Casualty of War

Marine A is due to be sentenced and the resulting media blitz on this case will begin anew. On Monday the Telegraph website published an interesting article on the matter of combat in Afghanistan. Written by a journalist who has embedded with the Royal Marines a number of times, it is not surprising the view point that Chris Terrill takes. Indeed he writes with a knowledge that a lot of commentators do not have.

He finishes the article with “Soldiers are not automatons. They are flesh-and-blood human beings with frailties and vulnerabilities like all of us. They are ordinary people doing extraordinary things on our behalf; risking their lives in combat and having to make difficult and morally confusing judgments in the heat of battle. They don’t always get it right because, sometimes, the stakes are just too high for any one man to cope with.
I believe that if Marine A is a criminal of war, then he is also a casualty of war.”


This is the key point when it comes to sentencing, yes he has done wrong and justice has to be seen to be done, however it has to fit the crime and not be used as an example to other would be transgressors of the Geneva Convention. 

Prisoners of War on the Battlefield

Still image from Helmet Camera footage. Photo Source: Ministry Of Defence/PA

The trial of the three Royal Marines accused of executing a member of the Taliban has come to a close with two of them being acquitted and a third known as “Marine A” being found guilty. This has lead to an interesting debate involving a number of serving and former officers from various services relating to the sentence “Marine A” should receive. These range from a call for leniency through to no leniency and “Marine A” facing the full sentence possible as “murder is still murder”. This Article strikes a good balance in discussing such an emotive issue. 

Warfare is never clear cut and the taking of prisoners is always a very dangerous time for all parties involved. There is always the worry that perhaps the enemy combatant is not sincere in their surrender, that perhaps at the first opportunity will seek to harm his captors when there attention is elsewhere. 

This case however is one of the more clear cut ones as the enemy combatant in this case was severely wounded and posed no direct threat to the Marines involved. Indeed it seems that this was carried out with malice and with revenge for the casualties suffered by the Marines unit and the displaying of body parts as trophies. 

While it has to be remembered that the serving soldiers are under a huge pressure and strain, this does not give them a free card in how they behave. It was an exceptionally foolish thing to do and one that brings the British armed forces and the wider forces that are part of ISAF into disrepute. 

Many soldiers,sailors and airmen serve as part of ISAF and this incident involves a very minor percentage, let us hope that it remains this way and cases of this nature will still shock us when they do occur. 

11 November 2013

Another year and another remembrance Sunday full of debate relating to the wearing of the Poppy, the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan, foreign policy and the ugly spectre of burning poppies. Each year the debates tend to run along the same lines. Next year will be very interesting with the anniversary of the Great War and the draw down of all forces from Afghanistan. I expect there will be a lot more commentary about what the poppy symbolises, the 'lost generation' and hopefully a lot less relating to Britains foreign policy of the last 12 years.

As we approach the centenary of the outbreak of the Great War the annual Poppy Appeal has become a broader battleground. Parties from both sides of the fence and those with no real interest the political aspects of wearing a poppy have become increasingly vocal.
Last week the national media was full of commentary attacking each view on why the commentator would or would not be wearing a poppy. I think that debate on wearing a poppy is healthy and not something you should stifle even if I disagree with some reasons for not wearing one. The fact that we have a choice to wear a poppy and the fact that we are allowed to decide a reason for wearing one should say a lot about our society. For myself I wear a poppy in remembrance and to support the work of the Royal British Legion. This is especially important given the increase in take up of it’s services over the last ten years due to increased military activity in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

There was a very good article that I read on the website of the Wallstreet Journal. While I knew a little about the Cenotaph and how it was originally meant to only be temporary, the article filled a gap in my knowledge and gave me a better understanding regarding its design and construction.
The article can be found here.


I would also like to advertise a friend’s writing blog as he has written a very short story based on the morning of the 1st of July 1916. He is a budding author so if historical fiction is something that interests you please check it out.

Drones

 

Source: AFP/Getty Images

I read an interesting but brief article on the use of UAVs this evening. The central part of the article concerned the ability of UAVs to do away with the risks to service personal and questioned whether this is preferred over deploying boots on the ground.

UAVs conduct a lot of reconnaissance missions that would otherwise involve risking either pilots or troops conducting ground reconnaissance. They also allow the ability to strike with out fear of injury to any service personnel.  

However the article does point out that there are people with issues regarding the use of drones for “targeted assassination” and the killing of US citizens by US forces without trial etc. I think this is an area where perhaps UAVs will always have a problem regarding justification. The fact that they allow targets to be killed/destroyed from a distance and with relative ease will always be unsettling, however is this really any different to a guided missile being used from a jet or launched from a naval vessel?

