Pat Dollard

Tweet

Times Online:

The head of the Army warned of strategic failure in Afghanistan today as it was announced that another British soldier had died in Helmand province.

General Sir Richard Danatt, who has been accused of playing politics over the issue of equipment, demanded more troops and greater investment as part of a shopping list of desires.

His plea was broadcast minutes before the Ministry of Defence said that a soldier from 2nd Battalion The Rifles was killed during a foot patrol in Helmand yesterday. Sixteen British soldiers have been killed this month.

Asked about reports that the Army had requested an additional 2,000 troops for Afghanistan, General Dannatt replied, “That figure in the public domain has never officially been put there.”

Gordon Brown has insisted that troops in Afghanistan are “properly equipped” and promised: “We will do whatever is necessary and what is right to equip our Armed Forces.”

But today, the head of the Army insisted that greater investment was needed, and even more important that ramping up the number of British soldiers. “There will be a shopping list that I will bring back,” he said. “But it won’t be so much people oriented.”

Government practice is traditionally for additional funding at the time of war to come from the Treasury reserves, but he said that if the public purse no longer allowed that then the Ministry of Defence would have to make the uncomfortable decision to reallocate its budget. “This has got to be done and got to be funded,” he said.

“If this is really important and the national finances are in such dire straits that we are not going to get more from the Treasury, then the Ministry of Defence gets £34 billion or so a year which we choose to spend on a range of programmes.

“There is then a strong case to say if this is so important and there is not going to be additional money from the Treasury, then we will have to re-order – yet again – some of our internal priorities.

“And that latter point will not be welcome at the Ministry of Defence, but it’s the right thing to do – shifting between the maritime, the air, the land environment, shifting between other areas of spending. We just may have to do it.”

General Dannatt claimed that to continue with the present level of funding would jeopardise the mission and that could not be allowed to happen. He said it would damage Nato, perhaps terminally, dent the special relationship with America and hand a huge PR victory to al-Qaeda and Islamist extremists.

“We need to flip a coin and see what’s on the other side,” he said. “The cost of failure here is just unthinkable,”

Showing no sign of bending to the Government’s pressure, General Dannatt responded this morning by saying: “If I have crossed the line then so be it.”

Dr Liam Fox claimed that a Conservative government would be more responsive to the Army’s requests.

“If we had a direct request from the head of the Armed Forces that they needed something specific to maximise the chance of success of the mission and minimise the risk to our Armed Forces, of course we would have to say yes to that,” he told the BBC.

“And what I find amazing is that if the Prime Minister was asked for extra troops by the Chief of the Defence Staff, as it’s rumoured has happened, why we are not getting them.”

General Danatt said: “Quite rightly if we carry on with the kind of casualty numbers we saw last week the people of our own country might say hold on this is not a price worth paying.”

“We do need more troops, we need more boots on the ground,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

General Dannatt claimed that more soldiers were required to reduce the impact of the improvised explosive devices, which have caused many of the British injuries including the soldier killed yesterday.

The general, who retires on August 28, said that it was vital to at least retain the number of British troops in Afghanistan at 9,000. He said that to reduce it to 8,300, as is currently planned after the Afghan elections, “would be quite wrong”.

“There may well be a case for what I would call a short term uplift, let’s not use the surge word that has sort of been worked to extinction in Iraq,” he said

The increasingly outspoken calls from General Dannatt led to senior Government officials questioning his behaviour this week. One junior minister accused him of “playing politics” and said: “This is a very difficult time and he should know better.”

Ministers fear that General Dannatt will launch an all-out attack on government policy when he retires as head of the Army next month.

General Dannatt suggested that as a temporary measure for 12-18 months, there may be a case for an increase in British troops while they wait for the Afghan National Army to be strong enough to take over.

“We don’t mind who’s feet are in the boots,” he said, although with other European countries unwilling to commit more troops to conflict zones and the training of local soldiers progressing slowly, additional British or American men would appear to be the only options.