Simon Shercliff

The importance of Panther's Claw

Much has been said and written about the significant increase in fighting that British troops are currently undergoing in Helmand. We all mourn the losses we have suffered, and applaud the unstinting professionalism and bravery of the units involved. Back home in the UK a loud and fractious political debate has erupted over the provision of equipment to the troops, including the numbers of helicopters. But there has been much less of a focus on what is actually going on, and why.

Put simply, these classic military shaping and clearing operations are happening to allow around 80,000 Afghans to exist free from the shadow of the Taliban as the country prepares to vote in the Presidential elections on 20 August. Why is this so important? Because the more Afghans who can participate in deciding the future of their country, and who genuinely buy-in to the process, the more chance Afghanistan has to gather strength as a country and to resist encroachment by AQ and other militant groups.

As usual when our two militaries deploy together, the British operations are being conducted in close coordination with US forces, who are working to exactly the same agenda elsewhere in Helmand (bigger area, but with a lower density of people than where the British forces are). Crucially, they are also being conducted in partnership with the Afghan Security Forces - they are the ones who need to be seen defending their government and protecting their people.

But given that we are conducting a counter-insurgency campaign within a political strategy, the operations are being conducted along with a comprehensive, civilian-led effort to stabilise and develop (hold and build) the parts of Helmand province which most need it.

We all agree that there is no purely military solution to Afghanistan. What is happening in Helmand right now is a concrete example of the strategy President Obama and Prime Minister Brown have set out. We all want the military operations to take the minimum amount of time and resources possible. But they are an essential part of our agreed approach, which will set the foundations for a long-term, civilian-led aid relationship with Afghanistan.

Posted at 17:27 24 July 2009 by Simon Shercliff  |  Comments[1]

More troops to Afghanistan?

Since the then candidate Obama (much earlier this year) pledged more US troops to help resolve the worsening security situation in Afghanistan, many people have joined that bandwagon. Sounds reasonable: the way to deal with more violence under any circumstances is often by having a greater security presence, and one thing that everyone can agree on about Afghanistan right now is that the security situation is not good, and trending in the wrong direction. Secretary Gates and others have now outlined US plans for up to three more combat battalions deploying to Afghanistan next year, so the intent (clearly shared by the current Administration - Gates still works for President Bush) is becoming real. There has been plenty of speculation in the international media and blogosphere about the UK sending significantly more troops to Afghanistan as we wind down our presence in Iraq during 2009. For us, this speculation remains just that: no final decisions have been taken on major troop uplifts. But we have, however, deployed 300 troops of the Theatre Reserve to Afghanistan between now and August 2009 (as annoucend by the Prime Minister today).

But my conversations around Washington over the last few weeks on the future of Afghanistan policy have gone much deeper than pure troop numbers. Our militaries, fantastically brave and resilient as they are, can only march forward towards success if they are part of a more comprehensive effort. These extra military deployments are being discussed within that context: more civilians; better targetted and coordinated development projects; and above all an Afghan government leading its people in a credible fashion. No one would claim to have found the silver bullet. But there is a definite consensus emerging on the major principle: Afghanistan cannot be solved by military means alone.

Posted at 16:32 16 December 2008 by Simon Shercliff  |  Comments[3]