‘Courageous Restraint’ Questioned
Posted on Jul 11, 2010
“Courageous restraint,” or stringent restrictions on engaging the enemy that were implemented to cut down civilian casualties in Afghanistan, is under fire by Britain’s top general there after soldiers complained against the perceived inflexibility of the protocol.
To put these criticisms into context, June was the deadliest month in Afghanistan for NATO troops since they arrived back in 2001, with many soldiers believing they have not been given the freedom to properly engage those they see as the enemy.—JCL
The Daily Telegraph:
Soldiers and Royal Marines told The Daily Telegraph last week that their lives were being endangered by the policy of “courageous restraint” introduced by Gen Stanley McChrystal to cut down the number of civilian casualties.
In an interview with the Telegraph, Lt Gen Sir Nick Parker said troops in more dangerous areas should be able to use “all the tools at their disposal”.
Last month was the bloodiest since Nato troops entered Afghanistan in 2001, and it is understood that soldiers will be given more flexibility in using lethal force to defend themselves after some complained they were fighting with “one hand tied behind our backs”.
“In some areas we have over-corrected and we have to absolutely make sure we bring that gently back into line,” said the Deputy Commander ISAF (International Security Assistance Force).
AP / Rafiq Maqool
British marines march into Kabul, Afghanistan, in 2006.