BB FANS

2007 is deadliest year for US in Iraq


The Pentagon today reported five US troops and a sailor killed in Iraq on Monday, making this year the deadliest since the 2003 invasion.

The five troops were killed in two incidents in Kirkuk province, and the sailor in Saluddin province, bringing the US death toll for this year to 854. The figure, with two months still to go, outstrips the previous worst, 849 in 2004, when the US took heavy casualties in an attack on Falluja.

The Pentagon attributes the high toll to an initial increase in combat operations, and higher visibility of US troops on the streets earlier this year as part of President George Bush's "surge" strategy, which saw an extra 30,000 troops sent to Iraq.

But after that intial rise in casualties, the numbers killed have been on a downward trend since May; last month's figure was the lowest since early last year.

During the initial stages of the surge, US troops left the protection of their large bases for redeployment in small, neighbourhood posts, presenting a target for insurgents.

Since then, they have divided Baghdad with a series of walls and introduced more rigorous ID checks that the US miltary claims has made it harder for insurgents to move about.

The US occupied Iraq with relatively low loss of life to its own forces, and there was an initial calm in the postwar period, but the overall death toll has since risen to 3,858.

The US is still assessing whether a drop in roadside explosives over the last three months is the result of a promise by Iran, in talks with the US in Baghdad, to try to stem the flow.

The US announced yesterday, possibly as part of a trade-off from the talks, that it is to release nine Iranians held in Iraq, including two of the five men arrested in January, a point of tension between the two countries. Iran claims the two were diplomats, while the US insists they are members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' Quds force.
guardian

Five MPs among up to 50 killed as insurgents switch focus from military to civilian targets


· Bomber struck in crowd gathered at sugar factory
· Taliban deny carrying out deadly assault


A suicide bomber killed up to 50 Afghans yesterday, including five MPs and several children, in one of the bloodiest incidents since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.

Reports of the total killed varied widely in the aftermath of the attack in Baghlan, 90 miles north of Kabul, when a bomber wearing explosives set them set off in the middle of a crowd gathered to welcome a parliamentary delegation to a sugar factory.

An interior ministry spokesman said that 28 people had died and 59 were injured. But the provincial security chief said a total of 50 bodies had been listed, and warned the figure could rise further.

"There are still bodies on the streets that we have not counted, and some have already been taken away by relatives," Abdurrahman Sayedkhail told Reuters.

If confirmed, his toll would make it the deadliest single attack in Afghanistan for many years, underscoring the perilous slide in security across the country.

The attack may mark an ominous shift in insurgent tactics. More than 200 people have died in suicide attacks this year. But until yesterday insurgents mostly targeted security forces, although many civilians have been killed in blasts.

Attackers have never before targeted such a large number of civilians or MPs from the fledgling parliament.

Witnesses saw the bomber holding a bomb in one hand and wearing an explosive belt around his chest. Then broken bodies of the living and dead littered the streets of the normally peaceful town.

"I saw bodies lying in the streets and some of the people were stealing the weapons of the dead soldiers. Children were screaming for help. It's like a nightmare," said Muhammad Rahim, who lost two cousins in the blast.

The head of hospitals in Baghlan, Yousaf Faiz, said many children were caught in the blast. "The children were standing on both sides of the street, and were shaking the hands of the officials, then suddenly the explosion happened," he said. A Taliban spokesman denied responsibility. "The Taliban doesn't target civilians. It might have been carried out by their rivals in the parliament," said Zabiullah Mujahid. "These parliamentarians were mujahideen in the past and killed lots of civilians. Maybe someone was trying to take revenge."

Most of the Taliban's recent targets have been in the south and east of the country rather than in the capital; however, instability in northern Afghanistan has been slowly rising. Taliban bombers have killed regional governors in the past, but never so many public figures at once.

Hamid Karzai, the president, said: "This is a heinous act of terrorism and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms." He blamed the incident on "the enemies of peace and security". A US military spokesman, Lt Col David Accetta, said that he had no information indicating whether al-Qaida had been behind the blast.

Among the dead was Mustafa Kazimi, a former Northern Alliance fighter who once served in Mr Karzai's government. He was a spokesman for the National Front, a new party largely made up of veterans of the mujahideen war against Soviet occupation in the 1980s. Four other MPs, who had been visiting the sugar factory as part of an economic commission looking into the privatisation of the plant, were also killed. Their deaths prompted an emergency sitting of parliament last night.

