HMG DEFENDS AFGHANISTAN MISSION AS BRITAIN'S DEATH

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 LONDON 001628 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL MARR MOPS MASS UK AF SUBJECT: HMG DEFENDS AFGHANISTAN MISSION AS BRITAIN'S DEATH TOLL THERE SURPASSES IRAQ TOTAL ¶1. (SBU) Summary. In the past week, Prime Minister Brown, Foreign Secretary David Miliband, and Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth have unequivocally and publicly reaffirmed Britain's commitment to its mission in Afghanistan. "This is a very hard summer, it's not over, but it's vital that the international community sees through its commitment.," Brown declared July 10, stressing that Britain's "clear" purpose is to "prevent terrorism from coming to the streets of Britain." This message has coincided with extensive media coverage of Britain's role in Afghanistan and the fact that the number of British fatalities in Afghanistan, which now stands at 184, has exceeded Britain's military death toll in Iraq of 179, with 15 British fatalities in Afghanistan over a recent ten day period. Conservative critics have fiercely criticized the government's handling of the Afghanistan mission. Liberal Democrat party leader Nick Clegg recently went against cross party consensus and urged the government to rethink its mission in Afghanistan, asserting that young lives were being "thrown away." However, according to poll results released July 13, 46 percent of those polled support Britain's mission in Afghanistan -- an increase of 15 percent since a similar poll in 2006, at a time when the public apparently closely associated Afghanistan with the unpopular war in Iraq. Criticism of HMG's handling of Afghanistan from staunch supporters of Britain's mission there appears to be forcing the Brown government to define in greater detail its Afghanistan strategy. End Summary. ¶2. (U) British media coverage over the last several days has focused heavily on British troops, mounting death toll in Afghanistan; 15 British troops died in Afghanistan from July 1 to July 10 and British fatalities now stand at 184 troops, surpassing the 179 British troops killed in Iraq. Against this somber backdrop, PM Brown has unequivocally defended Britain's role in Afghanistan, asserting July 11 that &it's vital that the international community sees through its commitment8 and affirming that Britain's "resolution to complete the work that we have started in Afghanistan and Pakistan is undiminished...I continue to believe our strategy is the right one.8 Brown stressed that &it has been a very difficult summer and it's not over8 but that Britain's &clear8 purpose is to &prevent terrorism from coming to the streets of Britain.8 ¶3. (U) Foreign Secretary Miliband responded forcefully in a July 13 television interview to critics of Britain's Afghanistan policy, stating that Britain's mission in Afghanistan has a &very clear strategy8 and is designed to "make us safer here." Miliband's rebuffed Conservative Party leader David Cameron's comment that it was a "scandal" that the British army did not have enough helicopters to transport troops around Afghanistan, asserting &we're not going to be able to do our mission in Afghanistan through tanks and helicopters alone. The great danger that our troops face is on the ground.8 Miliband also defended Britain's Afghanistan role in a July 11 interview, in which he stressed that &Afghanistan cannot become an incubator for international terrorism and a launching pad for attacks on us. That applies in Afghanistan and it applies in Pakistan and that mission is very, very clear.8 Defense Secretary Defines Goals and Strategy -------------- ¶4. (U) In a July 8 speech at Chatham House, Royal Institute of International Affairs, Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth defended British strategy in Afghanistan, in what was his first major policy speech since becoming Defense Secretary June 5. (Note: The full text of his speech is available at the Ministry of Defense website: http://www.mod.uk End Note.) He outlined Britain's current priorities in Afghanistan and insisted upon the "compelling" reasons for engagement in Afghanistan, disavowing a "purely military solution." He called for "courage" and "patience" and stressed that "there is no defined end date -- only an end state." Ainsworth stated that the next few months are critical for British forces, noting that the Afghan presidential elections in August must be "credible and inclusive." ¶5. (U) Ainsworth said the primary purpose of Britain's operations in Afghanistan is to protect Britain from terrorism, which "goes to the heart of this country's national security and to the core of our national interests." He affirmed that "the entire region in which Afghanistan