Green on blue is Nato-speak for Afghan soldiers or policemen turning their weapons on Nato troops and the trend undercutting the international coalition's strategy in the violence-wracked nation.
Nato trains and fights alongside the Afghan
security forces against the Taliban.
The training mission's motto is "shoulder to shoulder" and many
staff wear Afghan flag badges as a symbol of their commitment.
For those Afghan troops to then turn around and shoot dead men who have
travelled thousands of miles to enforce the peace is a terrible blow to
trust and morale.
Concern has been heightened by the attacks' growing frequency. In the four and
a half years from May 2007 to the end of 2011, there were 45 attacks
resulting in around 70 Nato deaths. There have now been an estimated 17
attacks and 24 dead this year alone.
One attack in Kapisa in January was the final straw for the sceptical French
electorate and is seen as largely responsible for the French decision to
pull troops out early.
The effect is so worrying that both Nato and Afghan commanders have made
studying and preventing the attacks a priority.
The Afghan army and police have tightened vetting procedures, have put intelligence agents inside units and begun tapping the phones of suspected insurgent infiltrators or sympathisers.
But how many of these killings are due to the insurgency?
Few attackers are taken alive - most escape or are gunned down - so the answer is unclear, but both Nato and Afghan commanders believe few have anything to do with the Taliban.
Nearly three quarters are in fact motivated by personal squabbles and grievances which blow up into violence, they believe.
Gen Sher Mohammad Karimi, head of the Afghan army, told The Daily Telegraph that 70 per cent were "individual cases, personal decisions, with their own motivation: perhaps religious or personal." "Maybe 20 to 30 per cent are sympathisers or recruited by the enemy." Perceived disrespect for Afghan religion and culture was the most common source of friction, he said.
There were at least three separate attacks in the week after Korans were inadvertently burned in Bagram airbase earlier this year.
He said Afghan soldiers also objected to being sworn at.
"In your language, a four letter word is not problem, but here people get very offended by bad words." A study into the problem commissioned by the US Army, and later disavowed, found the problem was a "rapidly growing systemic threat" because cultural tensions were so high between the allies.
Afghan troops found their Western allies to be rude, arrogant and aggressive, the study found. In return Western troops described their allies as lazy, lying drug users.
Nato generals play down the role of clashing cultures and point to the higher number of incidents where Afghan troops kill each other as evidence that Nato troops are not singled out for attack.
"Quite often people resolve their problems by resorting to the use of a weapon, it's a normal thing here," said one senior British officer.
The Afghan army and police have tightened vetting procedures, have put intelligence agents inside units and begun tapping the phones of suspected insurgent infiltrators or sympathisers.
But how many of these killings are due to the insurgency?
Few attackers are taken alive - most escape or are gunned down - so the answer is unclear, but both Nato and Afghan commanders believe few have anything to do with the Taliban.
Nearly three quarters are in fact motivated by personal squabbles and grievances which blow up into violence, they believe.
Gen Sher Mohammad Karimi, head of the Afghan army, told The Daily Telegraph that 70 per cent were "individual cases, personal decisions, with their own motivation: perhaps religious or personal." "Maybe 20 to 30 per cent are sympathisers or recruited by the enemy." Perceived disrespect for Afghan religion and culture was the most common source of friction, he said.
There were at least three separate attacks in the week after Korans were inadvertently burned in Bagram airbase earlier this year.
He said Afghan soldiers also objected to being sworn at.
"In your language, a four letter word is not problem, but here people get very offended by bad words." A study into the problem commissioned by the US Army, and later disavowed, found the problem was a "rapidly growing systemic threat" because cultural tensions were so high between the allies.
Afghan troops found their Western allies to be rude, arrogant and aggressive, the study found. In return Western troops described their allies as lazy, lying drug users.
Nato generals play down the role of clashing cultures and point to the higher number of incidents where Afghan troops kill each other as evidence that Nato troops are not singled out for attack.
"Quite often people resolve their problems by resorting to the use of a weapon, it's a normal thing here," said one senior British officer.
No comments:
Post a Comment