“Uzbekistan ring a bell?” News from the German military intervention in Afghanistan
Article in: SoZ 1/06 (www.soz-plus.de) by Tobias Pflüger
“Uzbekistan, ring a bell?” News from the German military intervention in Afghanistan
By Tobias Pflüger
Seven days after the elections to the German Parliament on September 21, 2005, the Parliament came together one last time for a special session. It was about - as are most special sessions - the prolongation of a Federal Armed Forces mandate, the ISAF intervention of the German Army in Afghanistan. The planned German Parliament resolution was taken on the fast track. The Federal Forces mandate “threatened” to run out on October 13, 5 days before the constitution of the new German Parliament. In this way, fast progress was made: after two lightning-speed sessions, the Parliament, finally, with 535 against 14 votes and 4 abstentions, prolonged the mandate of the Federal Armed Forces-ISAF troops in Afghanistan for another year. At the same time, the upper limit of the soldiers to be stationed there was increased from 2250 to 3000.
Shortly after the prolongation of the ISAF mandate, a German soldier was killed on November 14, 2005 in an explosives attempt in Afghanistan. Already in June 2003, in a suicide attempt against a Federal Army bus in Kabul, four German soldiers had been killed and an additional 29 had been wounded. Officially, 18 German soldiers have been killed in the Afghanistan mission, up to now.
NATO, in whose framework the mission is taking place, decided, on June 9, 2005, a considerable enlargement of the ISAF mandate and already plans a third stage of the extension. Hikmet Cetin, the so-called “High-ranking civil representative of NATO in Afghanistan”, in a conversation with deputies of the Foreign Committee in the European parliament, in the meantime openly admits that there were considerable problems with this Phase 3. The areas, where NATO would then be acting, were a lot less safe than the territories controlled up to now, but even there, there were also considerable problems. That was confirmed by a conversation the author had at the mission control command in Potsdam-Geltow. The evaluation of these regions by the German Federal Army sounds: “Not calm and not stable.”
Enduring Freedom is being prolonged…
The new Federal Parliament decided on November 8, 2005 to continue German participation in the Operation Enduring Freedom for one more year. 519 deputies voted yes, 67 with No, and 3 abstained.
The German Federal Army also participates in “Enduring Freedom”. With at least 100 soldiers of the elite battle troop Command Special Forces (German abr. KSK). Officially, nobody knows what the KSK has done and does in Afghanistan. A KSK soldier once made the claim to the author that they had fought at the “foremost front”. A smaller part of the KSK is supposed to support the ISAF troops in the North of Afghanistan, while a larger contingent in the South West is supposed to help the US troops in the battle against the insurgents at the border line to Pakistan. Especially there, the situation has grown more acute in the recent period.
With reference to a “right of self-defence” which is violating international law, war is been conducted for four years in Afghanistan by now. This war has cost the lives of thousands of civilians and keeps Germany in a permanent state of war. It is a resolution with enormous lee-way: Currently, in the context of Enduring Freedom, according to Federal Army reports, 260 (!) soldiers are active there, but there is no information what precisely they are doing, how many prisoners they have made or handed over to other troops, how many people have perished by their actions, and whether there also have already been casualties among the German soldiers.
… and mixed with ISAF
Peace and calm in Afghanistan? No. Even the FAZ (November 14, 2005) writes that “stability only reigned on paper”. In Afghanistan, it is war. The US-commanded troops of Enduring Freedom are leading a merciless war of aggression, in which uninvolved people are constantly being affected as collateral damage.
In this dangerous situation, NATO – and by that token – the German Federal Armed Forces are mixing the ISAF mission with the mission Enduring Freedom. Thus it says in the NATO resolution that “measures should be taken in order to increase the synergy effects in between ISAF and the Operation ‘Enduring Freedom’ (OEF).” The US government and, in its wake, the current Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Christian Schmidt, once and again call for an ever closer intertwining of ISAF and Enduring Freedom.
Schmidt said on October 7, 2005: “Who continues to insist on a strict separation, overlooks that in an extension of ISAF to the whole of Afghanistan, ISAF and OEF must closely coordinate as parallel missions. The fighters of the Taliban and other terrorists presumably also do not keep to any distinction between ISAF and OEF, but threaten all foreign soldiers and their own fellow citizens without any consideration.”
In the session of October 6, 2005 of the NATO delegation, Chris Riley from NATO headquarters confirmed upon being asked that the Afghan population naturally was not able to distinguish between the ISAF and the Enduring Freedom mission. There existed in principle a formal separation of the two missions for political reasons – to appease, for instance, public opinion in Germany. Asked for the situation in Uzbekistan, he called that difficult. The German Federal Army continued to keep up the military basis of Termez in this country, against which the EU has now imposed sanctions. This basis, however, although not being a NATO basis, was also being used for the logistics of the NATO troops.
