| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Drayson: My Lords, I am most grateful for the clear support of noble Lords opposite for the Statement. I am also grateful for the clear and direct questions. We know through our experiences over recent years in Iraq, and before that in Kosovo, that there have been important lessons to learn. It is by such questioning that we can ensure that we have properly thought about all aspects of the contingencies, the deployment and these operations to ensure that we get them absolutely right. I am therefore grateful to the noble Lords and happy to give them, as clearly as I can, the direct answers that they seek. If I miss any I shall write to noble Lords to ensure that they are followed up from the record.
The noble Lord, Lord Astor, asked whether we were convinced that we had enough troops. The noble Lord, Lord Garden, asked whether we felt we had sufficient reserves. Yes, we do. The plans put in place by the Chiefs of Staff take into account our understanding of the situation and the security environment into which we are going in the southern part of Afghanistan. They are based also on the experience that we have had in the northern regions. This leads us to be confident that this quite significant and complex deployment provides us with the capability we need to do the job properly and safely. Yes, we are confident that that can be done without any requirement to draw down troops from Iraq. We hope that as the situation in Iraq develops in a positive way we will be in a position this year to begin the process of handover. But that is not linked to this decision today.
I was asked about the rules of engagement but, as noble Lords know, it is not our policy to go into those details. However, particularly given the complexity of the two parallel operations, Operation Enduring Freedom and the ISAF NATO-led operation, we recognise that there is concern about the rules of engagement. I can reassure the House that we have clear and unambiguous rules of engagement which do not contain some of the caveats about which I suspect the noble Lords are concerned. However, I should be happy to meet noble Lords separately to fully brief them on the rules of engagement and to address that point.
The question about the development of the Afghan security forces leads to the point about what is our exit strategy, a matter which I know is of concern. Bluntly, our exit strategy is for us to support the development of the Afghan security forces in Helmand province until they have approximately the same number of security forces as we will be providing to support the reconstruction efforts. That is the criteria for our exit strategy. We have been encouraged by the progress that has been made by the governor, Engineer Dowd, in the region and the direction which he is giving that there really is progress. That is why we feel that it is so important for NATO to provide support in the south.
26 Jan 2006 : Column 1326
I was asked about protection for NGOs in the region, which is a key part of what we are doing. ISAF will be looking to create—and to help the Afghans create—a security environment in which the NGOs can function effectively. I believe that we have put in place the security forces to ensure that that is delivered in the way that I have described.
The noble Lords were right to ask questions about the detailed aspects of command and control, and we recognise the complexity of the transition. As we move around the country to increase the squeeze on the areas that are most under the control of the warlords, we believe that we have in place good plans, which have been thoroughly discussed between the commanders in Operation Enduring Freedom and the NATO operations, to manage that transition well. But we recognise the challenge and we are working to manage that very carefully indeed.
The noble Lord asked about the ARCC HQ. We are committed to doing the job for nine months. Our expectation is that, at the end of that nine months, the Spanish will take over. That is the plan. He also asked about helicopters. I know that he has deep experience of having flown a number of aircraft including helicopters and particularly Chinooks. I make it absolutely clear that we will be moving to a position where six Chinook helicopters will be deployed.
As the House will know, our practice is to have a six-month roulement. My understanding is that that will be maintained.
I hope that I have answered the noble Lords' question. If I have missed any or if they wish further information, I should be very happy to provide it in a briefing or in written form. Because of the importance of this issue I should say to the House generally that if any noble Lord wishes to have a personal briefing on these matters, I should be more than happy to arrange it.
2.30 pm
Lord King of Bridgwater : My Lords, the tone of voice in which the Minister delivered the Statement will be appreciated by the House, as it is a very sombre Statement indeed. He said that the Taliban continues to be a problem. Is it not correct that the Taliban has reorganised and that there is significant evidence that it is becoming a more serious problem again, which our forces will have to face? There is no point in ducking that issue, which I am sure the Minister would not want to do.
I have two specific questions. The Minister referred optimistically to the future decisions of the Dutch and the Danes to accompany us, and also to Australia and New Zealand. If by any chance they do not, what effect will that have on his Statement? He said that he had provided enough forces, and that Ministers are satisfied that this will be an adequate force to meet the requirements; but does that not also depend on adequate forces coming from other countries as well? Is the Statement in that sense conditional?
The Minister referred to the cost of the deployment as being £1 billion over five years. Is the House therefore to understand that this is an open-ended
26 Jan 2006 : Column 1327
commitment, possibly lasting as long as five years? He referred to a time limit on the ARRC headquarters, terminating in the middle of next year, but he referred in no sense to any time limit on this deployment. Could he help the House in that regard?
Lord Drayson: My Lords, the way in which the noble Lord, with his deep experience of these matters, described the concern and the interest in this subject is absolutely right. We do not underestimate what we are undertaking. I assure the House that the level of thought on the preparation for this operation, and the interaction between government departments, especially those responsible for providing the reconstruction support in DfID and the Foreign Office, has been unprecedented. Also, we are learning from our experience in recent years in Iraq and previous to that in operations in the Balkans.
As the noble Lord rightly said, aspects relating to the activities of the Taliban give us concern. We have been concerned to see the increase in suicide attacks, for example. None the less, we feel that the tactics and the force posture that we will be taking—and we have a very good understanding of the security situation that we will face in Helmand—give us the confidence that we have the tools and the configuration to do the job properly. Of course, as the noble Lord knows well with regard to the professionalism and experience of our Armed Forces, the way in which we go about our deployment will take into account what we are learning about the tactics that we come up against. We have full capability to respond, and the reserve capability should it be required.
Let me be absolutely clear on the NATO deployment of our coalition partners in this matter. The Secretary of State in the past 24 hours has had a number of conversations with the heads of other NATO states relating to that matter. We are confident that NATO will provide the forces necessary in those regions—for example, in Oruzgan in the north—which will be required to enable us to do our job properly. There is no question of Britain plugging any gap. We shall go forward only on the basis that these forces are provided by NATO to meet the commander's requirements to carry out this operation clearly. We feel confident, based on the conversations that have taken place, that NATO will provide those forces. We must recognise that Canada has already said yes and is already there, and that the Dutch Cabinet has voted unanimously to support this. So we believe that our confidence is well place. But I restate the fact that we shall not be plugging any gap.
Lord Soley: My Lords, the Minister has described a very welcome and extensive international co-operation, but could he tell us a little more about our efforts to involve some of the Islamic nations? I understand the problem for Pakistan, particularly—but Malaysia, Egypt, Jordan and Morocco, all of which support our aims and objectives in Afghanistan and all of which have experience of peace-keeping operations, should make some contribution. That
26 Jan 2006 : Column 1328
would give an even wider degree of support for the international effort. Could the Minister tell us a little more about our efforts to get them involved?
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |