US, NATO set to launch massive assault against Taliban-led militants

[yellow people]

Gen Petraeus hails Paras for precision attack


Gen Petraeus hails Paras for precision attack

Gen David Petraeus, the commander of Nato troops in Afghanistan, has hailed a Parachute Regiment operation involving a precision attack that killed 15 Taliban but left two civilans unharmed.

General Petraeus visits 3 Para Battlegroup, based in the northern Nad e Ali district of Helmand Province Photo: HEATHCLIFF O'MALLEY

By Thomas Harding, Shahzad 9:30PM GMT 30 Nov 2010

Two Afghan civilians survived unscathed as bombs and bullets rained down on Taliban during a "precision strike" campaign being run by the 3rd Bn The Parachute Regiment. Gen Petraeus undertook an urgent fact-finding visit to the Paras and praised the attacks as "the most impressive way to do business".

The American commander has adopted the mantra "ruthless prosecution of targets" since arriving in Afghanistan but has faced obstacles from subordinates worried over civilian casualties. His trip was prompted after the Paras carried out five "sigacts" – significant actions – in the last four weeks that have led to the death of more than 40 Taliban and capture of a dozen including a shadow Taliban governor.

In the action surveillance technology picked up an unusually large number of armed insurgents assembling north of their former stronghold of Ghazni Street as C Company, 3 Para approached across open ground. At 3 Para headquarters in Shahzad, three miles away, commanders frantically summoned an Apache attack helicopter to come on station as an unmanned drone's camera showed the insurgents preparing to attack.

"We held a rapid targeting meeting," said Major Peter Flynn, 3 Para's Chief of Staff. "The threat was imminent and decision had to be made on the lives of insurgents within 60 seconds. "But we have to bear in mind that the prosecution of enemy targets must not be at the expense of a single civilian casualty." Footage of the attack showed the first Hellfire anti-tank missile targeted two men carrying a heavy machine gun. One fighter looked up directly up to the sky a split second before the rocket hit.

The surrounding group of Taliban dispersed in several directions with a large group sheltering in an outbuilding being used as an armoury. Three minutes after the first strike an insurgent can be seen standing at the door of the building a second before the second Hellfire anti-tank missile struck, demolishing the room. It was later discovered 10 insurgents had been sheltering inside.

The men of C Company then began a rapid assault towards the Taliban-held compounds. The footage showed the Paras getting ready for an "explosive entry" into a compound while in the top right-hand corner Taliban can be seen hiding. Three or four insurgents were killed in the subsequent gun-battle on Saturday.

A middle-aged couple were later found sheltering in a compound that held Taliban but the building was not attacked by the Apache as commanders could not be certain it was clear of civilians. Earlier in the month the Paras witnessed four civilian fatalities, including three children, killed when insurgents fired a rifle grenade into a compound during a firefight.

Fragmentation taken from the victims proved the grenade was foreign made. Since then the soldiers have been "acutely sensitive" about civilian casualties. In the Ghazni Street attack the troops recovered seven PKM machine guns, hand-held radios and importantly an AK47 equipped with an under-slung grenade launcher, similar to the one used in the attack that killed the civilians three weeks earlier.

A minimum amount of ordnance was used to kill the Taliban. Two Hellfire missiles and 80 cannon rounds were fired by the Apache and about 100 bullets shot by C Company. The precision strikes have also led to a significant drop in artillery fire with 81mm mortar rounds used falling by half and 105mm shells dropping to a fifth of previous levels.

 

[yellow people]

British soldier shot dead in Afghanistan

A British soldier has been killed during an operation in southern Afghanistan, according to the Ministry of Defence.

A total of 346 British military personnel have died since operations in Afghanistan began in 2001 Photo: EPA

11:00PM GMT 05 Dec 2010

The soldier, from the 3rd Battalion The Parachute Regiment, was shot during an operation against insurgents in the Nad-e Ali District of Helmand Province. His family have been informed.

Spokesman for Task Force Helmand, Lieutenant Colonel David Eastman, said: "Regrettably I must announce the death of a soldier from 3rd Battalion, The Parachute Regiment this afternoon.

"The soldier was part of an operation aiming to increase security in the Nad-e Ali District of Helmand Province when he was shot and subsequently died of his wounds.

"He has made the ultimate sacrifice protecting the people of Nad-e Ali from insurgent intimidation and defending his country from the threat of terrorism; no more could be asked of any soldier. He will be greatly missed by all who knew him."

A total of 346 British military personnel have died since operations in Afghanistan began in 2001.

 

[yellow people]

British paratrooper killed by US jet

A British paratrooper has been killed after an American fighter pilot mistakenly fired on friendly forces during poor weather conditions, it can be disclosed.

A British paratrooper has died after being hit by cannon fire from the American F18 jet during a firefight with the Taliban Photo: EPA

By Thomas Harding, in Helmand 12:45PM GMT 06 Dec 2010

It is understood that the young soldier, who has not yet been named, was hit by cannon fire from the American F18 jet during a firefight with the Taliban.

The troops from the specialist Brigade Reconnaissance Force called in close air support after they came under small arms fire from an insurgent ambush five miles west of the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah.

It is understood a British Joint Terminal Attack Controller called in the airstrike but it is not clear how the accident happened. The soldier, whose home unit is 3rd Bn The Parachute Regiment, was operating with the BRF who roam across central Helmand hunting down insurgents.

He was killed on Sunday afternoon during particularly bad weather conditions after a sand storm and haze led to very low visibility. Helicopters had been grounded for 36 hours due the poor flying conditions.

An MoD spokesman said: "Initial reports suggest that the death was caused as a result of a friendly fire incident. The incident will be the subject of a full investigation however first reports indicate that an attack on an insurgent position by a US aircraft, requested by and agreed with British Forces on the ground, may have been the cause.

“The investigation is ongoing and as such it would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage." His death is the first in 18 days in Helmand and brings the total number of British fatalities in Afghanistan to 346.

 

[yellow people]

WikiLeaks: Herman Van Rompuy said 2010 is 'last chance of success' in Afghanistan

The year 2010 was "the last chance of success" in Afghanistan, European Union president Herman Van Rompuy said.