One thing is for certain however and that is they have had an impact in Afghanistan and their use is set to continue for the foreseeable future no matter how loud the dissenting voices get. If given the simple choice of deploying boots on the ground in a risky operation or using a UAV politicians will always choose the latter. 

Here is a link to the article. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9855577/Drones-are-gruesome-but-would-we-prefer-boots-on-the-ground.html

Kabul 2012

April saw the deadly attacks on Kabul from within the city. These attacks were significant as it showed not only the vulnerability of the city but also the ability of the reinvigorated Taliban to strike where they please.

While the attacks may not have caused an enormous amount of physical damage, the attacks were a spectacular PR victory for the Taliban. The PR success was then made all the greater by President Karzai declaring it a failure on the part of NATO intelligence, once more showing Karzai to be playing at political point scoring.

It is true that this was a failure on the part of NATO to prevent these attacks, however it must be remembered that Afghan forces should also be able to detect and stop such attacks occurring as it is not long until the NATO forces that Karzai likes to criticize so much withdraw from the country.

While people may like to make comparisons with the American involvement in Vietnam, the Taleban are unlikely to achieve a military victory over the coalition forces. Once the coalition forces have withdrawn from the country and there are only “advisors” left then it might be a different matter. This is where American involvement may become a little closer to the Vietnam comparison and the Taliban will no doubt be prepared to bleed American and Afghan forces until the final American forces depart from the country. If the Taliban are then able to take on and defeat Afghan government forces then it will add a further perceived “cut and run” laurel to the American reputation.

That is not to say that it is inevitable that the Taliban will emerge as the victors. There are many factors that could prevent that including some of the powerful tribal forces of various warlods switching sides once the foreign forces have left.

It will be interesting over the coming weeks to see if there are further “spectacular” attacks carried out and claimed by the Taliban. It will also be interesting to see the long term implications on the drawdown of forces and the timetable for the exit. 

Photo source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2012/apr/15/kabul-attacks-live-updates

Back From Holiday

Well it has been a while since my last update, due in part to going on holiday to sunny and hot Florida and having a lot on with work.

There has been a lot in the news recently that makes for interesting discussion. The ongoing saga over the Falklands, the regime in Syria still putting down its people and the recent attacks on Kabul.

Needless to say I plan to have a full  update within the next week hopefully.

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

The coalition plans for withdrawal suffered another setback this weekend at the hands of a lone US Staff Sergeant. The news of the horrific killings have unsurprisingly generated plenty of coverage in the papers over the last two days. As many commentators have been quick to point out, this is yet another embarrassing moment for US commanders coming at a time when the outrage over the burning of copies of the Koran had started to dissipate. Many commentators (at least in the UK) have also been quick to point out that there has not been a wave of protests or attacks against coalition troops in response to the killings, so far. What then is likely to occur over the next few days and weeks.

It will be interesting to see if any protests do occur as a result of the horrific and cold blooded actions of the lone gunman. However with the initial 48 hours passing it might be a case that many Afghans have become resigned to living life in a hostile environment where outsiders are generally unwelcome and death and injury comes from either insurgent activity (IEDs or reprisal etc) or from coalition activity (“collateral” damage). There is also the tribal element at play, the deaths occurred in the South of the country which is Pashtun. Despite and almost because of the near endless conflict that Afghanistan has witnessed, there is little national identity. Instead Tribal identity can take precedence over national identity.  

The Taleban were quick to try and seize the narrative of the events and issue declarations condemning the coalition forces as “savages” out to spill the blood of innocent Afghans. The Taleban have vowed to avenge these killings through attack on coalition forces.

Interestingly, this will be business as usual for the Taleban; but by making the statement and seizing the narrative of the event they appear to be doing something for the good of the Afghan people.

The press will spin the story out as long as it sells and will seek to use the attack as justification that our forces should no longer be in Afghanistan. Importantly the coverage the attacks receive will throw into the spotlight the ongoing discussions around the withdrawal of UK and US forces from Afghanistan. As one commentator pointed out, this could be a moment where Afghan politicians try and hold foreign forces accountable for their actions. There are already calls for the perpetrator to face justice in Afghanistan (something that the US is unlikely to acquiesce to).

Ultimately I believe that not a lot (aside from the usual levels of violence) will occur as a direct result following this attack. There will undoubtedly be attacks which the Taleban will claim are in retaliation to this event; but in all likelihood would have occurred anyway just in retaliation to something else.

The biggest impact these attacks will have is on the families of the victims and on the withdrawal plans. The timings of the withdrawals may not change but there will certainly be further conditions placed on the coalition troops staying in Afghanistan.

Photo source: (AP Photo/Rodrigo Abd) (Credit: AP) http://www.salon.com/2010/07/25/wikileaks_4/