Emergency Debate Held On Afghanistan Deployment

CNSNews ^ | 3/20/02 | Mike Wendling

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

British legislators held a rare emergency debate Wednesday following a Ministry of Defense decision to send 1,700 troops to Afghanistan for combat deployment.

The debate was requested by Bernard Jenkin, the Conservative Party defense spokesman. The Tories, along with some members of the ruling Labour Party and other legislators, want to know more about how many troops will be engaging the enemy in Afghanistan, the rules of engagement they will be operating under, the length of the mission and other details.

Jenkin said that the Conservatives supported in principal the decision to send troops, but criticized the government for making a decision "without a proper debate in the House of Commons." The surprise announcement on the additional troops was made Monday.

The leader of the U.K.'s third party, Liberal Democrat Charles Kennedy, questioned Wednesday whether British troops could effectively engage in combat while their compatriots head Afghanistan's International Security and Assistance Force peacekeeping mission.

But Prime Minister Tony Blair answered back: "There was always going to be a point when we would have to round up the last remnants of Taliban and al Qaeda resistance."

Blair noted that the British contribution to the anti-terror effort was relatively small compared to the numbers of American troops already on the ground. The latest deployment will boost the number of U.K. troops in the country to about 6,400, with a smaller number occupying support roles.

10,000 fighters

On Tuesday, Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon admitted that he did not know how many enemy soldiers remained in Afghanistan.

But Maj. Charles Heyman, a military expert and the editor of Jane's World Armies, estimated that up to 10,000 Taliban and al Qaeda troops could still be ready to fight in southern Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan.

Heyman said he based his estimate on a variety of intelligence, casualty and capture reports, and called the situation for allied forces "dismal."

"The speed at which the British government made the announcement of additional troops was astonishing," he said.

He predicted that U.S. and allied forces would still be in the region in three months' time and said a sizeable contingent might still be needed in Afghanistan through September.

"The latest intelligence coming in from Pakistan indicates that the Taliban are planning a major offensive for early April," Heyman said.

Heyman said coalition leaders have been forced into a fight to the finish because of previous pledges and the Afghanistan's wobbly central government.

"Blair and Bush have repeatedly said they would not abandon Afghanistan," he said. "If you don't destroy the Taliban, Hamid Karzai's (interim) government in Kabul doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of surviving."

E-mail a news tip to Mike Wendling.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article. Heyman said coalition leaders have been forced into a fight to the finish because of previous pledges and the Afghanistan's wobbly central government.

"Blair and Bush have repeatedly said they would not abandon Afghanistan," he said. "If you don't destroy the Taliban, Hamid Karzai's (interim) government in Kabul doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of surviving."