'No one believes in Afghanistan any more. But we will give it 2010 to see results. If it doesn't work, that will be it because it is the last chance,' said Mr Van Rompuy Photo: REUTERS

By Christopher Hope, Whitehall Editor 6:56PM GMT 06 Dec 2010

Mr Van Rompuy also told a US ambassador that Europeans were only staying in Afghanistan out of "deference" to the Americans, according to the leaked cables.

Speaking over a coffee with US ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman on Dec 23, 2009, Mr Van Rompuy said: "No one believes in Afghanistan any more.

"But we will give it 2010 to see results. If it doesn't work, that will be it because it is the last chance."

Underscoring Europe's waning appetite for combat, the former Belgian prime minister warned: "If a Belgian gets killed, it would be over for Belgium right then." European countries account for around 30,000 of some 150,000 Nato-led troops in Afghanistan, while the United States makes up the bulk of the force.

The news emerged as Afghanistan's foreign minister said the release of the cables had undermined trust across the world, including in his war-torn country. Speaking at a press conference in Kabul on Monday, Zalmai Rassoul said: "WikiLeaks has caused trouble for diplomatic relations all over the world.

"This is a vital issue, particularly for us ... we must be extraordinarily careful in our contacts with foreigners and embassies. We must be careful and … businesslike."

In one leaked cable, US ambassador Karl Eikenberry had portrayed Afghan president Hamid Karzai as "paranoid and weak" and "unfamiliar with the basics of nation building".

 

[yellow people]

Soldier killed by US friendly fire was a New Zealander in British army

A paratrooper killed when an American fighter fired on friendly forces in Afghanistan was a New Zealander serving with British forces.

Private John 'Jack' Howard was serving with 3rd Battalion The Parachute Regiment in Nad 'AliPhoto: HEATHCLIFF O'MALLEY

By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan and Paul Chapman in Wellington 7:00AM GMT 07 Dec 2010

He has been named as Private John "Jack" Howard, from Wellington. It is understood Private Howard was hit by cannon fire from the American F18 jet during a firefight with the Taliban in poor weather conditions.

The troops from the specialist Brigade Reconnaissance Force called in close air support after they came under small arms fire from an insurgent ambush five miles west of the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah.

Speaking during a visit to Afghanistan last night, David Cameron described the death as a "tragic" mistake which had occurred in the "fog of war." "It is a very tragic case and it is particularly tragic when you have one of these incidents of so-called friendly fire," the Prime Minister said.

"There needs to be an inquiry, as there always is in a case like this, so we get to the bottom of what has happened and why a mistake was made in this case. "Obviously one's heart goes out to the family. It is painful and difficult enough to lose a loved one without it happening in this way.

"We have got to do everything we can to stop it in the future. "But in the fog of war tragically these things do sometimes happen and I think we should always bear in mind that whether it is the RAF or it is the US Air Force they do an awful amount to save lives of our troops and in combat.

"But obviously you can't stop trying to learn the lessons of how to stop these things happening in the future." Private Howard's home unit was 3rd Battalion the Parachute Regiment, which was operating with the BRF. A spokesman for Britain's Ministry of Defence said initial reports suggested the soldier had died as a result of "a friendly fire incident".

"The incident will be the subject of a full investigation, however, first reports indicate that an attack on an insurgent position by a US aircraft, requested by and agreed with British forces on the ground, may have been the cause," he said.

Vicki Treadell, the British High Commissioner in Wellington, said the parents of the soldier, who live in New Zealand, had been spoken to by the British defence attache and had asked for privacy while extended family members were told. An investigation has been launched.

"The High Commission will now keep track of the investigation and, as further information is appropriate for release, we will make sure it is managed appropriately," Mrs Treadell said. "This is a very sad and deeply regrettable incident, any death is. In this particular instance it is one that affects both our countries and we will work together at an official level," she said.

Lieutenant Colonel David Eastman, of Task Force Helmand, said the soldier was part of an operation aiming to increase security in the Nad 'Ali district of Helmand province. "He has made the ultimate sacrifice protecting the people of Nad 'Ali from insurgent intimidation and defending his country from the threat of terrorism. No more could be asked of any soldier.

"He will be greatly missed by all who knew him," Lt Col Eastman said. A New Zealand Defence Force spokesman also confirmed the soldier was a New Zealander. Two British soldiers were reportedly injured in the incident. Private Howard, a former student at Wellington College in the New Zealand capital, travelled to London after applying over the internet to enlist in with British forces in March 2007.

He was on his second tour of Afghanistan. He is the fifth New Zealand-born soldier to die in action in Afghanistan. Two were serving with Australian forces, one with US, and one with New Zealand troops.

 

[yellow people]

UK PM eyes 2011 Afghan pullback, U.S. reviews war

By Mohammed Abbas and David Alexander

KABUL | Tue Dec 7, 2010 7:56am EST

KABUL (Reuters) - British Prime Minister David Cameron, on an unannounced visit to Afghanistan, said on Tuesday he was confident British troops could start leaving early next year when a gradual transition to Afghan forces begins.

Britain has the second-biggest foreign troop contingent in Afghanistan after the United States, and Cameron has said he wants British troops out of combat roles by 2015.

While he has said before he wants that process to begin next year, British commanders have since tried to play down the prospect of any major withdrawals in early 2011, saying it would depend on the readiness of Afghan forces to take over and other conditions on the ground.

"What I've seen on this visit gives me confidence that our plans for transition are achievable," Cameron told a news conference in Kabul alongside Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Cameron said progress had been made in 2010 but added 2011 must be "a decisive year for the campaign" and noted NATO's commitment, signed at a summit last month, for foreign forces to begin pulling out next year.

As Cameron and Karzai spoke, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, a frequent visitor to Afghanistan, arrived at the sprawling Bagram Air Base just north of the capital, Kabul. Gates's latest visit comes just as U.S. President Barack Obama reviews his Afghanistan war strategy, and a few days after the president made a trip himself to Afghanistan.

Gates will also meet Karzai and U.S. and NATO commanders. "(The trip) is taking place just as the National Security Council is in the midst of its evaluation of that strategy, so clearly what the secretary learns here, what he sees here, what he takes from here, will inform the discussion that is taking place back in Washington," Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told reporters traveling with Gates.

