Disquieting
news from Afghanistan kept reaching Germany this summer: According to a UN
report, the number of civilian casualties in Afghanistan rose dramatically
within the first half of the year: 55 percent more children and six percent
more women died compared to the first six months in 2009. The total number of
those killed or wounded rose by nearly one-third. While the Taliban was
responsible for over three-quarters of the killings, the more aggressive
strategy pursued by NATO troops bore the blame for the increasing deadliness of
the conflict (Stern).
The German
public was further unsettled by reports of the Taliban murder of a German eye
doctor. The insurgents accused her of spying for the coalition troops and
attempting to convert locals (ZDF).
The killing brought on renewed debate on the need for NGOs to work in close
concert with the military. Given limited resources, however, the Bundeswehr
would find such a task insurmountable. Moreover, the perceived neutrality of
aid workers remains their most effective defense (Die
Zeit).
According
to the Frankfurter Allgemeine, the
event clearly showed how determined the fundamentalists are to not merely drive
out the coalition troops, but to eliminate all Western influence in the
country. As the paper put it, "blinded by hatred," the Taliban did not shrink
from murdering those who merely came to their country to help ordinary Afghans
keep their eyesight (FAZ).
Meanwhile,
the Taliban's infamy also made the cover of TIME. The magazine featured the
disfigured face of an Afghan girl, whose nose and ears had been cut off by
extremists. Critics in the United States claimed that the campaign represented
emotional blackmail in order to keep troops in Afghanistan indefinitely (Spiegel).
German sceptics echoed this sentiment, claiming that the warmongers were
exploiting that story along with the killing of the German physician (Mein
Politikblog). Meanwhile, other observers in Germany maintained that TIME
was utterly right to publish the unsettling photo in so far as it reflected the
reality of life for Afghan women. However, they cautioned that the headline - "What happens if we leave
Afghanistan" - ought to be rephrased to read: "What is happening while we are
still in Afghanistan" (Asablog).
What was
actually happening in Afghanistan moved to the forefront of the debate with the
Spiegel's unveiling of the Wikileaks documents. According to
the magazine, the leaks revealed that Germans were being naïve in their
assumption that the situation in the North of Afghanistan, where the German
contingent has been stationed, was relatively stable. Instead, the operational
reality was one of a deteriorating security situation and near civil war (Spiegel).
Immediately
following the publication, the charge surfaced that the situation on the ground
is far worse than officials have admitted and that the German Government has
not been keeping the Bundestag informed in an adequate manner. A member of the
Foreign Affairs Committee of the Parliament, Hans-Christian Stroebele of the
Green Party, challenged the coalition government to be more forthcoming about
"what the Bundeswehr is up to precisely in Afghanistan" (Focus).
Contrary to
other members of the ISAF mission, the German Armed Forces operate under a
mandate from Parliament that needs to be renewed annually. Parliamentarians now
feel that they are being provided insufficient material to make informed
decisions. In spite of the fact that the Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu
Guttenberg has made strides in making the operation more transparent for
policymakers, Guttenberg "is risking his reputation" over the affair (Spiegel).
The most
contentious issue in this context is the presence of the American elite task
force 373 in the German camp at Mazar-i-Sharif. Its capture-and-kill tactics
have garnered heavy criticism from German lawmakers, as they contradict the
Bundeswehr's caveat (Die
Zeit). The extent of German knowledge of and involvement in this aspect of
operations is making the ISAF mission ever more controversial in Germany.
The
opposition is far from united on the issue, however. The minority Left Party is
uncompromising in its rejection of the ISAF mission and calls for a new vote on
the Bundeswehr mandate that will force all parties in the Bundestag publicly to
state their views (Die
Linke). Stroebele of the Green Party lauds the Wikileaks revelations for
their role in unveiling the truth about the deteriorating situation on the
ground, as well as unmasking "the many lies told in the context of the
Afghanistan mission" (Tagesschau).
Meanwhile,
the main opposition party SPD is split on whether the Wikileaks scandal merits
a reconsideration of its position. The Party's Spokesperson on Foreign Policy,
Ralf Muetzenich, cautions that the actions of the Americans need to be
considered in light of whether they comply with international law. On the other
hand, the SPD's leading defense policy expert, Hans-Peter Bartels, insists that
prolonging the mandate beyond 2011 is entirely justified. Jens Bullerjahn, a
member of the SPD's executive committee, warns of the mistaken belief that it
would be feasible to pull out of Afghanistan at this point (Die
Zeit).
This stance
is also espoused by the governing coalition. The Chair of the Foreign Affairs
Committee, Ruprecht Polenz of the CDU, does not see the need to rewrite the
history of Germany's engagement in Afghanistan, as he claims that the Wikileaks
documents do not contradict the government's official position (FAZ).
The German Brigadier General and Speaker for the ISAF mission, Josef Blotz,
cautions that the personal information disclosed in the Wikileaks documents
imperil the lives of those Afghans who trust and cooperate with ISAF. He calls
Wikileaks "morally irresponsible" for thus endangering the mission and the
lives of concrete individuals (Neue
Osnabrueker Zeitung).
Under
increasing pressure, the Defense Minister also denies that the documents reveal
anything new. He considers claims that terrorists are being hunted down in
illegal capture-and-kill operations to be exaggerated. However, Guttenberg
concedes that he would welcome clearer legal guidelines for the German mission
in Afghanistan. That debate is certain to continue now that parliamentarians
are returning to Berlin following summer recess. (Sueddeutsche
Zeitung).
Photo Licence: CC BY-NC-ND United Nations Photo 2
- 0
