By: Tom Perry, CBC News
A new report by the Canadian Forces shows that soldiers who have been deployed overseas are at a higher risk of taking their own lives.
The Canadian Forces annual report on suicide reveals that 18 military members committed suicide in 2015. While the report says the overall suicide rate within the military is not statistically higher than for the rest of the population, the risk for those serving in the army is much greater than it is for those serving in the navy or air force.
"The suicide rate amongst army personnel is about two to three times higher than it is compared to members who serve in other elements of the Canadian Forces and about 1½-times higher than males in the civilian population," said Col. Andrew Downes, director of mental health for the Canadian Forces.
Downes said the military's research also shows that the risk of suicide is higher for personnel who have been deployed overseas into places like Afghanistan.
"It's really not the deployment itself that's the risk for suicide. It's what happens on deployment," Downes said. "People, when they deploy, are exposed to more dangerous environments where they are at risk of physical injury and mental injury as well."
Despite the increased risk that goes along with overseas deployments, Downes said suicide is a complex matter. The military's report shows almost half of those who committed suicide in 2015 suffered from a documented depressive disorder. Nearly all were under stress in their personal lives, facing failed romantic relationships, legal problems or debt.
"All these people are human and they all have stressors," Downes said.
Time to do more
The government and the military have pledged to take action on suicide in the ranks. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said he is working with the chief of the defence staff on the issue as part of the government's defence policy review.
Sajjan said the goal is to find new strategies that can be put in place for future overseas deployments by the Canadian Forces.
"For example, building greater resilience in pre-deployment training, early on, so that we can help with some of the challenges that are faced and also other things, post-deployment," Sajjan said.
Randall Garrison, defence critic for the NDP, questions the government's resolve, saying it has already taken far too long to come up with any answers about a continuing crisis.
"You know, in 2013 we had a rash of suicides that first brought this to the public attention and to the minister's attention. Now, here we are, three years later, and no one has done a thing," Garrison said.
One family's hope
The family of one Canadian soldier who took his own life says that if the military wants to improve suicide prevention, it needs to listen to Canadian Forces personnel and their families.
Sheila Fynes's son, Cpl. Stuart Langridge, committed suicide at CFB Edmonton in 2008.
"I think they need to go back to the grassroots to do it. They need to talk more to the men, all the men," Fynes said.
"They need to talk to the families. I really wish somebody would say to me, 'You were with Stu, you talked to Stu, is there anything that we could have done differently that might have had a different outcome for him?'"
Showing posts with label Afghan Mission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Afghan Mission. Show all posts
Thursday, November 24, 2016
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Trudeau ignoring calls to launch inquiry into Afghan detainee treatment
By: David Pugliese, Defence Watch
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is being asked to reconsider his government’s decision not to hold an inquiry into the treatment of Afghan detainees even as the International Criminal Court prepares to conduct its own investigation.
The Liberals rejected in June an e-petition calling for a judicial inquiry into detainee treatment.
But Craig Scott, a law professor and former NDP MP who initiated the petition, asked Trudeau last month to reconsider his government’s decision.
In addition, in June, human rights activists, diplomats, current and former parliamentarians, including former prime minister Joe Clark, wrote an open letter to Trudeau calling for a full investigation into the Canadian military’s transfer of prisoners to Afghan officials during the war.
“There’s been no response from the prime minister at all to any of these requests,” Scott said. “It’s clear his government wants to do everything it can do to bury this issue.”
But Canada’s activities involving detainees could be put in the spotlight if the International Criminal Court proceeds with an investigation into how U.S. troops, Afghan soldiers and the Taliban acted on the battlefield.
Foreign Policy magazine, a U.S. based publication, reported Tuesday that the International Criminal Court is preparing to investigate allegations of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Afghanistan.
Scott said the criminal court inquiry, if it goes ahead, could ask for evidence gathered from Canadian sources and well as examine what Canadian officials knew about any incidents of abuse or torture.
Trudeau’s office did not provide comment.
But the issue of the treatment of Afghan detainees has been dogging the Canadian military since 2009.
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, a former Canadian Forces officer and Afghan war veteran, rejected calls for the government to hold the judicial inquiry into the overall treatment of detainees. He said Canadian military personnel conducted themselves properly at all times.
