looks increasingly likely for next year could concentrate on the business of confronting the Taliban instead of being diverted to guarding ballot boxes…
I also sense that the Taliban are starting to understanding that targeting “caveat-heavy” nations may represent good opportunities for further undermining ISAF/NATO resolve.
And futhermore, the recent NATO announcements that they will now allow anti-drug missions may have generated some good news headlines (and even appeared to temporarily placate US Defence Secretary Gates) but they do not look particularly convincing. It is difficult to see any serious counter-narcotics campaigns initiated any time soon – my bet is that the caveats are still effectively in place: ‘members' participation is ``subject to the authorisation of specific nations”’, according to Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.
National Caveats