Brown says more troops 'not needed'

Published on Monday 13 July 2009 22:00

GORDON Brown yesterday refused to commit more troops or resources to the war in Afghanistan – despite calls for a rethink of military strategy after the deaths of 15 soldiers in ten days.

The Prime Minister insisted British commanders "have the resources" required to defeat the Taleban, in what has become an increasingly bloody conflict that has claimed 184 British lives since 2001.

The government had come under intense pressure to increase the number of helicopters in Afghanistan to cut the toll of soldiers killed by roadside bombs. Two-thirds of UK fatalities in the past two years have been caused by improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.

In April, it was reported that the Prime Minister had refused a request from military commanders for a further increase in troop numbers.

Mr Brown, who made an unannounced visit to an RAF helicopter base Oxfordshire yesterday morning, later told the Commons that the number of UK troops had risen recently to 9,100 to cover the pre-election period – Afghans go to the polls on 20 August.

He also said there had been a 60 per cent increase in the number of helicopters, resulting in an 84 per cent increase in flying time in the past two years. A number of Merlin helicopters were being reconfigured after use in Iraq, while the first of another eight troop-carrying Chinooks would arrive in Afghanistan by the end of the year as part of a 100 million refit. Between eight and ten Chinooks are already in the front line.

But despite demands from experts such as Lord Guthrie, a former chief of the defence staff, the Prime Minister made no new announcements about troops or resources.

He repeated a pledge that troop numbers would be reviewed after the Afghanistan election – though this is likely to lead to a reduction – and insisted military commanders had reassured him "we have the manpower we need for the current operations".

Mr Brown had come under attack earlier in the day from Tory leader David Cameron, who said more helicopters were needed as a matter of urgency and that the government should "beg, borrow or, frankly, steal" them from Nato allies.

"It's a scandal in particular that they still lack enough helicopters to move around in Afghanistan," he said.

In the Commons, Mr Cameron rejected Mr Brown's suggestion that helicopters were now more readily available to transport troops between secure bases and battle zones.

He said: "Isn't the real point this: the number of troops has doubled since 2006, so proportionately there hasn't really been an increase in helicopter capacity at all."

Mr Cameron stopped short of demanding an increase in the size of the British contingent, the second largest of the 42 countries fighting in Afghanistan.

Instead, he said the government had to outline its strategy and explain the purpose of sending British troops to risk their lives. "We need to be absolutely clear about what our mission should be," he said. "It is about security: it is to deny the ability of al-Qaeda to have bases in Afghanistan."

Mr Brown said the spate of deaths had made it a "sad and difficult time". Eight soldiers were killed in 24 hours last week, with three of the victims aged 18.

UK forces are encountering fierce resistance as they try to make areas of central Helmand safe for the elections, clearing the Taleban from ground the Afghan army and police then attempt to hold. UK forces are fighting alongside United States, Danish and Estonian troops.

Mr Brown maintained that action was necessary in the "crucible of terror" in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan, an area responsible for three-quarters of terror plots against the UK. He said: "It has been a very difficult summer, and it is not over yet. But if we are to deny Helmand to the Taleban in the long term, and if we are to defeat this vicious insurgency, and by so doing make Britain and the world a safer place, then we must persist with our operations in Afghanistan."

Earlier, Bob Ainsworth, in his first appearance at the dispatch box as Defence Secretary, told the Commons helicopters would not have saved the most recent British fatalities.

He said Operation Panther's Claw involved foot patrols engaging Taleban fighters hand to hand. It was "irresponsible" to suggest the deaths could have been prevented, he said.

Five soldiers had died in a well-planned ambush, while a sixth was killed getting out of a Mastiff armoured vehicle.

"There has been hand-to-hand fighting that has resulted in some of the deaths we have experienced, sadly, over the last week or so," Mr Ainsworth said.

"This cannot be conducted from inside a highly armoured vehicle and it cannot be conducted from inside a helicopter.

"They have to take these risks. They understand that. I think that the British public understand that. It's our duty to supply the kit and equipment to keep people as safe as we can. But we cannot remove risk."

In an opinion poll for ITV's News at Ten last night, 59 per cent thought British forces should be withdrawn from Afghanistan, with 36 per cent saying they should stay. A total of 75 per cent felt troops were inadequately equipped.

Read Jerome Starkey's analysis here

WAR OF WORDS OVER LABOUR'S STRATEGY

FORMER defence secretary John Reid reacted furiously after a senior Conservative MP suggested yesterday that the Labour government had been was guilty of a "serious misreading" of the conflict in Afghanistan.

Michael Ancram, a former shadow defence secretary, demanded to know the basis for the claim that "not a shot would be fired" – remarks attributed to Mr Reid, who was defence secretary between 2005-6.

Mr Ancram added: "Was this not the beginning of a really serious misreading of the situation in Helmand … for which our armed forces are paying a heavy price?"

But Mr Reid said Mr Ancram had inadvertently misled the Commons. "I never at any stage expressed the hope, expectation, promise or pledge that we would leave Afghanistan without firing a shot," he said.

"I did, however, insist we would not be aggressors. We did not seek war. We did not go there as part of an invasion. We would be happy to go and work with the Afghan government and leave without firing a shot."

Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth, a junior minister at the time, said: "What was said …was we would be happy if not a shot were fired."

HALF FIT TO FIGHT

FEWER than half of the British military's helicopters are available for use on the front line, the Ministry of Defence has admitted.

In a written parliamentary answer, the MoD revealed that 43 per cent of the 507 helicopters in service were "fit for purpose" in June.

Work is currently being carried out on Merlin helicopters used in Iraq to make them suitable for the higher altitudes and harsher terrain of Afghanistan. These are due to reach the war zone by the end of the year.

In addition, eight Chinooks – used to transport troops – are being modified, though only one of these is due to be ready by the end of the year. There are between eight and ten Chinooks in the Afghanistan front line.

Lynx helicopters are also undergoing modifications for use in the country.

A plan for Nato allies with limited involvement in Afghanistan to provide helicopters has yielded few results, with three provided by the Czech Republic being the only known donations so far.

A deal signed more than a year ago between the UK and France will not produce dividends until December, when the first three French helicopters will be provided.

Five more will follow in 2010 and up to three more in 2011.

Plans to convert six Merlins formerly belonging to Denmark are well behind schedule, with no clear timetable for their entry into service.

Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox said: "If we cannot move our forces by air they are more vulnerable on the ground."