The EU, in turn, is holding on to its financial support for the build-up of Afghan police and military structures, which often enough are nothing but continued warlord structures, and supports the NATO mission by “civilian means”. Moreover, the EU Council has decided, in a common session with the Afghan government on November 16, 2005, an EU-Afghanistan declaration, in which the EU asks all EU member states “to hold on to its substantial role in the supply of the military and civilian resources for the Security Assistance Force commanded by NATO.” Moreover, the EU Council has called openly for the support of the “US-headed operation Enduring Freedom”. In this way, the EU Council is calling for the continued military and civilian support of a military mission in Afghanistan contrary to international law.
The Federal Army in Uzbekistan
The main artery of the German ISAF contingent in Kabul and Kunduz directly runs through the airport of the 114,000 inhabitants counting town, Termez, in the Southern most corner of Uzbekistan. Since June 4th, it is officially called, using the the Federal Army official lingo, ”Termez mission squadron”. The whole supply to Afghanistan is being organised by using this former “Air transport basis 3”.
However, the problem is that Uzbekistan lives under a dictatorship, headed by president Islam Karimov. On May 13th in 2005, so-called “security forces”, slaughtered at least 500 people, if not more, called the massacre of Andishan. Since then, the relationship between the Western States and the dictatorship in Uzbekistan can officially be seen as disturbed . The governments of the USA and the EU demanded an independent, international commission to investigate, that was rejected by Uzbekistan. The USA thereupon had to vacate their military basis Chanabad in, Uzbekistan. Furthermore, Russia and Uzbekistan signed a new friendship treaty that foresees that, in the case of de-stabilisation, Russia may send troops to Uzbekistan ..
The back then Red Green German government hardly criticised the regime in Tashkent. In spite of the resistance of the German government, the EU imposed sanctions against Uzbekistan. The resolution that was passed by the EU Council on December 14th says, that: “It is forbidden, (a) to provide any technical support that has to do with military activities, and with the supply, production, upkeep, and use of armament, and material of all kind linked to it, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and corresponding spare parts, directly or indirectly to private or legal persons, organisations, or institutions in Uzbekistan or for utilisation in Afghanistan; (b) to prepare financial means or financial aid in connection with military activities, connected to special subsidies, grants, and export credit insurances, for the sale, supply, transfer, or the export of armament, and material of all kind linked to it or to the rendering of technical support connected to that, or to other services, directly or indirectly to private, or legal persons, organisations, or institutions in Uzbekistan, or even for utilisation in Uzbekistan.” However, the German Federal Bank releases certificates of exemption for which, according to the Federal Bank homepage, can be applied for, in the service centre Financial Sanctions of the German Federal Bank.
And on December 9 and 10, 2005, Under-Secretary of State for Defence Friedbert Pflüger (CDU) has struck a deal with the government ruled by president Karimov which is central to NATO and the German Federal Army: In spite of the EU sanctions levied against the Uzbek regime, the German Federal Army may continue to use the base of Termez, meaning, therefore, also all other NATO states.
The Uzbek Interior Minister Sakir Almatov then received medical treatment shortly before Christmas in a clinic in Hanover (the place of origin of the Under-Secretary, Friedbert Pflüger), and this even though he is probably one of the main responsible figures of the massacre at Andishan and that there exists an interdiction to issue visas to all members of the Uzbek government.
Germany gives comprehensive military aid to Uzbekistan, lately sanitation material from the stocks of the German Federal Army in the value of 280,000 Euros was given free of charge to Uzbekistan. This gift was an “expression of the good cooperation between Germany and Uzbekistan at the military level”, states the German ambassador Joachim Kinderlen.
In the deal between Friedbert Pflüger and the dictatorship in Uzbekistan, it was agreed “to stimulate the dialogue concerning the international struggle against terrorism, economic relations as well as democratisation and the rule of law.” Moreover, the Federal Government, argues Friedbert Pflüger, wanted to take into account Karmiov's viewpoint of the massacre in Andishan “in a fair way”.
The homepage of the German Federal Army says it clearly: “If it were not for the supply basis of the Federal Army in the Uzbek Termez, then the German soldiers in Afghanistan might have to pack and leave very shortly.” O.k., let it stand, we want them to pack. Therefore, the demand for the peace and anti-war movement is clear: “Withdrawal of the Federal Army troops from Afghanistan.” As a first step: Immediate closure of the Federal Army base in Termez!”
Will appear in SoZ 1/06 (www.soz-plus.de)
Tobias Pflüger is member of the Information Point Militarisation inc. (www.imi-online.de) and as member without party affiliation, deputy of the European parliament.
Translated by Carla Krüger and Jürgen Wagner, January 3, 2006
“Uzbekistan, ring a bell?” News from the German military intervention in Afghanistan
By Tobias Pflüger
Seven days after the elections to the German Parliament on September 21, 2005, the Parliament came together one last time for a special session. It was about - as are most special sessions - the prolongation of a Federal Armed Forces mandate, the ISAF intervention of the German Army in Afghanistan. The planned German Parliament resolution was taken on the fast track. The Federal Forces mandate “threatened” to run out on October 13, 5 days before the constitution of the new German Parliament. In this way, fast progress was made: after two lightning-speed sessions, the Parliament, finally, with 535 against 14 votes and 4 abstentions, prolonged the mandate of the Federal Armed Forces-ISAF troops in Afghanistan for another year. At the same time, the upper limit of the soldiers to be stationed there was increased from 2250 to 3000.
Shortly after the prolongation of the ISAF mandate, a German soldier was killed on November 14, 2005 in an explosives attempt in Afghanistan. Already in June 2003, in a suicide attempt against a Federal Army bus in Kabul, four German soldiers had been killed and an additional 29 had been wounded. Officially, 18 German soldiers have been killed in the Afghanistan mission, up to now.
NATO, in whose framework the mission is taking place, decided, on June 9, 2005, a considerable enlargement of the ISAF mandate and already plans a third stage of the extension. Hikmet Cetin, the so-called “High-ranking civil representative of NATO in Afghanistan”, in a conversation with deputies of the Foreign Committee in the European parliament, in the meantime openly admits that there were considerable problems with this Phase 3. The areas, where NATO would then be acting, were a lot less safe than the territories controlled up to now, but even there, there were also considerable problems. That was confirmed by a conversation the author had at the mission control command in Potsdam-Geltow. The evaluation of these regions by the German Federal Army sounds: “Not calm and not stable.”
Enduring Freedom is being prolonged…
The new Federal Parliament decided on November 8, 2005 to continue German participation in the Operation Enduring Freedom for one more year. 519 deputies voted yes, 67 with No, and 3 abstained.
The German Federal Army also participates in “Enduring Freedom”. With at least 100 soldiers of the elite battle troop Command Special Forces (German abr. KSK). Officially, nobody knows what the KSK has done and does in Afghanistan. A KSK soldier once made the claim to the author that they had fought at the “foremost front”. A smaller part of the KSK is supposed to support the ISAF troops in the North of Afghanistan, while a larger contingent in the South West is supposed to help the US troops in the battle against the insurgents at the border line to Pakistan. Especially there, the situation has grown more acute in the recent period.
With reference to a “right of self-defence” which is violating international law, war is been conducted for four years in Afghanistan by now. This war has cost the lives of thousands of civilians and keeps Germany in a permanent state of war. It is a resolution with enormous lee-way: Currently, in the context of Enduring Freedom, according to Federal Army reports, 260 (!) soldiers are active there, but there is no information what precisely they are doing, how many prisoners they have made or handed over to other troops, how many people have perished by their actions, and whether there also have already been casualties among the German soldiers.
… and mixed with ISAF
Peace and calm in Afghanistan? No. Even the FAZ (November 14, 2005) writes that “stability only reigned on paper”. In Afghanistan, it is war. The US-commanded troops of Enduring Freedom are leading a merciless war of aggression, in which uninvolved people are constantly being affected as collateral damage.
In this dangerous situation, NATO – and by that token – the German Federal Armed Forces are mixing the ISAF mission with the mission Enduring Freedom. Thus it says in the NATO resolution that “measures should be taken in order to increase the synergy effects in between ISAF and the Operation ‘Enduring Freedom’ (OEF).” The US government and, in its wake, the current Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Christian Schmidt, once and again call for an ever closer intertwining of ISAF and Enduring Freedom.
Schmidt said on October 7, 2005: “Who continues to insist on a strict separation, overlooks that in an extension of ISAF to the whole of Afghanistan, ISAF and OEF must closely coordinate as parallel missions. The fighters of the Taliban and other terrorists presumably also do not keep to any distinction between ISAF and OEF, but threaten all foreign soldiers and their own fellow citizens without any consideration.”
In the session of October 6, 2005 of the NATO delegation, Chris Riley from NATO headquarters confirmed upon being asked that the Afghan population naturally was not able to distinguish between the ISAF and the Enduring Freedom mission. There existed in principle a formal separation of the two missions for political reasons – to appease, for instance, public opinion in Germany. Asked for the situation in Uzbekistan, he called that difficult. The German Federal Army continued to keep up the military basis of Termez in this country, against which the EU has now imposed sanctions. This basis, however, although not being a NATO basis, was also being used for the logistics of the NATO troops.