sits is of vital strategic importance to the United Kingdom." He underlined the importance of supporting the Afghan National Government until it can tackle on its own the threat posed by the Taliban, "because for Britain to be secure, Afghanistan needs to be secure." Ainsworth described success as "an environment in which the Afghan government is LONDON 00001628 002 OF 003 capable of providing for its people the security required to govern their country themselves, suppress violent extremism and ensure the terrorists do not return." Ainsworth underscored the importance of "encouraging reintegration and reconciliation so that insurgents renounce violence in favor of legitimate Afghan-led political processes." He outlined the aims of British strategy as focusing upon preventing the Taliban from returning to control, preparing for elections, helping to build civil society, and working to prepare the Afghans to assume responsibility for their own security. Liberal Leader Questions Mission -------------- ¶6. (U) Liberal Democrat party leader Nick Clegg went against cross party consensus and urged the government to rethink its mission in Afghanistan, writing in the "Daily Telegraph" July 9 that young lives were being "thrown away." Clegg questioned whether the government has the "will, strategy, or tactics to do the job properly." He added that political disorder is causing the unnecessary deaths of young men and women. Clegg also said that poor equipment was responsible for the deaths of British soldiers, saying the lack of sufficient equipment was "appalling." According to Clegg, the surge of American troops will further marginalize the British effort in the same way that it did in Iraq, when British troops were pushed to the background. Clegg called the dependence on American military support "demoralizing." Though Clegg did not assert that British troops should be withdrawn at the present time, he insisted the government must put "political will behind a new strategy" and renew commitments to Afghanistan. Clegg's criticism of the government's Afghanistan strategy echoes comments by Conservative critics such as Shadow Defense Secretary Liam Fox, who asserted July 10 that HMG lacked "clear strategy" and benchmarks for success Steady Public Support -------------- ¶7. (U) An ICM poll published in the July 13 "Guardian" daily newspaper shows British support for the war is greater than three years ago and opposition is slightly lower. According to the poll, 47 percent oppose the war and 46 percent support it. However, support for the war has risen by 15 percentage points since the last ICM poll on this topic, in 2006, when only 31 percent supported the war. The 2009 poll shows that 42 percent of respondents want British troops to immediately withdraw from Afghanistan and a further 14 percent want them home by the end of the year, almost identical to the 2006 polling results. Significant percentages of those polled understand the reasons for Britain's commitment in Afghanistan, with 80 percent stating that the war is part of the international fight against Al-Qaida, 78 percent stating that British troops are in Afghanistan to help its government against the Taliban, and 58 percent stating that Britain is there to fight the narcotics trade ) all figures that are higher than in the 2006 ICM poll. A March 2009 INR poll found 52 percent of Britons "support military participation in the ISAF NATO mission." Polling consistently shows majority support for bringing troops home as soon as possible and majority opposition to providing any additional troops. Comment -------------- ¶8. (SBU) HMG leadership has not pulled any punches in its message to the British public: Britain and its allies have a long hard slog in Afghanistan, but the mission is necessary to protect the British homeland from terrorist attacks. As recent polling shows, most Britons seem to understand that message -- even if many are not convinced that British troops should remain in Afghanistan for the long haul. HMG's biggest challenge may be to convince its critics that it is prosecuting the war competently and minimizing the risks to British troops. Prominent critics of Britain's Afghanistan strategy include a former CHOD who has accused the Treasury of being unsympathetic to the war and has called for more troops -- a call for reinforcements echoed by the outgoing Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt. Critiques such as these -- from staunch supporters of Britain's mission in Afghanistan -- appear to be forcing the Brown government to define and defend its Afghanistan strategy in more detail, as criticism mounts. End Comment. Visit London's Classified Website: http://www.intelink.sgov.gov/wiki/Portal:Unit ed_Kingdom LONDON 00001628 003 OF 003 LeBaron