Proceeding contribution from Lord Beamish (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 8 July 2009. It occurred during Adjournment debate on British Troops (Helmand Province).
British Troops (Helmand Province)
I shall come to that point in a moment. I want to deal first with drugs. The impression is being given that no progress has been made on drugs, but Governor Mangal has run an effective narcotics programme in Helmand, working with the coalition force in providing grain for local farmers. Overall, more than half of Afghanistan’s provinces are now are poppy-free. We started with six in 2006; there are now 18. The question is whether it will be a long, slow process. It may be, because we must ensure that we bring in alternative lifestyles behind the poppy eradication. I shall now pander to the hon. Member for Aldershot and his question on helicopters. I have to say that I agree with him about protected vehicles. Even if all our vehicles were highly protected, we still would not get rid of the potential for injury. We are dealing with a dangerous situation and clever opponents are always changing their tactics. That is why our counter-ID teams and others are working hard to look at the different techniques that are used. Our approach is clear. The Government not only put in the money, but we make a wide range of vehicles available. However, it is for commanders on the ground to decide when they are used, not politicians. The hon. Gentleman is right that to say using a Mastiff vehicle in parts of Helmand province is not on. First, it would not move; it would sink into the sand in certain areas. Secondly, he is right to say that winning hearts and minds cannot be done from inside a vehicle. Our people will be exposed, and it is important to ensure that we get the training tactics and techniques right. The way to win hearts and minds and influence the local people is not to fly everywhere: there is a case for getting out on the ground. We have increased the operating hours of helicopters by 84 per cent. We have also brought in some capacity, with our coalition partners, for commercial helicopters to do some of the heavy lifting. Again, we should get away from the notion that Britain is out there on its own, using its own helicopters for its own use. It is a coalition approach, and helicopters are being shared—as we learned this week, when a British soldier was tragically killed in a Canadian helicopter. It is all about pooling our resources and using them in the most appropriate way. As for the next move, the hon. Member for Aldershot will know that when the Merlins come out of Iraq, they will be moved to Afghanistan. When I was there, I had to share helicopters. People were asking whether we have the helicopters that we need. Yes, we have. The next question is whether they could do with more. Someone said, "We will always ask for more." However, for the operations going on at the time we have the helicopters that are needed. My hon. Friend the Member for Newport, West asked what is the alternative. I see one weakness in that approach. It is the question, "What would you do differently? What other conclusion could be drawn?" It is clear that if we leave Afghanistan, it will become a safe haven, as the hon. Member for North Devon suggested. I pay tribute to the Pakistan army, which is taking the fight to the Taliban in the north of that country and is having great success in bearing down on safe havens for terrorists. The Pakistan army should be congratulated on that and we recognise the sacrifice that they are making. I do not agree that we are at a stalemate position in Helmand. We are at a turning point, given the surge of Americans and our strategy. It is all about keeping the momentum going. Is it going to be tough? Yes it is; no one would say that it is not a difficult situation. I was asked what the end game is. The end game—we are moving in that direction—is to ensure that the Afghan national army, and the police and the Government, can take over security. I pay tribute to them; they are taking an increasing role, including in the successful operation at Musa Kala. The Kajaki dam convoy was supported by the Afghan national army, and it is taking a clear role in providing security for the Afghan presidential elections later this year. We need to train the Afghan national army to ensure that it can continue in that role. The hon. Member for Aldershot asked about our exit strategy. It has been clear from the start that it about ensuring that we put in security, bring in development, and train the Afghan national army and the Afghan police to take over security. We also need to put government structures in place that will lead to the sustainable development that is needed. I do not accept the analogy with the Russians drawn by my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, West. They took a very different approach to occupation. We should not think that the lessons of history can be necessarily be used in modern-day Afghanistan or in other situations.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 495 c303-5WH
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Armed forces Deployment Casualties Human rights Drugs Foreign policy Peacekeeping operations Politics and government Military alliances Afghanistan NATO Taliban
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 22:46:24 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_575773
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_575773
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_575773