The EU, in turn, is holding on to its financial support for the build-up of Afghan police and military structures, which often enough are nothing but continued warlord structures, and supports the NATO mission by “civilian means”. Moreover, the EU Council has decided, in a common session with the Afghan government on November 16, 2005, an EU-Afghanistan declaration, in which the EU asks all EU member states “to hold on to its substantial role in the supply of the military and civilian resources for the Security Assistance Force commanded by NATO.” Moreover, the EU Council has called openly for the support of the “US-headed operation Enduring Freedom”. In this way, the EU Council is calling for the continued military and civilian support of a military mission in Afghanistan contrary to international law.
The Federal Army in Uzbekistan
The main artery of the German ISAF contingent in Kabul and Kunduz directly runs through the airport of the 114,000 inhabitants counting town, Termez, in the Southern most corner of Uzbekistan. Since June 4th, it is officially called, using the the Federal Army official lingo, ”Termez mission squadron”. The whole supply to Afghanistan is being organised by using this former “Air transport basis 3”.
However, the problem is that Uzbekistan lives under a dictatorship, headed by president Islam Karimov. On May 13th in 2005, so-called “security forces”, slaughtered at least 500 people, if not more, called the massacre of Andishan. Since then, the relationship between the Western States and the dictatorship in Uzbekistan can officially be seen as disturbed . The governments of the USA and the EU demanded an independent, international commission to investigate, that was rejected by Uzbekistan. The USA thereupon had to vacate their military basis Chanabad in, Uzbekistan. Furthermore, Russia and Uzbekistan signed a new friendship treaty that foresees that, in the case of de-stabilisation, Russia may send troops to Uzbekistan ..
The back then Red Green German government hardly criticised the regime in Tashkent. In spite of the resistance of the German government, the EU imposed sanctions against Uzbekistan. The resolution that was passed by the EU Council on December 14th says, that: “It is forbidden, (a) to provide any technical support that has to do with military activities, and with the supply, production, upkeep, and use of armament, and material of all kind linked to it, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and corresponding spare parts, directly or indirectly to private or legal persons, organisations, or institutions in Uzbekistan or for utilisation in Afghanistan; (b) to prepare financial means or financial aid in connection with military activities, connected to special subsidies, grants, and export credit insurances, for the sale, supply, transfer, or the export of armament, and material of all kind linked to it or to the rendering of technical support connected to that, or to other services, directly or indirectly to private, or legal persons, organisations, or institutions in Uzbekistan, or even for utilisation in Uzbekistan.” However, the German Federal Bank releases certificates of exemption for which, according to the Federal Bank homepage, can be applied for, in the service centre Financial Sanctions of the German Federal Bank.
And on December 9 and 10, 2005, Under-Secretary of State for Defence Friedbert Pflüger (CDU) has struck a deal with the government ruled by president Karimov which is central to NATO and the German Federal Army: In spite of the EU sanctions levied against the Uzbek regime, the German Federal Army may continue to use the base of Termez, meaning, therefore, also all other NATO states.
The Uzbek Interior Minister Sakir Almatov then received medical treatment shortly before Christmas in a clinic in Hanover (the place of origin of the Under-Secretary, Friedbert Pflüger), and this even though he is probably one of the main responsible figures of the massacre at Andishan and that there exists an interdiction to issue visas to all members of the Uzbek government.
Germany gives comprehensive military aid to Uzbekistan, lately sanitation material from the stocks of the German Federal Army in the value of 280,000 Euros was given free of charge to Uzbekistan. This gift was an “expression of the good cooperation between Germany and Uzbekistan at the military level”, states the German ambassador Joachim Kinderlen.
In the deal between Friedbert Pflüger and the dictatorship in Uzbekistan, it was agreed “to stimulate the dialogue concerning the international struggle against terrorism, economic relations as well as democratisation and the rule of law.” Moreover, the Federal Government, argues Friedbert Pflüger, wanted to take into account Karmiov's viewpoint of the massacre in Andishan “in a fair way”.
The homepage of the German Federal Army says it clearly: “If it were not for the supply basis of the Federal Army in the Uzbek Termez, then the German soldiers in Afghanistan might have to pack and leave very shortly.” O.k., let it stand, we want them to pack. Therefore, the demand for the peace and anti-war movement is clear: “Withdrawal of the Federal Army troops from Afghanistan.” As a first step: Immediate closure of the Federal Army base in Termez!”
Will appear in SoZ 1/06 (www.soz-plus.de)
Tobias Pflüger is member of the Information Point Militarisation inc. (www.imi-online.de) and as member without party affiliation, deputy of the European parliament.
Translated by Carla Krüger and Jürgen Wagner, January 3, 2006
Tobias Pflüger - 2006/01/04 09:55
Trackback URL:
https://tobiaspflueger.twoday.net/stories/1359535/modTrackback