Defence

The changes are in response to a request by UK commanders for additional forces, so that they can secure early advances in the North of Helmand, whilst also being able to make progress in the centre of the province. The additional forces, drawn from all three Armed Services, will contribute to the same mission as before: rebuilding Afghanistan, strengthening its Government, security forces and legal system, and tackling its desperate poverty.

In a statement to the House, Defence Secretary Des Browne emphasised that UK Forces were not waging a narcotics war, for example destroying poppy fields - they were helping to create the conditions of security and development in which the narcotics industry would be weakened, and eventually driven out by the Afghans themselves.

The full text of Mr Browne’s speech is below:

"With permission, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a statement about UK deployments to Afghanistan.

"On Thursday, I spoke about Afghanistan during the Defence Debate. Today I reiterate the enormous debt we owe to the British soldiers who have given their lives, and who have been injured, serving there. I also salute the bravery of all of our forces working to bring about lasting change in Afghanistan.

"On Thursday I also said we had received requests for additional forces in Helmand, and that I would announce our response as soon as possible. I will do that today.

"But first I want to place this response, and indeed the whole of our deployment to Helmand and Afghanistan as a whole, in its proper context.

"On 11 September 2001, a devastating terrorist attack was launched against the West from within Afghanistan’s borders. This happened at least in part because we abandoned Afghanistan to become a failed state after the Soviet occupation. And that is still why it remains overwhelmingly in our national interest to ensure Afghanistan does not revert to a haven for terrorists. It is also in the interests of the Afghan people, the vast majority of whom have no sympathy for terrorism or violent extremism. There are many malign influences holding the Afghans back and we need to fight them, but we should be under no illusion about what is required to succeed. Only by rebuilding Afghanistan, by strengthening its Government, its security forces and its legal system, and by tackling its desperate poverty, will we be able to help Afghanistan make real and lasting progress. I have heard all sides of the House agree that we should help. The UN agrees. NATO agrees. 36 countries are providing troops to seal their agreement. We all agree, and everything we do and say should reflect this consensus.

"It is also important to recognise where our efforts in Helmand stand in relation to the strategy for Afghanistan as a whole. NATO has been in charge of this mission for three years. It has helped generate the confidence for millions of refugees to return, and improved access to better medicine and education. It has followed a clear plan to expand security and reconstruction from the North, to the West, and now to the more challenging South. We have been engaged in that process throughout, having until recently provided a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Mazar-e-Sharif in the North. The South is more challenging, but this was always well understood – which is why NATO sought a firm platform of progress in the North and West first.

"Now let me turn specifically to Helmand.

"We began deploying to Helmand in February, building up to full operating capability on the first of July. It has been said that we have been over-optimistic about that deployment, that we told the House this would not be difficult and that we sent the wrong force. None of this is true. We said from the start that this was going to be a challenging mission. My predecessor’s statement to the House on 26 January included a sober assessment of the threat. The force package reflected this. It was designed by the military and endorsed by the Chiefs of Staff. It contained attack helicopters, artillery and armoured vehicles. We deployed tough, capable units, with robust rules of engagement – because we expected violent resistance.

"We knew that the Taliban, the drug lords and certain tribal elements would resist any attempt to bring security to the people of Helmand. We knew that the kind of people who behead teachers, burn schools, smuggle drugs and assassinate government officials were not likely to stand by and allow progress to happen. Yes, we have taken casualties, but we have overmatched the opposing forces every single time we have faced them. They have tried to block our deployment, and failed. They will continue to try to disrupt our mission – and they will continue to fail.

"Let me turn now to that mission. Some say it is confused and that it is spurious to say that it is about reconstruction, when the reality for soldiers has been fighting. We always knew that there was a probability of violent resistance. That is why we sent soldiers to do this task. But that does not change our over-riding purpose – which is to rebuild. We have been accused of naivety by drawing a distinction between the ISAF mission to spread security, and the US led mission focussed on counter-terrorism. But this distinction is not naïve at all. In both cases soldiers will have to fight, but the nature of the ISAF mission reflects the fundamental fact that we will not reach a lasting peace by force alone. We will reach it when Afghanistan has changed; when the Government has been able to deliver such security, development and prosperity that the ordinary Afghans will no longer tolerate terrorists and criminals in their midst. This is why rebuilding is our mission. Our forces on the ground understand this and, the Afghans understand us.

"The mission is simple – but the delivery of it is complex.

"That complexity arises from the situation. Three decades of conflict has stripped the South of all signs of Governance. It has robbed many Afghans of hope. And in that uncontrolled space, violence, criminality, narcotics and extremism have flourished. We have confronted these threats and learnt much about them since we deployed. And, as with any deployment these experiences have allowed us to review our forces and our approach. That is what we have been doing in recent weeks.

"Madam Deputy Speaker let me now explain why we need to adjust and strengthen our force structure in Helmand.

"The original intent was to tackle the challenges incrementally, spreading security and reconstruction from the centre of Helmand out. But commanders on the ground grasped an early opportunity. They saw the chance to reinforce the position of the local Governor and the Afghan army and police by going into Northern Helmand, and challenging the impunity of the Taleban there. In doing this, we moved faster towards achieving our ultimate objectives, but extended ourselves. This is a development we must respond to. But it is our actions that have brought about this development, our decisions and our determination to grasp the challenge. It is not, as some suggest, a failure to anticipate a violent response to our arrival. Yes the violence has increased, but that was inevitable. We are challenging the power of the Taleban and other enemies of the Afghan government, and they are reacting. But despite their efforts, we are spreading security.

"Our commanders have asked for additional forces to secure these early advances in the more remote communities in the North, whilst also being able to make progress in central Helmand. Last Monday I said I was aware of ongoing work on additional resources. I was also aware that as part of this process the Chiefs of Staff were going back to operational commanders and urging them to ensure they had asked for everything they needed. As I said in the House this iterative process produced a recommendation which I received that day. I and the Chiefs of Staff have considered this recommendation and I have now endorsed it. I am grateful for the support and assistance of other Departments, especially the Treasury, in working through the necessary detail of this process as quickly as possible.

"Let me then outline the key elements of this additional force.

"In order to accelerate the reconstruction effort in the current security environment, we will deploy 320 engineers, from 28 Regiment Royal Engineers, to start projects to improve local infrastructure. A company from 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines will provide force protection for them, and these deployments will take place in September.

"We will deploy an additional infantry company, drawn from the Second Battalion, The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, to provide more mobile forces, and two platoons, from The First Battalion, The Royal Irish Regiment, to provide additional force protection.

"There will be small increases in Headquarters staff. We will also boost our medical and logistical support to reflect the increase in troop numbers.

"We will step up our efforts to build the capacity of the Afghan National Army. These brave soldiers have fought side by side with us in recent months and they are the key to our eventual exit strategy. We are therefore deploying additional staff in Helmand, and to the regional Army Headquarters for the South. Great strides have been made already in this essential task and, following the forthright discussions I had with the Afghan Defence Minister Wardak, additional Afghan troops have been sent to Helmand and more will follow. There are also around 2,300 Afghan police and military in Helmand, building to 4,800 or so in 2007.

"As with previous deployments, there will be a requirement to deploy reservists. There are some 150 reservists serving in the Joint Operational Area, including members of the Sponsored Reserves. Some 450 call-out notices will be served on individual reservists in order to fill approximately 400 posts in theatre. One of the main reasons for the increase in reservist numbers is the planned deployment of 100 reservist personnel from 212 Field Hospital.

"These enhancements – some 870 personnel – will place additional demands on our air transport. We have already increased the flying hours available for attack and support helicopters, as requested by commanders – and today I can say we will also be making more support helicopters and one additional C130 Hercules available. We also plan to deploy a radar installation, provided by Number One Air Control Centre, Royal Air Force.

"All these additional deployments will be made as soon as possible. But Madam Deputy Speaker, I also want to cover the planned changes to the force structure resulting from the roulement in October, when the units currently comprising the Helmand Taskforce, drawn predominantly but not solely from 16 Air Assault Brigade, will complete their tours. They will be replaced by units drawn principally from 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines, including 42 and 45 Commando, and other supporting elements including 12 Signal Regiment.

"This roulement will also involve a change to the force structure, reflecting the differences in the two brigades’ structures and equipment, including the requirement to support the Commandos’ Viking armoured vehicles. This represents around an additional 125 personnel.