"This is a great shock," said Kabul MP Shukria Barakzai by phone. "You can see they are from different tribes, different backgrounds, different ethnic groups. There is Hazara, Tajik and Uzbek; Shia and Sunni. Their target is not the foreigners, it is the Afghan nation. They just want to kill people, that is all."

The British ambassador, Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles, called it a "cowardly and abhorrent act of terrorism". White House press secretary Dana Perino called the attack a despicable act of cowardice. "It reminds us who the enemy is: extremists with evil in their hearts who target innocent Muslim men, women and children," she said.

The Taliban-affiliated militant group Hizb-i-Islami has strong ties in the area where the blast occurred. Its fugitive leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar has previously pledged allegiance to al-Qaida.

In Kandahar, the Canadian defence minister Peter MacKay had a narrow escape when a rocket landed near him during a visit to a base, a spokesman said. Four soldiers were slightly wounded.

This year has been the deadliest so far in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban, with more than 5,500 deaths.
guardian

Upbeat US military claims it has forced al-Qaida out of Iraqi capital


· Number of murders cut by 80%, commander says
· European analysts cast doubt on assessment


The US military has painted its most upbeat assessment yet of security in the Iraqi capital, claiming it has forced the most extreme of the insurgent groups, Al-Qaida in Mesopotamia, out of every neighbourhood in Baghdad, and has cut the number of murders by 80%.

In a move described as over-optimistic by some observers, Major-General Joseph Fil, commander of the US forces in Baghdad, told reporters that the clear-out of extremists would make it easier for the US military to reduce its presence in the city from next year.

Speaking to reporters in the Iraqi capital, Gen Fil said "there's just no question" that violence had declined since a rise in June. He said: "Murder victims are down 80% from where they were at the peak." He added: "The Iraqi people have decided that they've had it up to here with violence."

The US has been providing arms to militia groups in Baghdad and elsewhere to take on al-Qaida. Gen Fil's comments are in line with recent US assessments that there have been improvements in security, albeit often marginal. But European defence analysts cautioned against rushing to premature judgments. One, speaking on condition of anonymity, described Gen Fil's assessment as "wildly optimistic" and warned that there was a danger of his words "coming back to bite him".

Two years ago the US declared the road between the centre of Baghdad and the international airport to be safe, only to be followed a few weeks later by a series of attacks.

Al-Qaida in Mesopotamia, a Sunni group buttressed with foreign jihadists, has been behind some of the biggest suicide bombings in Iraq. Its attacks on Shia civilians have alienated many Iraqis.

Gen Fil's assessment about improved security was immediately undermined by an announcement by the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, that he had given up trying to bring the country's largest Sunni Muslim political block back into his coalition government. The Accordance Front withdrew its six ministers from the cabinet in August. The US military and Bush administration officials have said repeatedly that peace cannot be achieved by military means alone and that a political settlement is crucial.

The Pentagon is also privately worried about the British withdrawal from the streets of Basra, allowing Shia militia groups to fight it out for control of the province. The US command's assessment is that armour is needed to impose order and Iraqi forces who have taken responsibility for security do not have it.

The number of US troops in Iraq and Kuwait stands at 154,000, up by 30,000 as a result of a troop surge ordered by President George Bush in January. The US military expects to begin withdrawing next spring. Gen Fil said: "I think there is going to come a day when certainly we will need [fewer] coalition troops in Baghdad."

The death toll for American troops this year is already the worst since the invasion, but the Pentagon attributes this to increased confrontation with insurgents in the spring as part of the surge strategy, and the trend during the past five months has been downwards.

Among various factors contributing to US optimism is that hundreds, possibly thousands, of Iraqis have abandoned safe havens in Syria to return home. Tahsin al-Sheikhly, an Iraqi government spokesman, said 46,030 displaced Iraqis had returned last month from outside the country to their homes in the capital.

However, in contrast to the US optimism, the Iraqi Red Crescent said the number of internally displaced people in Iraq had more than quadrupled during the past year, reaching 2.3 million by the end of September.
guardian

Georgian president announces early election to quell protests


· Saakashvili agrees to opposition demand
· Pledge follows western criticism of clampdown



Georgia's president, Mikhail Saakashvili, sought yesterday to end the country's bitter political crisis by announcing an early presidential election in January, after criticism from the west over the way in which opposition protests were put down.

In a major concession to the opposition, which has demanded his resignation, Mr Saakashvili said the vote would be held on January 5 rather than in late 2008 as planned. It would "receive the trust of the people", he said in a TV address. He also said that the state of emergency imposed on Wednesday after riot police violently dispersed opposition demonstrators outside the parliament building in the capital Tbilisi would be lifted within days.


"It is my proposal to hold presidential elections on January 5," Mr Saakashvili said in a live broadcast. "You demanded early elections but now you have them even earlier."

His announcement followed condemnation from the west yesterday of the use of tear gas and water cannons against opposition protesters, who began mass demonstrations last week. More than 550 demonstrators were taken to hospital after riot police armed with batons and rubber bullets broke up the crowds. They also closed down Georgia's opposition TV stations and beat up the country's human rights ombudsman.

Nato's secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, hinted yesterday that Georgia's attempts to join Nato were now on hold, and said he was "concerned" about the imposition of emergency rule and the shutting down of opposition media. This was "not in line with Euro-Atlantic values", he pointed out.

The UN's human rights commissioner, Louise Arbour, also chided Georgia for its "disproportionate use of force".

Yesterday troops cordoned off the deserted streets of central Tbilisi. The city remained quiet with opposition leaders urging protesters to stay at home.

Last night the opposition Republican party said it was delighted that Mr Saakashvili had met its demands. "We are very happy," a spokeswoman said, adding: "The president's foreign friends have told him what happened on Wednesday wasn't legitimate."

Mr Saakashvili also announced that a plebiscite would be held on January 5 on whether to bring forward parliamentary elections from the autumn to the spring - another key opposition demand.

The president appears to be calculating that he still enjoys majority support and will be able to shrug off any challenger to win a second term in office.

Last night, however, analysts warned that this was a high-risk strategy. "If you ask me quite honestly I think he will lose," Zaza Gachechiladze, editor in chief of the Georgian Messenger, said. "The opposition doesn't currently have a charismatic challenger. Saakashvili is relying on his former reputation. But if the opposition manages to consolidate around a neutral figure they could win."

Mr Saakashvili - who swept to power in 2003 during the Rose Revolution - was elected for a five-year term. But a pro-Saakashvili majority in parliament is likely to swiftly endorse his decision.

Yesterday Russia said it was expelling three senior Georgian diplomats from Moscow in retaliation for Mr Saakashvili's expulsion on Wednesday of three Russian diplomats. He has accused Russia's security services of orchestrating rallies and plotting to overthrow his government.

Yesterday the Kremlin denied any link with the disorder in Tbilisi. It said Mr Saakashvili was trying to distract attention from his domestic problems. "We are convinced the world community, major human rights bodies ... the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the OSCE should urge official Tbilisi to stop violence and fully respect human rights," said Russia's foreign ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin.
guardian

Bereaved author Grossman snubs grim Olmert at awards ceremony
By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem


David Grossman, the leading Israeli writer and peace campaigner whose son was killed just before the end of the 2006 Lebanon war, deliberately refrained from shaking the hand of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at a high-profile awards ceremony.

Mr Grossman stood silently in front of Mr Olmert when, as one of 11 recipients of the prestigious £500,000 Emet Prize, he came forward to collect his award.

A grim-faced Mr Olmert, forewarned that Mr Grossman would not shake his hand, remained seated.

The silent protest, which was front-page news in Israel yesterday, came a year after the Tel Aviv rally in memory of the assassinated premier Yitzhak Rabin at which Mr Grossman declared that the Lebanon war had heightened the sense that there was "no king" in Israel and that its leadership was "hollow".

Mr Grossman's son, Uri, 20, a tank commander, was among 30 Israeli soldiers killed during the last weekend of the war despite the agreement to a peace resolution by the UN Security Council.

Mr Grossman, who also used last year's rally to issue one of his many pleas for peace with the Palestinians, was more recently among a group of leading authors, along with Amos Oz and A B Yehoshua, who signed a petition urging the Israeli government to talk to Hamas.

Addressing Mr Olmert directly at last year's rally, Mr Grossman said: "I am not saying these words out of feelings of rage or revenge... You will not be able to dismiss my words tonight by saying a grieving man cannot be judged. Certainly I am grieving, but I am more pained than angry. This country and what you and your friends are doing to it pains me."

Mr Grossman is also understood to be dismayed that Mr Olmert did not take greater responsibility for what the first report of the Winograd commission of inquiry into the conflict called the "serious failings" of the conduct of the war.

The author said last night that "my purpose was not to humiliate the Prime Minister. It was to impose on him remembrance or awareness of what lies behind his manipulations ... and that some things are not manipulable." Mr Olmert presided over the awards ceremony at the Jerusalem Theatre. The Emet Prize is partly awarded by the Prime Minister's Office, along with the Alberto M Nissim charitable foundation, for services to arts, science and culture.

Mr Grossman was not the only major Israeli figure to re-ignite a controversy at Wednesday night's ceremony. The immediate past president of the Supreme Court, Aharon Barak, went out of his way in his acceptance speech to denounce a series of initiatives launched by Mr Olmert's appointee as Justice Minister, Daniel Friedmann. Mr Barak attacked the reform plans, which are intended to strengthen the Knesset and governing coalition at the expense of the Supreme Court, and declared: "There will be no judges in Jerusalem if political considerations prevail."
Independent

Court ruling deals blow to Zuma in ANC contest
By Basildon Peta in Johannesburg


Thabo Mbeki's hopes of retaining the South African presidency received a boost yesterday when a court ruling cleared the way for new corruption charges to be lodged against his chief nemesis, Jacob Zuma.

Both Mr Mbeki and Mr Zuma, the country's former deputy president, are front-runners in the race to win the leadership of the ruling African National Congress, which will elect a new president next month.

Mr Zuma is currently Mr Mbeki's deputy as ANC leader. If he wins the ballot, it would put him in a strong position to become South Africa's next president in 2009.

However, he suffered a setback yesterday when the Supreme Court upheld appeals made by the state against earlier rulings which prevented prosecutors from using documents seized from Mr Zuma during a raid by anti-corruption officials.

Mr Zuma, who was acquitted of rape earlier this year, was sacked by Mr Mbeki in 2005 over his role in a £4bn arms deal, although corruption charges were dropped the following year owing to lack of evidence.

Yesterday's rulings make it much easier for prosecutors to charge Mr Zuma. And while that does not automatically mean he will face trial, it makes it very difficult for him to contest and win the ANC presidency.

Mr Zuma's lawyer said he would appeal to the Constitutional Court against the rulings, and claimed his client was being victimised to thwart his presidential ambitions. Mr Zuma's supporters also accuse Mr Mbeki of trying to use the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to end Mr Zuma's presidential hopes. They want Mr Zuma to succeed Mr Mbeki as party leader and then as head of state when Mr Mbeki's second and final term expires in 2009. Mr Mbeki has signalled he wants to remain as head of the ANC, fuelling speculation that he also wants to change the constitution and remain in office for a third term.

Even if barred from standing again as president, holding sway in the ANC would allow him to establish a rival power base.

The appeals uheld yesterday relate to searches and seizures of documents by the NPA. Two years ago, Mr Zuma's former financial adviser Schabir Shaik was found guilty of soliciting a bribe from the French arms company Thint in exchange for Mr Zuma's support. Shaik is now serving a 15-year sentence.

Mr Zuma was then put on trial on corruption charges in relation to the 1999 arms deal, but the case collapsed last year when the prosecution said it was not ready to proceed. A court agreed with Mr Zuma that documents seized during the NPA raids on his premises could not be used as evidence because the search warrants used by officers were illegal.

Last night, the opposition Democratic Alliance urged the ANC to postpone its December congress until the issues surrounding Mr Zuma were settled. But the ANC deputy president's most vocal backers stood by him.

The South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions both issued statements of support, while Don Mkhwanazi, a spokesman for the trust helping to raise funds for Mr Zuma's campaign, added: "We are behind him, as president of the ANC and, preferably, of the country."

"We are being tested and we will stand our ground in backing Zuma," said Fikile Mbalula, head of the ANC Youth League.
Independent

Six US Troops Die In Afghan Ambush


Six US troops have been killed in an ambush in eastern Afghanistan.
The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said eight ISAF troops and 11 Afghan soldiers were also wounded in the fighting

Fighting began when insurgents ambushed a patrol from multiple positions with rocket-propelled grenades and small arms fire.

The military said it was one one of the deadliest attacks on American forces this year.

The troops were returning from a meeting with village elders in Nuristan province when militants attacked them with rocket propelled grenades and gunfire.

"They were attacked from several enemy positions at the same time," said spokesman Lt Col David Accetta. "It was a complex ambush."

Eight more Americans and 11 Afghans were wounded. The total of 14 US casualties was the highest number of wounded and killed from a battle in Afghanistan this year, he added.

Mohammad Daoud Nadim, Nuristan's deputy police chief, said military aircraft fired on enemy
positions but had no information on any casualties among the militants.
Sky

Lest we forget
In Afghan fields, the poppies blow... and another British soldier dies in a war without end
By Raymond Whitaker in Kabul

Staff at the British embassy in Kabul are wearing poppies in honour of the country's dead in Afghanistan, as well as the other conflicts in which British soldiers have fought over the past century. But Afghans do not understand the meaning of the symbol.

"Why do you have that paper flower pinned to your clothes?" the proprietor of a bookshop in Kabul asked a British customer yesterday. " I have seen the newscasters on BBC and Sky wearing them too. What is it for?" The explanation seemed to leave the bookseller even more confused – in Afghanistan, poppies have a very different significance.

The income from opium poppies is helping to fuel a conflict in which Taliban insurgents, drug traffickers and simple resistance to the presence of foreigners in southern Afghanistan are often indistinguishable. It is a struggle which has so far claimed the lives of 83 British soldiers, 57 of them in combat. The latest death occurred yesterday: a soldier serving with 36 Engineer Regiment was killed when his vehicle rolled off a bridge near Sangin in Helmand province, the scene of some of the most bitter fighting since British forces were sent to there early last year.

Although British troops in Helmand and the Canadians in Kandahar have regained some of the territory lost to the Taliban, they simply do not have the troops in numbers to hold the ground. As a result, repeated operations have to be undertaken to recapture strategic positions.

The battle being waged against the Taliban in southern and eastern Afghanistan can seem remote even in Kabul, let alone Britain, though insecurity has crept closer to the Afghan capital in recent months. A new front was opened this week, when more than 70 people were killed and more than 100 injured in the northern town of Baghlan in the worst suicide bombing in the country's history.

Almost 60 schoolchildren who had lined up to greet MPs visiting a sugar factory were among the dead. Such is the fear of violence spreading that yesterday the Education Minister ordered that it was no longer safe for children to be included in public ceremonies of this kind.

The northern Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras who dominate the life of the capital certainly do not want the Taliban back. But they fail to understand why the battles being fought against the Pashtuns, both Afghan and Pakistani, who constitute the majority of Taliban fighters, along with a small but significant number of extremists from other Muslim countries, have not made their own lives safer. They are uneasy too at the growing toll of Afghan civilians, often in air strikes called in by Nato forces spread too thinly on the ground.

Despite urgent appeals most of the other Nato members have failed to come up with troops for Afghanistan and even some who have deployed there have put caveats on these forces, effectively shielding them from full-scale combat.

And if Afghans are unclear about the purpose of the war, now into its seventh year, the British public can often seem no less bemused. Marchers who recently carried posters down Whitehall demanding, "Stop the war in Iraq and Afghanistan", are by no means the only ones seeing the two conflicts as one and the same. In vain can London and Washington argue that they are completely different, when they failed to conclude one, before plunging into the other. The worsening violence in Afghanistan since the beginning of last year, which has claimed thousands of Afghan lives as well as all but a handful of the British casualties, has been the result.

British commanders in the country openly admit the Taliban's propaganda has been far more effective than their own. One of its most telling slogans, addressed to Nato, has been: "You have the watches but we have the time. " In other words, all the money and technology Nato has brought to bear will be of no avail, because its commitment will not last.

Farmers in Afghanistan may soon be subsidised in an effort to stop them producing heroin, in a radical plan proposed by Gordon Brown. Ministers are looking at introducing a system of payments, similar to the Common Agricultural Policy, to encourage farmers away from opium production.

Britain has recognised that it must emphasise, both to Afghans and its own people, that it is in for the long haul. The beefing up of the diplomatic mission in Kabul – which will in due course move back to the grand 19th-century premises built in Lord Curzon's day – is one clear token of that. And this week the Defence Secretary, Des Browne, made it clear that the British military commitment would last at least until 2010. Mr Browne announced that a temporary brigade headquarters was being set up to command British forces in Afghanistan after October 2009, when the current British deployment ends, to April 2010.

"The precise size and duration of the UK military in Afghanistan will depend on a number of factors, including the ability of the Afghan security forces to take greater responsibility for the security of their own country," he said on Thursday. "However, to ensure that any forces we might deploy are properly prepared and commanded, it is necessary for the brigade headquarters to be established now."

The Nato secretary-general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, appealed for more troop contributions, disclosing that the alliance has only half the trainers it needs for Afghan security forces, adding: "This is obviously a problem. We have to find an answer and member nations need to do more".

By contrast, the Taliban fighters are increasingly well trained and using sophisticated techniques, according to the commander of the 1,200-strong Polish contingent in Afghanistan. Brigadier General Marek Tomaszycki added: " We have more and more examples of tactics which are used in Iraq and are being imported to Afghanistan. We have to consider the enemy as very dangerous."

But even so, the baffled bookseller of Kabul is not alone in needing to be reminded why British troops are in his country. They went there to oust a movement which had reduced Afghanistan to anarchy and penury, and gave safe haven to al-Qa'ida, which wants to Talibanise the whole world.

But at least Britain now has more troops stationed in Afghanistan – 7,700 – than it does in Iraq. They face a task made more difficult because of the West's, and their own Government's, fitful attention to it. But the 83 British soldiers who have given their lives there will not have not done so in vain if Britain stays the course – something it owes to its own people, as well as to those of Afghanistan.

Troubled country still in turmoil

* October 2001: British-backed, US-led air strikes against Taliban strongholds. Taliban leader Mullah Omar flees to Pakistan border as his fightersare forced to withdraw

* December 2001: The Bonn deal on the future of Afghanistan creates an interim government, headed by the US-backed Hamid Karzai

* January 2002: First contingent of foreign peacekeepers arrives with a year-long mandate

* May 2002: UN Security Council extends mandate of International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) until December 2002

* June 2002: The first post-Taliban "loya jirga", or grand assembly, selects Hamid Karzai as interim president

* July 2002: Attacks increase throughout country and a vice-president, Haji Abdul Qadir, is shot dead in Kabul

* September 2002: Assassination attempt on Hamid Karzai in Kandahar

* August 2003: Nato takes control of security in Kabul, its first operational commitment outside Europe

* January 2004: The Assembly backs a new national constitution paving way for elections

* September 2004: Another attempt on life of Karzai who is confirmed as president with 55 per cent of vote in first elections for a generation

* May 2005: Details emerge of alleged prisoner abuse by US forces at detention centres including Bagram air base.

* February 2006: International aid donors pledge more than $10bn (£5.7bn) in reconstruction aid over five years

* Spring/summer 2006: Taliban regroup in the south and mount a series of fierce attacks there and elsewhere

* July-October 2006: Nato peacekeeping forces, totalling 18,500 and rising, take control of security, first in the south of Afghanistan and then throughout the country

* May 2007: Taliban's most senior military commander, Mullah Dadullah, is killed during fighting with US, Afghan forces

* Spring 2007: Renewed efforts made by British-led coalition troops to force Taliban out of south

* October 2007: Violent incidents, especially suicide bombings, are up 30 per cent on last year, with an average of 550 a month

* November 2007: Sixty-eight people die in Afghanistan's worst suicide bombing in Mazar province, an area previously spared such violence. Six members of parliament and dozens of children are among the dead. A senior Nato commander admits Taliban insurgents were now "better prepared" than they were a year ago
[ur=http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article3146457.ece]Independent[/url]

Troops kill Afghan car bomber
Exclusive by Chris Hughes, Security Correspondent
British soldiers killed a Taliban suicide car bomber hellbent on destroying their convoy in a crowded street, it was revealed yesterday.

The Royal Artillery patrol was on its way back to base in wartorn southern Afghanistan when troopers spotted a white Toyota Corolla hurtling up behind them.

Alerted to the danger gunner Cpl Lee Wilbor, 27, fired a single shot through the driver's window.

The driver collapsed at the wheel. Incredibly, as the vehicle carried on, he still managed to detonate his explosives.


A motorcyclist was killed. But by that time the Toyota was too far away to inflict any serious damage on troops or other passers-by.

If the fanatic's crazed mission had been successful dozens of locals could have been killed.

Proud commanding officer Major Tony Phillips said: "This proves our training works.

"We went in and performed the role for which we are trained and were able to react to the situation.

"The performance of the troops throughout this incident was extremely impressive."

The attack took place a few days ago as the two-vehicle convoy moved slowly through congested Gereshk town, in Helmand.

Captain James Ashworth, 27, of Preston, Lancs, was the first to spot the white danger car. He told the Mirror: "I thought to myself 'What's this guy up to?' Local traffic usually pulls over.

"I then shouted a warning to the soldier providing top cover. He was in an ideal position to fire a warning shot. Then the rear vehicle opened fire on the target."

Cpl Wilbor took up the story. He said: "I noticed the white vehicle pull out. Then there was a shout from either the boss or someone else and our vehicle swerved to avoid the bomber.

"As the car passed me I fired a single shot into the driver's window. "He hit our vehicle. Then he collapsed but the car continued on."