Sajjan’s refusal to allow for an investigation is in stark contrast to the Liberal’s position when they were in opposition. They accused the Conservative government of covering up detainee abuse and demanded a public inquiry.
Critics say Sajjan’s work in Afghanistan with the Canadian Forces, which included setting the stage for the killing or capture of some 1,500 Afghan insurgents, was enough to disqualify him from making the decision not to conduct a public inquiry into alleged abuses.
Sajjan could have been a potential witness for any such investigation, said Scott. He noted that Sajjan also had dealings with Afghan officials, some of whom were later accused of torturing people.
Sajjan, however, has said that in his three tours of Afghanistan he was never involved in any situations involving detainees.
A military police watchdog group is currently conducting its own investigation into a specific case involving allegations Canadian military personnel abused Afghan prisoners in their cells in Kandahar in 2010 and 2011.
The Military Police Complaints Commission has already interviewed a number of individuals aware of the cell raids by military police and confirmed several detainees were so scared they defecated and urinated on the spot during one such foray into the cells.
Some Canadian military police officers also recently raised concerns that many Afghans taken prisoner by Canadian troops were innocent farmers or workers and not members of the Taliban or al Qaeda.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is being asked to reconsider his government’s decision not to hold an inquiry into the treatment of Afghan detainees even as the International Criminal Court prepares to conduct its own investigation.
The Liberals rejected in June an e-petition calling for a judicial inquiry into detainee treatment.
But Craig Scott, a law professor and former NDP MP who initiated the petition, asked Trudeau last month to reconsider his government’s decision.
In addition, in June, human rights activists, diplomats, current and former parliamentarians, including former prime minister Joe Clark, wrote an open letter to Trudeau calling for a full investigation into the Canadian military’s transfer of prisoners to Afghan officials during the war.
“There’s been no response from the prime minister at all to any of these requests,” Scott said. “It’s clear his government wants to do everything it can do to bury this issue.”
But Canada’s activities involving detainees could be put in the spotlight if the International Criminal Court proceeds with an investigation into how U.S. troops, Afghan soldiers and the Taliban acted on the battlefield.
Foreign Policy magazine, a U.S. based publication, reported Tuesday that the International Criminal Court is preparing to investigate allegations of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Afghanistan.
Scott said the criminal court inquiry, if it goes ahead, could ask for evidence gathered from Canadian sources and well as examine what Canadian officials knew about any incidents of abuse or torture.
Trudeau’s office did not provide comment.
But the issue of the treatment of Afghan detainees has been dogging the Canadian military since 2009.
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, a former Canadian Forces officer and Afghan war veteran, rejected calls for the government to hold the judicial inquiry into the overall treatment of detainees. He said Canadian military personnel conducted themselves properly at all times.
Sajjan’s refusal to allow for an investigation is in stark contrast to the Liberal’s position when they were in opposition. They accused the Conservative government of covering up detainee abuse and demanded a public inquiry.
Critics say Sajjan’s work in Afghanistan with the Canadian Forces, which included setting the stage for the killing or capture of some 1,500 Afghan insurgents, was enough to disqualify him from making the decision not to conduct a public inquiry into alleged abuses.
Sajjan could have been a potential witness for any such investigation, said Scott. He noted that Sajjan also had dealings with Afghan officials, some of whom were later accused of torturing people.
Sajjan, however, has said that in his three tours of Afghanistan he was never involved in any situations involving detainees.
A military police watchdog group is currently conducting its own investigation into a specific case involving allegations Canadian military personnel abused Afghan prisoners in their cells in Kandahar in 2010 and 2011.
The Military Police Complaints Commission has already interviewed a number of individuals aware of the cell raids by military police and confirmed several detainees were so scared they defecated and urinated on the spot during one such foray into the cells.
Some Canadian military police officers also recently raised concerns that many Afghans taken prisoner by Canadian troops were innocent farmers or workers and not members of the Taliban or al Qaeda.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Calls mount for inquiry into CAF's treatment of Afghan detainees
By: David Pugliese, The National Post
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is being asked to reconsider his government’s decision not to hold an inquiry into the treatment of Afghan detainees even as the International Criminal Court prepares to conduct its own investigation.
In June, the government rejected an e-petition calling for a judicial inquiry into how the Canadian military treated prisoners in Afghanistan.
