Editorial: Mutual mistrust Saturday, 21 January 2012 01:31

The killing of four French soldiers by a rogue Afghan soldier in the Taghab valley of Afghanistan’s eastern Kapisa province yesterday points to a deep-rooted malaise plaguing Nato operations in the country – their deplorable inability of Nato forces to win the confidence of  the local troops. To put it more bluntly, it speaks of the deep mistrust and hostility that exists between Afghan and Nato soliders. Yesterday’s attack shocked Nato with its magnitude. Not only that four soldiers were killed, around 15 others were wounded, prompting Paris to threaten to pull out its forces from Afghanistan. France has almost 4,000 troops in the country as part of the 130,000-strong Nato-led force and French troops mainly patrol Kapisa, a mountainous province near Kabul.

It rarely happens in military history that allies kill allies. But in Afghanistan it has assumed dangerous proportions. According to reports, the number of attacks has been growing, with 26 killings or attempted killings since early 2007 that led to the deaths of 58 foreign personnel.

What makes Afghan soldiers turn their guns on their foreign comrades? Research by a behavioural scientist commissioned by the US military found that US soldiers (and by extension Nato soldiers) enrage their Afghan comrades with their arrogance, bullying and ‘crude behaviour’. Both sides view each other with mutual suspicion and deep mistrust. While American soldiers regard Afghan soldiers as untrustworthy, dishonest, incompetent and with poor hygiene, Afghans find the foreign troops’ behaviour objectionable, like urinating in public, their cursing at, being rude and vulgar, and unnecessarily shooting animals. Other actions which enraged Afghans include the blocking of traffic and  returning fire on insurgents indiscriminately killing civilians.

The US military may or may not agree with this finding, but the recurrence of these incidents gives it credence. At the same time, Afghan officials and Nato have said these shootings are the works of Taliban elements which have infiltrated the Afghan army with the specific purpose of taking revenge on their enemy.

Having to fight an invisible enemy is something the Nato is not prepared for. They need to undertake a thorough re-evaluation of their cooperation with Afghan forces. An independent panel, with equal participation from either side, can conduct an investigation into the causes of these shootings and act on their findings. As the US is planning to withdraw its forces by 2013,  the remaining months need to be used to build confidence, not deepen the mistrust and hostility that already exists. Jimmie Cummings, a spokesman for the Nato-led forces in Kabul, said: “There is no indication that these incidents are linked or part of any larger coordinated effort.”

Then, what are they? We expect definitive answers.