British soldier becomes the 100th to die in Afghanistan this year

The British death toll in Afghanistan rose to 100 today when a soldier from the 1st Battalion The Royal Anglian Regiment was shot and killed by small arms fire in central Helmand province.

It is the worst annual casualty toll for Britain’s Armed Forces since troops were first sent to Afghanistan in 2001, and is double the number who died last year.

However, General Sir David Richards, the head of the Army, warned that the campaign in Afghanistan must not be judged by casualties alone.

"The death of this brave soldier is a huge loss to his family and friends. For those of us in the Army, whilst we grieve for a fallen comrade, his loss hardens our determination to succeed,” General Richards said.

“The temptation to judge this essential campaign by casualties alone undervalues the tremendous efforts of our forces and our allies, and the progress they are making."

Gordon Brown said: “Today we mourn together the 100th British fatality in Afghanistan in 2009. We will never forget those who have died fighting for our country and we must also honour their memory.”

Mr Brown vowed to stay the course and finish the mission.

The soldier who died was killed in the Nad-e Ali area in central Helmand this afternoon. The area has been a hotbed of Taleban activity. His next of kin have been informed and his name will be released tomorrow.

The huge rise in British casualties this year – more than 430 have also been wounded in action – reflects the devastating strategy adopted by the Taleban insurgents, who have resorted to industrial-scale laying of improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

Three quarters of the 100 who have died this year were killed by concealed IEDs. Despite an influx of 6,000 US Marines into Helmand in May and additional British troops to project military power into the most densely populated areas of the province, the insurgents have not been cowed and appear to have an inexhaustible supply of bomb-making equipment.

The soldier who died today was the victim of gunshot wounds, a further reminder that in the back alleys and hostile compounds where the Taleban hide, even the best equipped and best-trained professional soldier can easily fall prey to a determined insurgent armed only with a Kalashnikov and wearing little more than an outer ankle-length garment, a turban and a pair of flip-flops.

The Taleban have taken the fight to their enemy this year in a manner last witnessed when the Russians were the occupiers in the 1980s. While the British and the other Nato and non-Nato partners have learnt to adapt their tactics and have killed thousands of the Taleban and their affiliated militia and terrorist associates, they have faced an opposition which can count on a stream of volunteers from among local unemployed young Afghans who melt back into their family compounds and poppy fields at the end of a fighting day.

Britain has had to send increasingly bigger and better protected armoured vehicles to defend against the Taleban’s bombs and ambushes, but the insurgents rely on motorbikes to make their getaway. It is asymmetric David-and-Goliath warfare.

Bob Ainsworth, the Defence Secretary, admitted this had been a challenging year for the Armed Forces in Afghanistan, but added: “I believe we must keep at the forefront of our minds why our people are in Afghanistan and the progress and achievements they have and continue to make alongside our international partners.”

Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, the Chief of the Defence Staff, said: “Our people face a difficult and dangerous task in Afghanistan, and 2009 has been a particularly challenging year. Each death is a sad loss, and we mourn every one. We remember those who have given their lives, the bereaved families and friends who are left behind, and all those who have been injured.”

He said the British Armed Forces had brought security to more of the population of Helmand, and had helped the Afghan National Army to develop its own capabilities.

The British troops have suffered more than any other other Nato nation in Afghanistan apart from the United States because the majority of the 10,000 serving in the country are in Helmand, where the Taleban have been focusing their main effort. The insurgents still dominate large parts of the province.

There has been an intense debate this year about whether the equipment and vehicles provided to British troops in Afghanistan have been adequate to protect them from IEDs. There have been calls for more helicopters, and additional aircraft have been ordered for the troops. But military commanders insist that patrols and hearts-and-minds initiatives among the Afghan people have to be carried out on foot.

British forces were first deployed to Afghanistan in November 2001 when Royal Marines helped to secure Bagram airfield near Kabul as part of the US-led invasion after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Several hundred more troops followed but the human cost remained relatively low until Britain sent 3,300 troops of 16 Air Assault Brigade to Helmand in the spring of 2006.

There were only five British fatalities between 2001 and 2005. In 2006, 39 died. In 2007 it was 42 and last year it rose to 51.

Part of the reason for the doubling of fatal casualties this year has been the deliberate strategy of the UK Task Force and the Americans to try to drive the Taleban out of central Helmand. In Operation Panther’s Claw in the summer, 3,000 British troops fought their way through areas such as Babaji and Nad-e Ali. The operation was regarded as a success, but the casualty toll soared.

General Richards has warned that British troops could be engaged in a combat role in Afghanistan for another three to five years, raising the prospect of a final casualty toll far in excess of past campaigns.


British soldier becomes the 100th to die in Afghanistan this year - Times Online