Last month, Craig Scott, a law professor and former NDP MP who initiated the petition, asked Trudeau to reconsider the decision.
Human rights activists, diplomats, current and former parliamentarians, including former prime minister Joe Clark, have also written an open letter to the prime minister, demanding a full investigation of the Canadian military’s transfer of prisoners to Afghan officials during the war.
“There’s been no response from the prime minister at all to any of these requests,” Scott said Tuesday. “It’s clear his government wants to do everything it can do to bury this issue.”
Canada’s activities could be put in the spotlight if the ICC goes ahead with its probe into how U.S. troops, Afghan soldiers and the Taliban acted on the battlefield.
Related
Out-of-control Canadian military police terrorized Afghan prisoners in Kandahar, documents indicate
Defence watchdog clears Canadian military police in Afghan prison torture controversy
Federal government releases Afghan detainee documents (2011)
Foreign Policy magazine, a U.S.-based publication, reported Tuesday the court is preparing to investigate allegations of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Afghanistan.
Scott said the ICC could ask for evidence from Canadian sources and well as examining what Canadian officials knew about any abuse or torture.
Trudeau’s office had no comment, but the issue of the treatment of Afghan detainees has been dogging the Canadian military since 2009.
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, a former Canadian Forces officer and Afghan war veteran, rejected calls for the government to hold the judicial inquiry into the overall treatment of detainees. He said Canadian military personnel conducted themselves properly at all times.
His refusal is in stark contrast to the Liberals’ position in opposition. They accused the Conservative government of covering up detainee abuse and demanded a public inquiry.
Critics say Sajjan’s work in Afghanistan with the Canadian Forces, which included setting the stage for the killing or capture of 1,500 Afghan insurgents, is enough to disqualify him from deciding not to conduct a public inquiry into alleged abuses.
The defence ministger could have been a witness in any such investigation, said Scott. He noted Sajjan also had dealings with Afghan officials, some of whom were later accused of tminister
However, Sajjan has said in his three tours of Afghanistan he was never involved in any situations involving detainees.
A military police watchdog group is conducting its own investigation into a case involving allegations Canadian military personnel abused Afghan prisoners in their cells in Kandahar in 2010-11.
The Military Police Complaints Commission has interviewed several witnesses with knowledge of the raids by military police who confirmed several detainees were so scared they defecated and urinated on one occasion.
Some Canadian military police officers also recently raised concerns many Afghans taken prisoner by Canadian troops were innocent farmers or workers,not members of the Taliban or al-Qaida.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is being asked to reconsider his government’s decision not to hold an inquiry into the treatment of Afghan detainees even as the International Criminal Court prepares to conduct its own investigation.
In June, the government rejected an e-petition calling for a judicial inquiry into how the Canadian military treated prisoners in Afghanistan.
 |
| A suspected Taliban prisoner is searched, handcuffed, and processed by Canadian soldiers after a raid on a compound in Northern Kandahar, in 2006. |
Human rights activists, diplomats, current and former parliamentarians, including former prime minister Joe Clark, have also written an open letter to the prime minister, demanding a full investigation of the Canadian military’s transfer of prisoners to Afghan officials during the war.
“There’s been no response from the prime minister at all to any of these requests,” Scott said Tuesday. “It’s clear his government wants to do everything it can do to bury this issue.”
Canada’s activities could be put in the spotlight if the ICC goes ahead with its probe into how U.S. troops, Afghan soldiers and the Taliban acted on the battlefield.
Related
Out-of-control Canadian military police terrorized Afghan prisoners in Kandahar, documents indicate
Defence watchdog clears Canadian military police in Afghan prison torture controversy
Federal government releases Afghan detainee documents (2011)
Foreign Policy magazine, a U.S.-based publication, reported Tuesday the court is preparing to investigate allegations of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Afghanistan.
Scott said the ICC could ask for evidence from Canadian sources and well as examining what Canadian officials knew about any abuse or torture.
Trudeau’s office had no comment, but the issue of the treatment of Afghan detainees has been dogging the Canadian military since 2009.
Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, a former Canadian Forces officer and Afghan war veteran, rejected calls for the government to hold the judicial inquiry into the overall treatment of detainees. He said Canadian military personnel conducted themselves properly at all times.
His refusal is in stark contrast to the Liberals’ position in opposition. They accused the Conservative government of covering up detainee abuse and demanded a public inquiry.
