NATO general sparks row over opium plan

NATO general sparks row over opium plan
01-29-2009
Google News
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hkPG4wYfwig6GAdPUM9aDHZDmnTw
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BERLIN (AFP) — NATO's supreme commander has sparked a row among top brass with "guidance" for opium dealers in Afghanistan to be killed even without proof of ties to insurgents, a German magazine said Thursday.

Citing a classified document, Spiegel said that US General John Craddock has told commanders he wants troops in the 50,000-strong military alliance "to attack directly drug producers and facilities throughout Afghanistan."

It is "no longer necessary to produce intelligence or other evidence that each particular drug trafficker or narcotics facility in Afghanistan meets the criteria of being a military objective," Spiegel cited Craddock as saying.

The alliance "has decided that (drug traffickers and narcotics facilities) are inextricably linked to the Opposing Military Forces, and thus may be attacked," Spiegel said in its online edition.

The report sparked anger at NATO headquarters in Brussels, with Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer calling for an immediate inquiry into what he called an "unacceptable" leak of a confidential document.

A NATO spokesman, James Appathurai, declined to confirm the content of the directive and played down any talk of a row, saying what had been sent to military commanders was "not an order but guidance."

Spiegel said that the directive was sent on January 5 to Egon Ramms, the German leader at NATO Command in the Netherlands, which is currently in charge of NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), and to David McKiernan, commander of the ISAF peacekeeping force in Afghanistan.

Neither wants to follow it, Spiegel said, as they believe it is illegitimate and violates both ISAF's rules of engagement and international law.

A classified letter issued by McKiernan's Kabul office claims that Craddock is trying to create a "new category" in the rules of engagement for dealing with opposing forces.

This would "seriously undermine the commitment ISAF has made to the Afghan people and the international community... to restrain our use of force and avoid civilian casualties to the greatest degree predictable," Spiegel cited the letter as saying.

The Taliban, ousted from power seven years ago by a US-led coalition, has been reaping close to 100 million dollars (77 million euros) a year from the opium trade and using the funds to buy weapons to kill NATO troops.

Afghanistan produces around 90 percent of the world's illegal opium, much of which is turned into heroin inside the country and exported to Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia.

The bulk of Afghanistan's opium production is centred in the south of the country, which is also the heart of the Taliban insurgency.

At a meeting in Budapest in October, NATO defence ministers decided to let individual nations hunt down drug lords and laboratories, with the consent of the Afghan government -- but on a voluntary basis.

Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland, Romania and Spain had led opposition against officially diving into the drug war in earnest for the first time, believing that the Afghans themselves should drive such efforts.

Appathurai said that it was "perfectly normal that there is a discussion within the chain of military command about how this decision is implemented, including on legal issues, so that it conforms with national laws and international conventions."

His comments were echoed by Colonel Derek Crotts, chief of public affairs at NATO's military headquarters.

"No-one has asked or directed anyone to do anything illegal," he said.

"Since the Budapest ministerial NATO meeting, military leadership has been working to develop an effective engagement plan regarding ISAF counter-narcotics operations.

"At this point all the parties concerned are still at the planning stage and there has been no order issued."

The leaking of Craddock's directive may also be part of a power struggle within NATO's top brass, with the US general -- appointed by former US president George W. Bush -- reportedly fearful that he may be replaced by new President Barack Obama.

trainwreckmolly said:

The leaking of Craddock's directive may also be part of a power struggle within NATO's top brass, with the US general -- appointed by former US president George W. Bush -- reportedly fearful that he may be replaced by new President Barack Obama.

Click to expand...

Lets hope he does get replaced. I'm amazed corruption at that level really goes down as often as it does.

The Taliban, ousted from power seven years ago by a US-led coalition, has been reaping close to 100 million dollars (77 million euros) a year from the opium trade and using the funds to buy weapons to kill NATO troops.

I was under the impression that opium production was at an all time low while the taliban was in control as THEY were executing people for producing it? Islam isn't very pro drug...... did I miss something?

How can the US afford to keep fighting these wars? The country will go bankrupt while trying to bankrupt the Taliban. Bring all the troops home to defend and rebuild the homeland.

Itd prob be cheaper to just buy the fucking opium at twice the price the taliban buy it off the farmers for and either donate it to the UN to ship to 3rf world countries where they have few painkillers or even just dump it into the ocean.

The farmers would prob all of a sudden be anti-taliban when they manage to double their profits and itd cost like $2US for a kilo or what ever. Give the farmers shit the taliban cant provide, like viagra apperently...

(surely thats been suggested)


they could introduce grasshoppers and make a plague or just collect every junkie from around the world and loose them in the fields and let them be another plauge...

Destorying the fields doesnt work though apperently

that is fucking insane. words cant even describe how stupid the givernment is about going about it this way.


....Seriously though.. they MUST have discussed all possibilities... whats stopping them from doing it? What exactly are they scared off... I just dont get it..

the junkie plague gets my vote. Stop dropping junkies into prison, give em a parachute and kick em out the door of a plane over afghanastan, they could clear the country side like locusts lol

Dragynfyr said:

The Taliban, ousted from power seven years ago by a US-led coalition, has been reaping close to 100 million dollars (77 million euros) a year from the opium trade and using the funds to buy weapons to kill NATO troops.

I was under the impression that opium production was at an all time low while the taliban was in control as THEY were executing people for producing it? Islam isn't very pro drug...... did I miss something?

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that Islam doesn't explicitly forbid opium, just alcohol. When the Taliban succceeded at reducing opium production, we (W.'s America) simply paid them a decent sum of money to combat opium production, and then simply decreed that opium was against Islam. The people of Afghanistan understandably stopped, knowing what happens when you break their bullshit rules

Maybe the US wants to shift the production of opium to neighboring Pakistan. Obama went to Pakistan when he was 20 years old. Maybe he still has friends there.