Viewpoint: The Achilles heel in Afghan war
Tuesday, 14 July 2009
The deaths of five Northern Ireland-based soldiers in what was the Army’s bloodiest week in Afghanistan has brought home to many people here the true horror of the conflict there.
Three of them were aged just 18, merely boys fighting in a savage war whose origins they could scarcely understand. Yet they displayed the outstanding courage that soldiers have shown throughout the ages, putting their lives on the line — and sadly losing them — because that was their duty and their calling.
Their deaths, and those of the other 179 who have perished in Afghanistan, have forced people to confront the real issues of the conflict.
What is the strategy of the allied forces? They went into Afghanistan to drive out the Taliban and al-Qaeda as part of the war on terror. The terrorists were driven out initially but have regrouped and are now fighting a classic hit-and-run campaign, particularly in Helmand province, Afghanistan’s bandit
country. As 30 years of conflict in Northern Ireland proved, terrorist organisations embedded within a civilian population are notoriously difficult to defeat.
It is clear that the NATO forces can muster overwhelmingly superior firepower and trained soldiers, but the Achilles heel is public opinion. As the death toll mounts people question if victory is achievable.
And what is victory? Is it the defeat of the Taliban and al-Qaeda — a doubtful proposition — or is it the creation of a relatively stable society which the Afghan government can then administer in its own way? It seems that America and the UK went into Afghanistan, just like Iraq, with a set objective of confronting and defeating a known opponent but with little idea of what would happen next and with even less idea of how to exit the region.
But it is also clear that these are dangerous times in global affairs. Flashpoints like Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East and North Korea provide the tinder which could be set alight at any moment. There are seasoned analysts who believe that global politics are approaching a crossroads and that any wrong turning could have dire consequences for decades to come. The conflict in Afghanistan is a case in point. It is not simply about preventing terrorist organisations using the country as a launch pad and training ground from which to attack the west. It is also about preventing those same terrorist organisations continuing to destabilise neighbouring Pakistan, a country with a nuclear arsenal. For it to fall under the control of the Taliban or al-Qaeda is a spectre too terrifying to countenance.
While it is correct for the Government to be pressurised into stating its objectives in Afghanistan and to be questioned vigorously over the level of resources provided for British troops in that country — particularly the number of helicopters deployed — the civilian population should show the same courage and resolve as displayed by the soldiers on the ground.
They are fighting to help the Afghan people create a better way of life for themselves, free from the tyranny of terrorism. They deserve nothing but our admiration and our support.
- Text Size

Photosales
niJobfinder
niCarfinder
Home Delivery
Propertynews
















Nonsense....there is very little offered by way of proof that the majority of Afghans wanted western intervention, and the war was initiated without a clear view of either a desired outcome or endgame...it was a mad rush to the mountains to catch Bin Laden...the tyranny that the Afghans have been lumbered with wears a NATO badge and destroys women, children, houses and villages. So called seasoned analysts led America into Vietnam, the Soviets into Afghanistan and Chechnya and let's not even start to consider what the analysts did here in NI....Viewpoint as propaganda!
Posted by malachy mulligan | 17.07.09, 00:51 GMT