Cpl Darren Clark, 21, who was driving the front vehicle, recalled: "As soon as I saw the car heading towards us from the rear, I knew it must be a suicide bomber.

"I veered off but he still managed to clip the rear of our vehicle. Cpl Wilbor got a round off at him. Then the rear vehicle opened fire.

"The white car detonated and I felt shrapnel flying over our heads. The explosion blew our brakes off so it took me a while to stop."

Despite the dangers, troopers briefly stopped at the scene to treat bystanders for minor blast injuries.

The men were from 473 Special Observation Post Battery, a reconnaissance force for the newly formed 52 Brigade.

British troops make lengthy patrols across Helmand to spy on Taliban movements, often living for weeks away from their main bases.

Suicide car bombers have killed hundreds since the post-9/11 ousting of the Taliban by coalition troops in late 2001.
Mirror

UK death toll in Iraq and Afghanistan now equals Falklands total Mail

Afghan hero up for VC
Exclusive by Bob Roberts Political Editor

A soldier who died leading an attack against the Taliban in Afghanistan is expected to be awarded the Victoria Cross.

Captain David Hicks, 26, was badly wounded when the 1st battalion, Royal Anglian Regiment, was ambushed in Helmand Province on August 11.

Despite being in agony from his injuries, he refused medical help so he could gather 50 men and lead an attack against a Taliban rocket position.

He also turned down an airlift to safety so he could stay with his men until the attack was successful.


Captain Hicks, from Wokingham, Berks, is one of two British soldiers from the same battalion to be nominated for the Victoria Cross. The second is believed to be L/Cpl Oliver "Teddy" Ruecker, 20, who fought off Taliban riflemen to rescue a wounded comrade from a burning armoured car. L/Cpl Ruecker would be only the second living recipient of the VC in 38 years after Private Johnson Beharry of the Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment, who was awarded the medal in 2005.

Yesterday, the Ministry of Defence refused to confirm the awards but senior sources in Whitehall said they would be in the New Year gallantry list. An MoD spokesman would only say: "Many soldiers have acted in a courageous ways on operations and thus may be considered for gallantry awards."

If Capt Hicks is honoured, he will be the first officer to win the VC since Falklands hero Lt Col Herbert "H" Jones in 1982.

The fact that there are two nominations for the VC is a sign of the ferocity of action involving British soldiers. The Anglians' campaign, which has cost the lives of nine of their soldiers with about 80 wounded, has involved some of the heaviest fighting since World War Two.

The awards would be the first time two soldiers from the same battalion have received the VC since the Korean War.

The nominations were written by the soldiers' commanding officers.

Colleagues who witnessed their bravery provided written accounts describing what they saw.

The final decision will be made later this year by a committee of retired and serving generals.

Final decisions are based entirely on the citations of other soldiers.

The recipients or their families are always the last to know if a medal is to be awarded.
Mirror

Heroes' march of pride


Nearly 1,000 troops will march through their home towns this week after coming home from Afghanistan.

More than 250 men of The Light Dragoons will parade through Dereham, Norfolk, tomorrow at 10.40am after a year spent battling the Taliban in lawless Helmand Province.

A Light Dragoons spokesman said: "The regiment is lucky to have returned with all its soldiers - though other units who served alongside were less fortunate."

On Tuesday at 10.45am the 600-strong 1st Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment, also back from Helmand, will parade through Guildford, Surrey.

On Thursday they march through Norwich, where they have been given the freedom of the city.

And on Friday morning the battalion will be on parade again in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk.


Mirror

SAS troopers killed in Iraq crash


Two SAS men were killed when a helicopter crashed on a secret mission in Iraq.

The elite troops, members of the 22 SAS Regiment, were in a "special duties" RAF Puma near Baghdad.

Two more SAS members were seriously injured. Sources said it was too early to rule out the helicopter being brought down by enemy fire.

It is thought the troops may have been involved in the search for five Britons taken hostage in May.


The SAS has also been liaising with MI6, which has a station in Baghdad, to target key al-Qaeda strongholds.

Sas soldiers are often used as armed escorts on missions with MI6 officers.

It is believed the RAF crew on board the helicopter were not hurt in Tuesday's crash. The Puma was designed for covert operations and had jamming devices to detect potential terrorist bomb attacks.

A squadron of SAS troopers has been working flat out on operations nighttime in recent weeks, sometimes going on five missions a night.

The SAS has suffered in Iraq its worst casualty figures since the regiment was founded during the Second World War.

A source said: "They are suffering bad casualties and many are receiving emergency treatment. It is enough to cause genuine concern. For each man killed, several more are badly injured."