"And the House will also be aware that last month I announced the deployment of 130 personnel from 34 Squadron of the Royal Air force to increase force protection at Kandahar Airfield.

"Madam Deputy Speaker, this is a complex picture – some troops will be going immediately, others in October; some will constitute an enduring addition, others are being deployed on a surge basis – but I can tell the House that as a result of today’s announcement the steady-state size of the Helmand Taskforce will increase between now and October from some 3600 to some 4500 personnel.

"I am aware that our armed forces are heavily committed. As I said in the personnel debate around 18% of the Army is currently deployed on operations. This is challenging, but sustainable. Taking into account deployments in Iraq and the planned increase in personnel to Afghanistan most of our deployable units will operate outside Harmony guidelines. I don’t accept this lightly. But I do believe it is necessary, and judging by comments made in this House in recent months, so do the majority of the Honourable members. We will do all we can to minimise the impact of this, and we will continue to seek further contributions from our NATO partners in order to relieve the pressure in some of these areas.

"Some commentators have suggested that there are insufficient infantry soldiers deployed in comparison to the force’s overall size. Let me be clear that the delivery of this mission is not borne by the infantry alone, and it does a disservice to a great many brave men and women to suggest otherwise. Indeed of the six deaths in Afghanistan since the deployment, half have been from other arms. The infantry do have a challenging task but so do all our forces in Afghanistan. Airpower, artillery, light armour and others are involved in combat. But the work done by the Provincial Reconstruction Team, the training teams, and those who enable the others to operate is every bit as essential to eventual success. Some more infantry are indeed deploying, but the fundamental balance of combat forces, to others carrying out vital roles, will not change, and this is because the mission has not changed.

"There have been questions raised about the capability of NATO, and of the intentions of the United States. NATO now has many more troops, to reflect the greater challenge in the South. Rules of Engagement have been made more robust. This morning I spoke to Commander ISAF, General David Richards. He told me that in the South effectively there were no caveats placed by nations on the use of their forces. Across Afghanistan he was seeing a ‘new NATO’ where such caveats were becoming a thing of the past. He also said he was confident he had the forces to do the job, and that he had been encouraged to see nations like Germany and Spain considering making additional forces available.

"I believe that NATO is thoroughly fit for this role. It has been suggested that because it does not have forces in every province, it cannot succeed. But this misses the fundamental point that we are in a stage when NATO is expanding in Afghanistan. Months ago there were no NATO troops in the South at all, and there were few United States troops. Soon there will be nearly nine thousand in the South, part of a total of around 18,500. NATO is building on a success that many seem determined to ignore.

"As for the US, last week I spoke to General John Abizaid, the US commander responsible for Afghanistan and Iraq. He was absolutely clear about the US commitment to Afghanistan. They are not leaving this to NATO. They are part of NATO, and likely to be the biggest force contributor in Afghanistan for some time to come. Accusations they are abandoning NATO are misplaced.

"Lastly Madam Deputy Speaker I want to address counter-narcotics. I said stability was the key to Afghanistan’s future. Part of that stability must be delivered by the Afghan Government facing up to the evil of narcotics. President Karzai’s personal commitment to this has been clear, and we must help. Again the aim is simple even if the implementation is difficult, and it is the same aim as for all other aspects of our task – to rebuild. We will only make a lasting impact on the narcotics industry by strengthening all aspects of Afghan life, so that the economy can function without drugs money and farmers have alternative livelihoods to turn to. This will take time but the process must start now.

"Madam Deputy Speaker, our soldiers are not narcotics police and we do not ask them to be narcotics police. They are not waging a narcotics war; they will not destroy poppy fields and fight farmers for bags of opium – they are helping to create the conditions of security and development in which the narcotics industry will be weakened and eventually driven out by the Afghans themselves.

"Madam Deputy Speaker, I trust that I have made my position clear. My decisions on these matters have been shaped by what I saw and heard when visiting Afghanistan. Our people there are doing a fantastic job in very difficult circumstances. They know why they are there. They recognise the importance of their task. They have achieved a great deal already and I intend to give them what they need to secure these achievements and help the Afghans towards the stable future that they deserve.