Critics say Sajjan’s work in Afghanistan with the Canadian Forces, which included setting the stage for the killing or capture of 1,500 Afghan insurgents, is enough to disqualify him from deciding not to conduct a public inquiry into alleged abuses.
The defence ministger could have been a witness in any such investigation, said Scott. He noted Sajjan also had dealings with Afghan officials, some of whom were later accused of tminister
However, Sajjan has said in his three tours of Afghanistan he was never involved in any situations involving detainees.
A military police watchdog group is conducting its own investigation into a case involving allegations Canadian military personnel abused Afghan prisoners in their cells in Kandahar in 2010-11.
The Military Police Complaints Commission has interviewed several witnesses with knowledge of the raids by military police who confirmed several detainees were so scared they defecated and urinated on one occasion.
Some Canadian military police officers also recently raised concerns many Afghans taken prisoner by Canadian troops were innocent farmers or workers,not members of the Taliban or al-Qaida.
Monday, October 17, 2016
Why the CAF Refused the NATO Afghanistan Service Medal
By: David Pugliese, Defence Watch
Defence Watch has received a number of questions from Afghan veterans regarding the Canadian Forces/Department of National Defence decision not to accept the NATO Afghanistan medal. This decision was made years ago but it still causes concern among some veterans (the latest email coming in to Defence Watch just a couple of weeks ago)
So Defence Watch asked the questions and Suzanne Parker, of Personnel and Legal Services – ADM Public Affairs, provided the answers.
So why didn’t Canada accept the NATO Afghanistan medal for its troops? “On the recommendation of the Department of National Defence, the Government of Canada decided that Canada would not be accepting nor authorizing the wear of the NATO Medal for International Security Assistance Force,” explained Parker. “Canada instead created and issued its own recognition of CAF service with International Security Assistance Force, the South-West Asia ribbon to the General Campaign Star and General Service Medal. In accordance with the Canadian Honours Policy rule, which precludes dual recognition, the Chancellery of Honours directed that no Canadian can receive the NATO-International Security Assistance Force Medal.”
NATO was informed of this decision through official channels, she added. “It is important to note that Canada is not the only country not to allow the wear of the NATO-International Security Assistance Force Medal,” Parker pointed out. “While the United Kingdom did allow its members to accept the medal as a memento, it did not approve the medal for wear. The UK instead awarded its own Operational Service Medal – Afghanistan for service on the mission.”
And what were the specific reasons for the CF/DND recommending that the Canadian government not to accept the NATO medal? “When NATO first introduced its Medal for International Security Assistance Force, it was determined that the dates and location of eligibility for the medal would exclude a large number of Canadian Armed Forces personnel,” Parker explained. “Also, there was a strong feeling among the troops that the medal offered by NATO was not appropriate for the service in question; NATO medals being mostly associated, in their view, with peacekeeping service in the Balkans and not a combat mission.”
Defence Watch has received a number of questions from Afghan veterans regarding the Canadian Forces/Department of National Defence decision not to accept the NATO Afghanistan medal. This decision was made years ago but it still causes concern among some veterans (the latest email coming in to Defence Watch just a couple of weeks ago)
So Defence Watch asked the questions and Suzanne Parker, of Personnel and Legal Services – ADM Public Affairs, provided the answers.
So why didn’t Canada accept the NATO Afghanistan medal for its troops? “On the recommendation of the Department of National Defence, the Government of Canada decided that Canada would not be accepting nor authorizing the wear of the NATO Medal for International Security Assistance Force,” explained Parker. “Canada instead created and issued its own recognition of CAF service with International Security Assistance Force, the South-West Asia ribbon to the General Campaign Star and General Service Medal. In accordance with the Canadian Honours Policy rule, which precludes dual recognition, the Chancellery of Honours directed that no Canadian can receive the NATO-International Security Assistance Force Medal.”
NATO was informed of this decision through official channels, she added. “It is important to note that Canada is not the only country not to allow the wear of the NATO-International Security Assistance Force Medal,” Parker pointed out. “While the United Kingdom did allow its members to accept the medal as a memento, it did not approve the medal for wear. The UK instead awarded its own Operational Service Medal – Afghanistan for service on the mission.”