After landing at Bagram, Gates later flew to two U.S. bases in the east, including one where a renegade Afghan border policeman shot and killed six U.S. troops during a training exercise last week. At a conference in Lisbon last month, NATO leaders agreed to meet Karzai's timeline for foreign troops to end combat operations in Afghanistan by the end of 2014. Some U.S. and NATO leaders have warned that may spill into 2015.

The NATO summit agreement has thrown the spotlight onto the readiness of Afghanistan's roughly 260,000 police and soldiers to take over from foreign forces. Some foreign commanders acknowledge there are problems with training, equipment and retention rates and that a target of 306,000 for Afghan forces by October 2011 will be hard to meet.

Cameron and General David Richards, the head of Britain's armed forces, painted an upbeat picture of progress in training Afghan forces. Cameron also saw progress in securing Helmand province, a Taliban stronghold in the south where some of the hardest fighting has been waged in the past year.

"There are more markets open, more children going to school, local government providing legitimate governance with the local population rejecting the brutal shadow Taliban regime," he said. "Of course there is no scope for complacency because progress is still fragile. But I am cautiously optimistic."

SUCCESS AT A PRICE

U.S. commanders have also reported signs of progress in the war since September, when the United States completed deploying the 30,000 additional troops Obama authorized last year. The United States now has about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan out of a total foreign contingent of about 150,000.

Military and civilian casualties however are at their worst levels since the Taliban were ousted in late 2001, despite the presence of a record number of foreign forces. This week, a poll by four major international news groups found Afghans are more pessimistic about the country's direction, less confident that foreign troops can provide security, and more open to talks with the Taliban.

Analysts and observers also say the increasingly unpopular war is widely seen is going badly for Washington. European NATO leaders, like Cameron, are under pressure to withdraw troops. Cameron, making his second visit to Afghanistan as prime minister, reiterated his deadline of having no British troops in combat operations by 2015.

Britain has about 9,500 troops in Afghanistan, most in Helmand, where they were spread thinly until Obama authorized the extra U.S. troops, 20,000 of which are in southern provinces. British troops have since been able to concentrate on smaller, strategic areas of Helmand.

At least 346 British troops have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001, almost a third of them this year. Casualty rates among foreign troops have risen dramatically, particularly in the south and east, since July 2009 as NATO-led forces mounted more operations against Taliban-led insurgents.

Cameron, who arrived on Monday, shrugged off recent criticism of the troops' performance, saying they had been spread too thinly before the extra U.S. troops arrived. Afghan and U.S. embassy comments, obtained by the WikiLeaks website, said British troops "were not up to the task" of securing Helmand.

"When you look at what was said, it was relating to a previous period, when we all know now there weren't enough troops in Helmand," Cameron said in Helmand late on Monday.

(Writing by Paul Tait; Editing by Alex Richardson)

 

[yellow people]

Pentagon says winning battle for Afghan town Marjah


Pentagon says winning battle for Afghan town Marjah

U.S. Marines from 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines leave a V-22 Osprey transport helicopter as they arrive at Sherwali camp in Marjah district, Helmand province May 22, 2010. Credit: Reuters/Asmaa Waguih

WASHINGTON | Tue Dec 7, 2010 6:29pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The battle to secure the Afghan town of Marjah is "essentially over," a top U.S. commander said on Tuesday, almost a year after NATO forces promised a quick victory in the former Taliban stronghold.

Marjah was once meant to showcase a revised U.S. counter-insurgency strategy, with NATO and Afghan forces sweeping into the city in February, followed by the much-touted rollout of a so-called "government in a box" meant to provide services that would win over the local population.

Instead, critics say delays caused by a stiff Taliban resistance and inadequate Afghan government support turned the Marjah campaign into a cautionary tale. U.S. General Richard Mills, who has commanded NATO forces in southwest Afghanistan since June, was resoundingly upbeat at a briefing to Pentagon reporters. He said the real fight was nearly behind coalition forces.

"The battle for Marjah is essentially over," Mills said, speaking via video-conference from Afghanistan. "The enemy has been pushed to the very outskirts of the district and the city center itself, the district center, if you will, has been cleared of insurgent activity for some weeks."

He acknowledged widely-reported "murder and intimidation" tactics by the Taliban in the past, but said Marjah residents organized themselves into neighborhood watch groups that had helped repel them. NATO forces were now most active on the city's outskirts, "along the perimeter, near the deserts where the insurgent remains."

"(A Taliban fighter) still comes out of his hole every once in a while from the desert, comes into town, and takes the odd shot at us," Mills said. "But, in effect, he has lost the ability to impact much on the people of Marjah." In February, the commander of NATO forces in southern Afghanistan predicted it would take troops just until late March to secure Marjah and then until June to determine whether the campaign had been successful.

Similarly, critics have faulted U.S. President Barack Obama for laying out a timeline in his revamped strategy that could embolden the Taliban and potentially set up failure. Obama aims to start withdrawing U.S. forces next July, part of a plan to gradually hand over lead security control to Afghan forces through the end of 2014. The Pentagon has cautioned that the 2014 date is only "aspirational."

U.S. officials say southern Afghan towns like Marjah, where fighting has been hardest, could be among the last slated for transition to Afghan control. Mills did not venture a guess as to when foreign troops in southern Helmand province might start to withdraw. "I don't want to discuss specific troop deployments or redeployments at this time," he said. "But I can say that I think that the situation on the ground will allow me to make some readjustments within my force."

(Reporting by Phil Stewart; Editing by Vicki Allen)

 

[yellow people]

Taliban video shows US soldier held in Afghanistan


Taliban video shows US soldier held in Afghanistan

Bowe Bergdahl

This image provided by IntelCenter Wednesday Dec. 8, 2010 shows a framegrab from a new video released by the Taliban containing footage of a man believed to be Spc. Bowe Bergdahl, the only known American serviceman being held in captivity in Afghanistan, a group that tracks militant messages on the Internet said Wednesday. (AP Photo/IntelCenter)

By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Deb Riechmann, Associated Press – 17 mins ago

KABUL, Afghanistan – Spc. Bowe Bergdahl, the only known U.S. soldier held captive in Afghanistan, appears briefly in a newly released Taliban video standing next to a smiling insurgent commander who once threatened to kill him.

The 24-year-old from Hailey, Idaho, has bags under his eyes and what appears to be an abrasion on his left cheek in the video — the fourth to appear since he was captured nearly 18 months ago. The footage was provided to reporters Wednesday by IntelCenter, a private, U.S.-based organization that tracks Islamic extremist activities and communications.