The Ministry of Defence said: "It is with great sadness that the MoD must confirm the loss of an RAF Puma helicopter near Baghdad last night.

"Two service personnel were killed. Their next of kin have been informed.

"Two other personnel were seriously injured and are recovering in hospital.

"An RAF Board of Inquiry has already been convened and is en route to Iraq to conduct its investigations."

The five British hostages - four security guards and a computer expert - were seized from a Baghdad ministry by suspected insurgents.



RAF PUMA

Entered service in 1971, operated by 33 Sqdn, RAF Benson and 230 Sqdn, RAF Aldergrove

Can transport 16 fully equipped troops or 2-ton load or six stretchers for casualty evacuation

Flown by crew of 3
Mirror

Rifleman's family back medals bid



The grieving family of a young British soldier killed in Iraq gave full support to the Mirror's medal campaign yesterday.

Rifleman Daniel Coffey, 21, was shot when his armoured personnel carrier was attacked in February.

He had volunteered for his second tour of duty in Iraq.

Daniel's grandad David Godfrey, 62, said yesterday: "I back the Mirror absolutely.


"We must look after our bravehearts who have made the ultimate sacrifice and those men and women left badly scarred, physically and mentally."

The Mirror's campaign, supported by senior politicians and military chiefs, is for a medal to honour those killed or wounded serving their country, like America's Purple Heart.

Mr Godfrey added: "No medal can bring back our loved ones but we must also look after the people left behind."

The Army said of Daniel: "He volunteered to return to Iraq only two months after having completed a seven-month tour.

"That is a humbling testament to his selfless commitment to serving his country."
Mirror

Afghanistan 'falling into hands of Taliban'


· Frontline getting closer to Kabul, says thinktank
· Aid not going to those who need it most, warns Oxfam





The Taliban has a permanent presence in 54% of Afghanistan and the country is in serious danger of falling into Taliban hands, according to a report by an independent thinktank with long experience in the area.

Despite tens of thousands of Nato-led troops and billions of dollars in aid poured into the country, the insurgents, driven out by the American invasion in 2001, now control "vast swaths of unchallenged territory, including rural areas, some district centres, and important road arteries", the Senlis Council says in a report released yesterday.

On the basis of what it calls exclusive research, it warns that the insurgency is also exercising a "significant amount of psychological control, gaining more and more political legitimacy in the minds of the Afghan people who have a long history of shifting alliances and regime change".

It says the territory controlled by the Taliban has increased and the frontline is getting closer to Kabul - a warning echoed by the UN which says more and more of the country is becoming a "no go" area for western aid and development workers.

The council goes as far as to state: "It is a sad indictment of the current state of Afghanistan that the question now appears to be not if the Taliban will return to Kabul, but when ... and in what form. The oft-stated aim of reaching the city in 2008 appears more viable than ever and it is incumbent upon the international community to implement a new strategic paradigm before time runs out."

Its 110-page report coincides with an equally severe warning from Oxfam. In a report for the House of Commons International Development Committee the humanitarian and aid agency warns that the security situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating significantly with the country's problems exacerbated by corruption in central and local government.

Senior British and US military commanders privately agree despite their public emphasis on short-term successes against Taliban fighters.

The insurgency is divided into a largely poverty-driven "grassroots" component and a concentrated group of "hard-core militant Islamists", says the Senlis Council, which has an office in Kabul and field researchers based in Helmand and Kandahar provinces in southern Afghanistan.

It says that the Nato-led International Security Force of some 40,000 troops should be at least doubled and include forces from Muslim countries as well as Nato states which have refused to send troops to the country.

There is no sign of any move within Nato to send reinforcements to Afghanistan.

While western governments, like the Senlis Council and Oxfam, are increasingly concerned about the lack of effectiveness of President Hamid Karzai's government, there is no agreement about how to solve the problems.

Oxfam warns that urgent action is needed to avert humanitarian disaster in Afghanistan where millions face "severe hardship comparable with sub-Saharan Africa". Though the country has received more than $15bn (£7.5bn) in aid since 2001, the money is not getting to projects which could lead to sustained improvements in people's lives, says Oxfam.

It adds that at least 1,200 civilians have been killed so far this year, half in operations by international or Afghan forces. It notes there are four times as many air strikes by international forces in Afghanistan than in Iraq.

The Senlis Council wants Nato forces, and their Provincial Reconstruction Teams, to take on a bigger role distributing aid and Oxfam says the military should stick to providing security.

guardian