And what were the specific reasons for the CF/DND recommending that the Canadian government not to accept the NATO medal? “When NATO first introduced its Medal for International Security Assistance Force, it was determined that the dates and location of eligibility for the medal would exclude a large number of Canadian Armed Forces personnel,” Parker explained. “Also, there was a strong feeling among the troops that the medal offered by NATO was not appropriate for the service in question; NATO medals being mostly associated, in their view, with peacekeeping service in the Balkans and not a combat mission.”
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
Canada in Iraq: Trainers should build on Afghanistan Experience
Written by: Matthew Fisher, National Post
Published the Monday February 9, 2016 Ottawa Citizen - NP Section
IN AFGHANISTAN, MOST OF THEM HAD NEVER BEEN TO SCHOOL SO EDUCATING THEM WAS A CHALLENGE. IF THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND BASIC MATH, IT IS GOING TO BE AN EXTREMELY LONG TIME FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND THEIR GUNS. — RETIRED COL. GREGORY BURT
A soldier who ran Ottawa’s training mission for Afghan soldiers and police battling the Taliban believes the 500 Canadian Forces trainers bound for the Middle East to work with Iraqi forces fighting ISIL should mentor them on the battlefield as well as in garrison, as Canadian troops did in Kandahar in 2006-11.
“Motivating them in a secure training base where someone is not firing at you is a lot different than when the enemy has a vote,” said Burt, who took me several times to see his troops mentoring Afghan forces in dicey situations on the battlefield.
“When the enemy is going to the other flank, you’ve got to be able to say, ‘You don’t want to go there’ … Our stellar actions under fire were a motivating factor, Afghans saw us out there when the s--- was going down everywhere. It was a demonstration that we were with them.”
When they accompanied Afghan troops into battle, the Canadian trainers also directed artillery fire, called in airstrikes and arranged for helicopters to get the wounded to hospital quickly.
Published the Monday February 9, 2016 Ottawa Citizen - NP Section
IN AFGHANISTAN, MOST OF THEM HAD NEVER BEEN TO SCHOOL SO EDUCATING THEM WAS A CHALLENGE. IF THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND BASIC MATH, IT IS GOING TO BE AN EXTREMELY LONG TIME FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND THEIR GUNS. — RETIRED COL. GREGORY BURT
A soldier who ran Ottawa’s training mission for Afghan soldiers and police battling the Taliban believes the 500 Canadian Forces trainers bound for the Middle East to work with Iraqi forces fighting ISIL should mentor them on the battlefield as well as in garrison, as Canadian troops did in Kandahar in 2006-11.
 |
| A CAF Member instructs Afghan National Guard how to load a riffle |
That candid assessment by Col. Gregory Burt, who retired last summer after more than 30 years with the Royal 22nd Regiment, the Van Doos, comes as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Monday that Canadians being sent to instruct Iraqi forces would not be involved in combat.
“Motivating them in a secure training base where someone is not firing at you is a lot different than when the enemy has a vote,” said Burt, who took me several times to see his troops mentoring Afghan forces in dicey situations on the battlefield.
“When the enemy is going to the other flank, you’ve got to be able to say, ‘You don’t want to go there’ … Our stellar actions under fire were a motivating factor, Afghans saw us out there when the s--- was going down everywhere. It was a demonstration that we were with them.”
When they accompanied Afghan troops into battle, the Canadian trainers also directed artillery fire, called in airstrikes and arranged for helicopters to get the wounded to hospital quickly.
However, Burt says no trainers were with him when he saw action for the first time and everything he had learned about combat came from training behind the lines. The career infantryman is gung-ho about the new training assignment.
“The reason we can do well on every kind of mission is that I don’t think any other army trains as well as we do,” said the 52-year-old Newfoundlander. “It is in our doctrine and the way we give our junior ranks independence. Our maturity is above and beyond that of others.”
Canadian forces spent five years helping train in Afghanistan. The situation is different in Iraq, where they will start with “a blank sheet.”
It sounds prosaic, but a key part of the process will be to establish how good the Iraqi students are at mathematics, says Burt, who adds he has not been briefed on planning for the mission.
“To do the nuts and bolts to train an officer to take a platoon down range, you have to first establish a baseline about where they are in their training and the level of their education,” he said. “In Afghanistan, most of them had never been to school so educating them was a challenge.