His parents, Bob and Jani Bergdahl, have declined to speak with reporters throughout the ordeal, but Idaho National Guard spokesman Col. Tim Marsano said Wednesday that they had confirmed that the man in the video was their son.

"They responded that it was him, based on the screen shots," Marsano said. "It's been an extremely difficult year and a half. Without any concrete news, everyday brings more challenges. They do continue to take some comfort in the support they've gotten, from the community, their family and friends."

NATO spokesman Brig. Gen. Josef Blotz said the coalition was not sure whether the footage was old or new. Bergdahl is seen wearing an Afghan-style, lightweight tan shirt, suggesting that the video was shot during warmer weather.

"We are still investigating this case and hope Bowe Bergdahl is still fine," he said.

Bergdahl has been held by the Taliban since June 30, 2009, when he disappeared in Paktika province in eastern Afghanistan.

According to the SITE intelligence group, which also tracks Islamic extremist activities, Bergdahl is standing next to Sangin Zadran, a senior official in the al-Qaida linked Haqqani network in Paktika. In July 2009, Sangin's spokesman told The Associated Press in a telephone interview that Berghdal would be killed unless the U.S. stops strikes in Ghazni province's Giro district and Paktika province's Khoshamand district.

Bergdahl, who is seen in just a few seconds of footage that includes a montage of past militant attacks and news events, nods occasionally as if acknowledging another speaker and often looks down at the ground.

The 69-minute video, produced by Manba al-Jihad, a video production group of the Haqqani network, was released on the website of the Afghan Taliban on Dec. 2, but appeared on jihadist forums last month, according to SITE.

Bergdahl, a member of 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska, has appeared in three other videos that the Taliban released on July 18, 2009, Dec. 25, 2009 and April 7.

Separately, two NATO service members died Wednesday following an insurgent attack in southern Afghanistan. The coalition did not disclose their nationalities or details about their deaths. So far this month, 12 members of the NATO coalition have been killed in Afghanistan. At least 671 have died so far this year.

The Afghan Defense Ministry also condemned a coalition airstrike that it said mistakenly killed two Afghan soldiers on Tuesday afternoon. The ministry said in a statement that three other Afghan soldiers were wounded in the airstrike in Charkh district of Logar province in eastern Afghanistan. NATO said it was investigating the incident.

On Tuesday, Afghan soldiers killed a suicide attacker who threatened to blow himself up at an Afghan army base in the Gereshk district of Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, the Afghan Defense Ministry said. The ministry did not disclose any other details of the incident.

Also in the south, one child was killed and two men were injured in a homemade bomb explosion in the Shahjoy district of Zabul province, said Mohammad Jan Rasoolyar, spokesman for the provincial governor.

___

Associated Press writer John Miller in Boise, Idaho, contributed to this report.

 

[yellow people]

Father-in-law of mutilated Afghan girl nabbed


Father-in-law of mutilated Afghan girl nabbed

AP
Published Dec 9 2010

Aisha was sent to Los Angeles for reconstructive surgery and fitted with a temporary prosthetic nose - Photo credit: TIME/AP​

​

The father-in-law of a young Afghan woman who said her nose and ears were sliced off to punish her for running away from her violent husband has been arrested, officials said.

The woman, Aisha, gained worldwide attention when she appeared on the August 9 cover of Time magazine.

Under orders from a Taliban commander acting as a judge, she was disfigured last year as punishment for fleeing her husband's home, according to Time's story in August and other accounts.

Just 18 years old at the time, Aisha said she ran away to escape her in-laws' beatings and abuse.

Aisha was brought to Los Angeles for reconstructive surgery and fitted with a temporary prosthetic nose.

 

[yellow people]

Barack Obama's Afghanistan war review cements troop withdrawal

President Barack Obama's Afghanistan war review will conclude the United States has made enough security gains to begin withdrawing troops in July, but the findings also will emphasise lasting troubles, from Afghanistan's ability to serve its people to Pakistani havens for extremists. ​

Barack Obama Photo: GETTY

1:04AM GMT 15 Dec 2010

In a detailed preview of statements Mr Obama will make on Thursday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the year-long review of Mr Obama's war plan essentially will offer no surprises.

The president plans to stick with his pledge to start bringing home troops in mid 2011 after ordering one year ago that 30,000 more troops be sent to Afghanistan to blunt the Taliban's momentum. The goal of coalition forces is to shift control to Afghan security forces by the end of 2014.

A summary of the classified war report is expected to be released on Thursday, when Mr Obama will speak about the effort from the White House.

The review is expected to cite progress in combating the Taliban in Afghanistan, degrading senior al-Qaeda leaders, and improving co-operation with the Pakistani government, Mr Gibbs said. It will cite big challenges that still hamper the war effort, including Afghanistan's capacity to build up its own basic services and security forces, and the ability of militants to reside in Pakistan and undermine security in Afghanistan.

Mr Obama will not announce the pace or scope of the troop drawdown, Mr Gibbs said; that is to be determined in the coming months. But he said: "I think we are on course for the July 2011 date." There are about 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Mr Gibbs said the report will leave no doubt that the war is going better now than it was before Mr Obama increased the U.S. presence. It also has grown more deadly as the fighting intensified. More than 680 international troops, including more than 470 Americans, have been killed in 2010, making it the deadliest year of the war. Hundreds of Afghan civilians also have died, most as a result of Taliban attacks.

The review also is expected to describe the emergence of two separate fights: a textbook battle to counter insurgents in the south of Afghanistan and a more targeted effort to root out terrorists in the east. Mr Obama met with his war council on Tuesday for nearly two hours to review the draft findings of the report.

He ordered changes, but not major ones, Mr Gibbs said. The White House has sought to temper expectations for the report, promising no policy overhauls and no major address to the nation by Mr Obama.

The release of the review comes as the administration copes with the death of Richard Holbrooke, Mr Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan and a central player in the shaping of the strategy.

 

[yellow people]

Afghan war will fail unless Pakistan acts over militants

Success in the Afghanistan war will elude Nato forces unless Pakistan acts to drive the Taliban from its sanctuaries in the country's border areas, according to American intelligence reports.

The reports state that the reluctance of Pakistan to close down Taliban sanctuaries in its lawless tribal region remains a major obstacle Photo: AFP/GETTY

6:08PM GMT 15 Dec 2010

The assessment, the combined conclusion of the main United States intelligence agencies, came as a much more positive face was presented by the White House on the eve of a review of strategy to be released on Thursday.

Robert Gibbs, President Barack Obama's spokesman, said that the review, ordered to take place a year after Mr Obama committed a "surge" of an additional 30,000 American troops in a speech at West Point, will cite "important progress in halting the momentum of the Taliban".

He said that the start of the withdrawal from Afghanistan would begin as planned by July 2011. "We have seen, through counter-terrorism, success at degrading senior al-Qaeda leaders. And we have seen greater co-operation over the course of the past 18 months with the Pakistani government."

But two new classified National Intelligence Estimate reports provide a much grimmer assessment, stating that there is only a limited chance of defeating the Taliban unless Pakistan drives out insurgents operating from havens on its Afghan border.

The reports, one on Afghanistan and one on Pakistan, argue that although there have been gains for the US and Nato forces, the reluctance of Pakistan to close down Taliban sanctuaries in its lawless tribal region remains a major obstacle.

Last week, senior officers who briefed Robert Gates, the Pentagon Secretary, in Afghanistan said that although Pakistan had been driving some Taliban elements across the border into the clutches of American troops, members of the Taliban's Haqqani network were enjoying sanctuary in Pakistan.

Major General John Campbell, head of Regional Command (East), said that American forces were killing many Taliban but Pakistan was a significant problem. "The Haqqani network is probably the most dangerous enemy and they've got sanctuary in Pakistan. We shouldn't make any bones about it.

"They go back and forth across the border. They're financed better, they're better trained they bring in the more technologically advanced IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices]. But we've made a huge dent in the lower and midlevel leadership especially with Haqqani."

He said that it would "take a lot longer" in Afghanistan if the Pakistanis did not do more but he stressed that the Pakistanis "have stepped up their game" and growing co-operation with the Pakistani military "could be a game changer".

Mr Gibbs said that the review would address the Pakistan issue. "You will also see in the review an enumeration of the continued challenges that we have in that region. "They will focus on a few different areas, but clearly we have to continue to strengthen capacity inside of Afghanistan. And we still have the ongoing challenge and threat of safe havens in Pakistan."

He added: "There are things that we still need Pakistan to continue to co-operate with us more on and continue to do in order to prevent further safe havens from impacting the progress that ultimately can be made in Afghanistan." Mr Obama, who is expected to comment publicly on the findings of the review, held a two-hour meeting with 20 members of his member national security team on Tuesday to authorise minor amendments.

The death of Richard Holbrooke, US special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, on Monday cast a shadow over the meeting, at which Obama and Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, paid tribute to the veteran diplomat. An empty chair at the talks signified Mr Holbrooke's absence.

 

[yellow people]

US to begin 'responsible reduction' of forces in Afghanistan

The United States has made sufficient progress in Afghanistan in the last year to begin a "responsible reduction" of forces in July 2011, an Obama administration strategy review has confirmed.

Photo: AFP/GETTY IMAGES

12:42PM GMT 16 Dec 2010

The long-awaited assessment says that some aspects of the high-stakes strategy are working well, after a year of record bloodshed, but many of the advances in the nine-year war remain fragile and reversible.

The report, which Mr Obama is set to unveil later Thursday, says that after a relentless US campaign al-Qaeda's leadership in Pakistan is weaker than at any stage of the war launched after the September 11 attacks in 2001.

Progress will permit a "responsible reduction" to begin of US forces in Afghanistan, currently at nearly 100,000, next July, though a full handover to Afghan security is not envisaged until at least 2014, the review said.

The US anti-terror alliance with Pakistan has been "substantial" but also "uneven" in the last year, since Obama vowed to forge a new relationship of mutual trust and respect with Islamabad, the report said.

The review, the product of a two-month period of assessment of all aspects of US war strategy, comes nine years into the longest US war abroad, which is taking an ever increasing toll on US troops and Afghan civilians.

Mr Obama called Afghan President Hamid Karzai ahead of the report's release, with both stressing a "focus on the sanctuary of terrorists," the Afghan government said. The phrase is an apparent reference to Pakistan's semi-autonomous tribal belt on the Afghan border, which is a base for Taliban fighters operating in Afghanistan and the global headquarters of al-Qaeda.

According to an overview of the report the White House released, no major shifts in strategy are planned or needed, though some aspects of the US approach, especially in Pakistan, should be adjusted. "Most important, al-Qaeda's senior leadership in Pakistan is weaker and under more sustained pressure than at any other point since it fled Afghanistan in 2001," the document said.

"In Pakistan, we are laying the foundation for a strategic partnership based on mutual respect and trust, through increased dialogue, improved co-operation, and enhanced exchange and assistance programs.

"And in Afghanistan, the momentum achieved by the Taliban in recent years has been arrested in much of the country and reversed in some key areas, although these gains remain fragile and reversible."

"While the strategy is showing progress across all three assessed areas of al-Qaeda, Pakistan and Afghanistan, the challenge remains to make our gains durable and sustainable."

 

[yellow people]

Despite bloodshed, U.S. reports Afghanistan progress

A U.S. soldier from 2nd Brigade Special Troops Battalion walks during an early morning patrol in Zhari district in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan November 22, 2010. Credit: Reuters/Peter Andrews

By Missy Ryan
WASHINGTON | Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:33am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A review of President Barack Obama's Afghanistan strategy reported on Thursday that headway against insurgents likely will allow the United States to start pulling out troops next year as planned even though major challenges remain.

The long-awaited White House review said foreign forces had halted the Taliban's momentum in many areas, putting them on track to begin handing control to Afghan forces in 2011 despite hurdles including rebuilding war-torn Afghanistan and the need for Pakistan's "sustained denial" of insurgent safe havens.

Obama announced a year ago when he unveiled a temporary troop surge that he planned to begin withdrawing U.S. forces from the 9-year-old war in July 2011, and the review keeps the United States on the path to doing so.

"Buried in the summary is the acknowledgment of two significant challenges for the stabilization effort: the continuing Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan and the poor quality of governance in Afghanistan," said Vanda Felbab-Brown, an analyst with the Brookings Institution in Washington.