“If they cannot understand basic math, it is going to be an extremely long time for them to understand their guns. Even to blow up a mine requires (detonation) cords and there are equations that go with that in order to be able to get safely to cover. Anything technical — and that includes the logistics of water and food for soldiers in the fight — requires math.”
He warns there will be no quick fixes for the Iraqi security forces.
“It took us hours in garrison to teach the Afghans skills before we crossed the line of fire with them. It requires patience.”
The rule of thumb is that it takes 40 to 50 weeks to train new recruits to become infantry officers, and 2½ to three years to get those officers on to the battlefield.
But because of the urgent need to field troops quickly in Afghanistan, the timelines were much shorter. The same is likely to be the case in the fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.
Among the top priorities, Burt says, will be to quickly establish a close rapport with the Arab-speaking interpreters, and cultural and linguistic advisers who will provide the vital link between the Canadians and their Iraqi students.
“I guess they will be creating a mini-Gagetown,” Burt said, referring to the army’s combat schools in New Brunswick.
“There will be firing ranges, basic mine awareness, how to conduct road sweeps (for improvised explosive devices), how to issue basic orders and call in their own fire support, map reading skills for leadership, manoeuvre and counter-manoeuvre, first aid, training for medics, arranging medevacs for the injured, and teaching how to establish headquarters command and control.
“There will be teams to coach brigade-level intelligence in how to work and to prepare reports, and to give operations officers a common understanding of how coalition forces work.”
Teaching such skills would be even more challenging if the Iraqis’ morale was low or if most of the troops were conscripts.
Burt says that training Afghan forces was the highlight of his career, which included deployments to Somalia, the Balkans and Germany during the Cold War. While he was envious of the challenge facing those receiving orders to deploy to the Middle East, “others now carry the flame and they will succeed.”
“The reason we can do well on every kind of mission is that I don’t think any other army trains as well as we do,” said the 52-year-old Newfoundlander. “It is in our doctrine and the way we give our junior ranks independence. Our maturity is above and beyond that of others.”
Canadian forces spent five years helping train in Afghanistan. The situation is different in Iraq, where they will start with “a blank sheet.”
It sounds prosaic, but a key part of the process will be to establish how good the Iraqi students are at mathematics, says Burt, who adds he has not been briefed on planning for the mission.
“To do the nuts and bolts to train an officer to take a platoon down range, you have to first establish a baseline about where they are in their training and the level of their education,” he said. “In Afghanistan, most of them had never been to school so educating them was a challenge.
“If they cannot understand basic math, it is going to be an extremely long time for them to understand their guns. Even to blow up a mine requires (detonation) cords and there are equations that go with that in order to be able to get safely to cover. Anything technical — and that includes the logistics of water and food for soldiers in the fight — requires math.”
He warns there will be no quick fixes for the Iraqi security forces.
“It took us hours in garrison to teach the Afghans skills before we crossed the line of fire with them. It requires patience.”
The rule of thumb is that it takes 40 to 50 weeks to train new recruits to become infantry officers, and 2½ to three years to get those officers on to the battlefield.
 |
| OP ATTENTION - Canada's Training Mission in Kabul, Afghanistan. CAF members training Afghan National Guard Members on the firing range. (Photo: OP ATTENTION - DND) |
Among the top priorities, Burt says, will be to quickly establish a close rapport with the Arab-speaking interpreters, and cultural and linguistic advisers who will provide the vital link between the Canadians and their Iraqi students.
“I guess they will be creating a mini-Gagetown,” Burt said, referring to the army’s combat schools in New Brunswick.
“There will be firing ranges, basic mine awareness, how to conduct road sweeps (for improvised explosive devices), how to issue basic orders and call in their own fire support, map reading skills for leadership, manoeuvre and counter-manoeuvre, first aid, training for medics, arranging medevacs for the injured, and teaching how to establish headquarters command and control.
“There will be teams to coach brigade-level intelligence in how to work and to prepare reports, and to give operations officers a common understanding of how coalition forces work.”
Teaching such skills would be even more challenging if the Iraqis’ morale was low or if most of the troops were conscripts.
Burt says that training Afghan forces was the highlight of his career, which included deployments to Somalia, the Balkans and Germany during the Cold War. While he was envious of the challenge facing those receiving orders to deploy to the Middle East, “others now carry the flame and they will succeed.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)