"In fact, both issues remain enormous obstacles for success," she said. Despite cautious optimism from the White House a year after Obama ordered the extra 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, civilian and military deaths have reached record highs in Afghanistan and Obama must overcome skepticism in Congress and among Americans tired of the long, expensive conflict.

The review comes at the end of the bloodiest year since U.S.-backed Afghan forces ousted the Taliban in 2001, with almost 700 foreign troops killed so far. Yet Afghan civilians bear the brunt of the conflict as insurgents expand from strongholds into once-peaceful areas in the north and west.

A U.S. and NATO force of 150,000 troops, including 100,000 Americans, has pushed back the Taliban in cities like southern Kandahar, an encouraging sign as Washington hopes to start putting growing ranks of Afghan soldiers in charge.

But violence persists. On Thursday, a roadside bomb killed 14 civilians in western Afghanistan and four Afghan soldiers died in a U.S. air strike overnight. In addition, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said on Wednesday that worsening violence in Afghanistan has made it more difficult than at any time in three decades for aid groups to reach people in need.

In the absence of major strides by Afghan forces, who are growing rapidly in numbers but still learning to shoot and in many cases to read, those gains "cannot be maintained without continued U.S. involvement, both military and financial," said Caroline Wadhams, an expert at the Center for American Progress in Washington.

PAKISTAN CENTRAL

Calling Pakistan "central" to success in the region, the review found al Qaeda had been weakened in Pakistan but was still capable of plotting attacks against the United States. Officials said progress in ties with Islamabad, which Washington is pressuring to go after militants who launch attacks in Afghanistan, had been substantial but "uneven."

"I just don't see what kind of further pressure the Americans can place on the Pakistanis. It's sort of a risky thing," said Kamran Bokhari, director for Middle East and South Asia with intelligence firm STRATFOR.

"On one hand, you've got to get more cooperation from the Pakistanis. But on the other hand, you don't want to apply too much pressure that leads to tensions with the Pakistanis that undermine the whole strategy." The White House review noted the need for tweaks to its Pakistan strategy, including energized aid work along the two countries' wild border as part of efforts to corral insurgents.

The review is unlikely to end debate within the U.S. government over strategy for the region. Officials say the intelligence community has a gloomier view of the situation than that of military leaders. The New York Times reported this week that two recent classified intelligence reports said the Afghanistan strategy had little chance of success unless Pakistan prevented insurgents from launching attacks from border sanctuaries.

Experts say security gains will not be sustained if a weak, corrupt Afghan state is not strengthened in the near term. In some areas, Taliban intimidation has brought local government to a halt. Western suspicions that President Hamid Karzai has failed to crack down on corrupt officials have helped widen a rift with the Afghan leader. After nine years of aid efforts, poverty and illiteracy remain widespread.

The review called reducing corruption a key step in "sustaining the Afghan government." Surprisingly, Karzai was not mentioned by name in the report, even though his Pakistani counterpart was. The foreign forces in Afghanistan have until the end of 2014 to hand security control to Afghan forces, as agreed with Karzai at a NATO summit in Lisbon in November.

The war in Afghanistan, which now costs at least $113 billion a year, is a fiscal drain as Obama struggles to revive the U.S. economy and is a source of tension with some fellow Democrats who see little chance of quick success. It threatens to become more of a political liability for Obama next spring, when debate over bringing home U.S. troops may sharpen.

(Additional reporting by Mohammed Abbas in London, Matt Spetalnick in Washington, and Chris Allbritton and Augustine Anthony in Islamabad; Editing by Will Dunham)

 

[search24sc]

I would also like some more information regarding this.

 

[yellow people]

Navy medic loses appeal over objections to Afghan duty

A Royal Navy medic who objected to serving in Afghanistan in the wake of WikiLeaks revelations had his appeal to stand down on moral grounds dismissed.

1:33PM GMT 17 Dec 2010

Michael Lyons, 24, cast himself as a conscientious objector after reading of the ''enormous under-reporting of civilian casualties in the conflict I was about to enter''.

His request to leave the service on such grounds was refused by his commanding officer. He then made an emotional appeal at the Advisory Committee on Conscientious Objectors, but the original decision was upheld at today's hearing.

The committee had heard how anecdotal evidence of civilian casualties, including children, had prompted Mr Lyons to research the political reasons for the war. ''I was unable to find a real, just and noble cause to go out but I still had a sense of duty to my country,'' he said.

''It was a big dilemma. Soon after, a large number of military documents were leaked by WikiLeaks. ''Examples included a convoy of marines tearing down a six-mile highway, firing at people with no discrimination.

''Being in the military, most people's view was you just have to go out there and do what you're told to do. ''I came to the conclusion I couldn't serve on a moral ground and I couldn't see any political reason for being there.''

But after deliberating for about an hour, Judge Timothy King, chairing the panel, told him: ''Having considered the matter with great care we have come to the decision that our advice to the Ministry of Defence must be to dismiss your appeal to this committee and therefore uphold the decision of your commanding officer.''

No reasons were given for the rejection of the appeal. But in a departure from past practice, he said the written reasons would be published and made available to Mr Lyons' chain of command in the coming days.

The committee, sitting in London, heard that Mr Lyons, from Plymouth, came from a military family and was the great-grandson of a decorated Second World War hero. He described how he was further put off serving in Afghanistan when he learnt he may not be able to treat everyone, regardless of who they were.

He said: "It seems from previous testimony and courses I've done that even going out as a medic with all good intention, if you're at a patrol base or forward operating base, it's likely you'll have to use your weapon and will have to turn civilians away who are in need of medical aid."

He broke down in tears as he told the hearing: "If more people in my position stood up, there would be a lot less innocent lives lost around the world."

Mr Lyons, who joined the Navy in 2005, received a draft order to deploy to Afghanistan in May and was due to serve there from next April. He told how he had become more politically aware since he joined up and had developed a greater interest in current affairs.

After undertaking his own research, he said, his objections to the war hardened. "I feel the great loss of human life, the only thing it's doing is radicalising civilians out there," he said. "People losing family and friends are now taking up arms and trying to fight back."

Asked by Judge King, whether he thought service personnel should be able to choose which conflicts they serve in, he said: "If a serviceman or woman deems a conflict they are going to serve in as wrong on moral, political or religious grounds, they have to stand up and say they won't be a part of it."

Giving evidence, his mother Jill Bland, 49, described the pressure her son had come under since announcing he wanted to leave the service as a conscientious objector.

She said: "We have a military tradition in our family. Michael has dealt with enormous pressure at work to change his mind and enormous pressure within the family. "Certain members of the family are very aggrieved over Michael's decision.

"I'm extremely proud of Michael and I feel it has taken more courage to go through what he has gone through over the last few months, or as much courage at least, as it would have done to put his objections aside and go and serve."

Asked if he was scared of going to Afghanistan, Mr Lyons said: "I had the normal fears of leaving my wife a widow and fears of seeing things or being injured but I wouldn't say anything more than anyone else required to go out there."

He also pointed out that had he been a coward rather than a conscientious objector, he could have avoided serving by faking a back injury or psychiatric illness.

 

[yellow people]

Tanks 'needed to fight Taliban'


Tanks 'needed to fight Taliban'

The army wants to send a squadron of battle tanks to Afghanistan to take on the Taliban, according to reports.

The Challenger 2 main battle tank. Military commanders have called for the Challenger to be deployed in Afghanistan. Photo: JULIAN SIMMONDS

9:50AM GMT 19 Dec 2010

Senior army commanders have asked for the Challenger 2 tanks to be deployed in Helmand, in an admission that forces there lack armoured protection.

The tanks would provide close support for infantry and protection against improvised explosive devices (IEDs), according to the Sunday Times.

A source told the newspaper: "(The Challenger) can blast a hole in an insurgent compound from a distance and drive straight through it, disabling the IEDs with the minimum of damage.

The move follows a decision by the US to send a similar number of heavy Abrams tanks.

Until now, the Ministry of Defence has turned down requests for Challengers in Afghanistan, for fear that it would send out the wrong message to locals.

Battle tanks were used by the USSR during its invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The machines' burned out hulks still litter the landscape.

The Coalition government announced in the strategic defence review that it would cut the army's 345, 63-ton Challengers by about 40 per cent.

A spokesman for the MoD said that no decision had yet been made.

 

[yellow people]

Petraeus lauds Poles after Afghan criticism


Petraeus lauds Poles after Afghan criticism

WARSAW | Mon Dec 20, 2010 10:42am EST

WARSAW (Reuters) - The commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus, has lavished praise on Polish troops serving there after a magazine article quoted U.S. army officers criticizing the Poles' effectiveness.

In an article entitled "For U.S. Troops in Afghanistan, Coalition Forces are Mixed Blessing," Time magazine quoted U.S. officers as saying Polish troops had failed to patrol roads properly through Ghazni province targeted by Taliban fighters and spoke of the Poles "just kind of hanging around."

The report, which has triggered dismay in Poland, usually a staunchly pro-U.S. ally, comes at an awkward time for Washington as it struggles to limit the global diplomatic fallout from the mass publication of diplomatic cables by the WikiLeaks website.

"Polish forces are serving their nation, the coalition and Afghanistan in truly admirable fashion," Petraeus said in a statement on the website of Poland's Defense Ministry. "All of Poland's citizens should be very proud of the enormous contributions their men and women in uniform are making in Afghanistan," he said.

In similar vein, U.S. Major General John Campbell wrote a letter to Poland's defense minister apologizing for any hurt the comments may have caused and praising Polish forces who "have faithfully stood shoulder to shoulder with both the U.S. and Afghan forces in eastern Afghanistan for more than five years."

The Time article noted that U.S. officers were often critical of other countries' armed forces and said the Polish armed forces, only recently fully professionalized, had limited resources compared with the mighty U.S. military machine.

Polish Defense Minister Bogdan Klich has branded the Time article "offensive." Poland has 2,600 troops serving in Afghanistan and 22 Poles have so far died in the conflict there. Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski said on Monday he believed the U.S. officers' comments reflected their frustration with the lack of progress in Afghanistan.

"It is crucial that we draw conclusions from what really needs to be addressed here, that is to say an up-to-date NATO strategy in Afghanistan. It seems there are no convincing arguments in favor of the current strategy based on an increased number of NATO troops there," Komorowski said.

He reiterated that Poland should start reducing the number of its troops in Afghanistan in 2011 ahead of a complete pullout in 2014. He has previously spoken of withdrawing them by 2012.

(Writing by Gareth Jones, editing by Alison Williams)

 

[yellow people]

Joe Biden says troops will leave Afghanistan by 2014 'come hell or high water'


Joe Biden says troops will leave Afghanistan by 2014 'come hell or high water'

Vice President Joe Biden has promised that all American troops will leave Afghanistan within four years, stating that "we're going to be totally out of there, come hell or high water, by 2014".

Joe Biden appears during a pre taped interview on 'Meet the Press' Photo: GETTY

By Toby Harnden, Washington 4:56PM GMT 20 Dec 2010

The statement went much further than any other American official and appeared to contradict President Barack Obama, who said just last month that there would be a reduced number of troops by 2014 but exact force levels were undecided.

Mr Biden, who has long had a reputation for speaking carelessly, also told NBC's "Meet the Press" programme that the start of the Afghanistan withdrawal in July 2011 would involve a significant drawdown.

"We are going to, come July, begin to draw down American forces" and begin to transfer responsibility to the Afghans," he said. "It will not be a token amount."

He presented next July as the beginning of a process that would see all US troops leave by the end of 2014.

"We're starting it in July of 2011 and we're going to be totally out of there, come hell or high water, by 2014."

Until now, the Obama administration has gone no further than saying that responsibility for security would be handed over to Afghan forces throughout the country by the end of 2014, as was agreed by Nato at last month's Lisbon conference.

Few if any military planners believe that all American troops will be out of Afghanistan within four years. Most anticipate that even under a best-case scenario tens of thousands are likely to remain to assist the Afghan army.

Mr Biden said that al-Qaeda's strength had "been significantly degraded" because of American actions against the network's leadership. But, he conceded, there had been less success in countering the Afghan insurgency and creating a stable Afghan government. He admitted that the Taliban continued to make use of safe havens in Pakistan.

"We're making progress on all fronts, more in some areas than in others. Are we making sufficient progress fast enough? The answer remains to be seen," he said.

 

[yellow people]

National Archives: Britain agreed secret deal to back Mujahideen

Britain secretly agreed to back Afghan resistance fighters after the Soviet invasion of their country, some of whom would go on to form al-Qa’eda.

By Martin Beckford

Newly published papers show that one of the country’s top civil servants held a private summit with senior American, French and German politicians at which they decided to provide “discreet support for Afghan guerrilla resistance”.

One faction of the Mujahideen fighters, who were also covertly funded by the CIA, went on to become founding members of the al-Qa’eda terrorist network.

Declassified Government records, released by the National Archives, also detail Margaret Thatcher’s failure to stop British athletes competing at the Moscow Olympics in protest at the Afghan war.

The Communist superpower had sent troops into Kabul in December 1979 to support a Marxist-Leninist regime that was under threat from Islamic opposition groups known as the Mujahideen.

Its actions caused alarm around the world and less than a month later, leading Western governments were secretly discussing how they could counter the Soviet invasion.

On January 15th, 1980, Sir Robert Armstrong, the Cabinet Secretary, met Zbigniew Brzezinski, the US National Security Advisor, along with government representatives from France and West Germany at the Palais Marigny in Paris.

A note sent to London afterwards stated: “There was some discussion of support for Afghan resistance to the invading Soviet troops.”

In a restricted memo, Sir Robert told how the Americans suggested supporting refugee camps in Pakistan as they were being used as bases by guerrillas opposing the Soviet invasion, and it would “help to keep Afghan resistance alive”.

“So long as they remained in forward positions, they would need some defensive equipment, possibly including surface to air missiles to defend themselves against air attack.”

It was said at the meeting: “If one of the objectives of the West in this crisis was to keep the Islamic world aroused about the Soviet invasion, that would be served by encouraging a continuing guerrilla resistance.”

Sir Robert said although a border war should be avoided, “so long as Afghans were ready to continue guerrilla resistance, and Pakistan was prepared at least to acquiesce in Pakistani territory being a base for such activity, the West could hardly refuse to provide support, where it could do so with suitable discretion”.

The Germans were legally unable to supply arms, but the US, UK and France agreed to help the Mujahideen.

“It was agreed that heads of government should be invited to endorse this conclusion and, if they did so, to authorise discussions at the appropriate level in the agencies involved as to feasibility and methods of providing discreet support for Afghan guerrilla resistance.”

Soon afterwards Dr Brzezinski visited Pakistan and wrote to the Cabinet Office: “I was impressed by the determination of the Pakistanis, and also with the Afghan resistance fighters - the Mujahidin - whom I encountered during my visit to a refugee camp on the frontier.

“I am convinced we have something solid to work with in frustrating Soviet ambitions toward the south.”

In a confidential assessment of Soviet strategy, British officials recognised the potential dangers of military action against a guerrilla force in Afghanistan.

It stated: “Aid to the rebels is highly desirable in itself. A prolonged counter-revolutionary war there could only have the most profound effects on the whole Soviet system.

Certainly anything in the nature of a Soviet ‘Vietnam’ – to use an analogy which has been widely employed – would presumably have the same effect on a government in Moscow as the real Vietnam did in Washington.

“We trust the Western leaders are prepared for the enormous beneficial possibilities that could just possibly open up if the Afghan rebellion were to succeed.”

The Soviet army eventually lost some 15,000 lives and started withdrawing its forces in 1988.

Muslims from around the world had travelled to Afghanistan to join the resistance and some Mujahideen veterans who had received weapons and training from Western powers, including Osama Bin Laden, went on to use them against their former supporters in terrorist atrocities.

Back in 1980, the British Government also tried to isolate the Soviet Union by urging its athletes to boycott the Olympic Games in Moscow.

The declassified papers show that the Prime Minister told sporting leaders: “Never in the history of the modern Olympics has the host country at the time of the Games been committing aggression in another country.”

But although Mrs Thatcher wrote four times to the Chairman of the British Olympic Association, Sir Denis Follows, her words fell on deaf ears.

In one letter she told him: “Without the Americans and West Germans and the other sporting countries who have also decided to stay away, the Games will not be worthy of the name Olympics, and medals won at Moscow will be of inferior worth and the ceremonies a charade.”

One official at the BOA admitted he was “upset” by its “cavalier attitude towards the letters from the Prime Minister”, which were “never properly discussed in committee”.

Douglas Hurd, then a junior minister in the Foreign Office, wanted to discredit the BOA by highlighting the fact that it had “started writing to county councils and trades union bodies of known left-wing persuasion in an effort to raise more money”, so it could send more officials and sportsmen to the Games.

He told a fellow minister: “It would be worth encouraging press interest in the fundraising contacts with left-wing groups which he reports.”

 

[yellow people]

Wife of a bomb disposal expert killed in Afghanistan explosion pays tribute to husband with 'heart of gold'

The wife of a bomb disposal expert killed in an explosion in southern Afghanistan has paid tribute to her husband, saying he had a ''heart of gold''.

Warrant Officer Charles Wood with his wife Heather Photo: PA

Warrant Officer Class 2 Charles Wood, 34, from Middlesbrough, was caught in a blast from an improvised explosive device (IED) as he lead the clearance of a route through the Khushdal Kalay area of the Helmand River Valley on Tuesday.

His colleagues described the soldier, of 23 Pioneer Regiment, The Royal Logistic Corps, as a ''consummate professional''.

A total of 348 UK military personnel have died since operations in Afghanistan began in 2001.

WO2 Wood leaves behind his wife Heather, mother Barbara, father John and sisters Samantha and Amanda.

Heather Wood said: "The family have lost a son, a brother and an uncle and I have lost my loving husband who was also my best friend.

"Charlie had an infectious personality who made a positive effect on everyone he met; he had a heart of gold and endeared himself to everyone.

"He will be sorely missed by those who had the good fortune to have met and known him. "He will be forever in our thoughts for the rest of our lives."

WO2 Wood deployed to Afghanistan on November 6 as an advanced search adviser, trained to co-ordinate the detection of IEDs.

He was killed in the Lashkar Gah district as the task of clearing a route through the Khushdal Kalay area of the Helmand River Valley neared completion.

W02 Wood, who joined the Army in 1994 and also served in Iraq and Bosnia, had raised thousands of pounds for forces charities.