New Zealand's SAS troops in Afghanistan under US control

By MALCOLM BURGESS


SAS troops newly arrived in Afghanistan will take part in combat missions under the control of US forces, say documents leaked from Wellington defence headquarters.

Their activities will include short-duration strikes and other small-scale offensive operations to seize, destroy, capture, recover or inflict damage on designated personnel or material.

They will also engage in raids, ambushes, direct assaults, attacks from the air, ground or sea, guide "precision weaponry", and conduct independent sabotage and "anti-ship" operations.

They will help US forces assess the capabilities, intentions and activities of enemies, secure data on particular areas and engage in post-strike reconnaissance.

Prime Minister Helen Clark confirmed in the first week of April that the unit of up to 50 Special Air Service troops had left the country for Afghanistan, the country's second contingent since the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001.

However, she added no new details to her March 8 announcement that they would carry out direct action and long-range reconnaissance missions during their six-month tour of duty.

Herald requests for more detailed information on the SAS's proposed activities, rules of engagement and chain of command have gone unanswered by Helen Clark's and Defence Minister Mark Burton's offices.

But intelligence researcher Nicky Hager, who last year revealed the details of the SAS's 2002 mission to Afghanistan, says that the unit is likely to perform whatever tasks US commanders give it, with certain limitations applied by the New Zealand Government under their rules of engagement. But these are broad enough for them to be attacking anyone the US commanders tell them is the enemy.

Helen Clark said in March that SAS troops would work with soldiers from other countries but would remain under the command of a senior New Zealand officer, who would ensure the actions of the forces were within the approved rules of engagement.

Defence sources also raised questions about statements in the New Zealand Defence Forces March newsletter which claim that the senior officer has the right to refuse any command that is outside the parameters of the deployment as approved by the New Zealand Government.

The sources say that while New Zealand will retain a formal "command" of the unit, that is discipline and staff matters, US commanders will have the more important "control" of the SAS.

This means the authority to direct forces so that the commander may accomplish specific missions or tasks and the ability to deploy units and to retain or assign tactical control of those units, according to defence documents.

Keith Locke, defence spokesman for the Green Party, is also concerned the SAS's activities in Afghanistan may contribute to the alleged human rights abuses committed by US troops stationed there, as documented in a March report by the international pressure group Human Rights Watch.

He said the Prime Minister's words were an improvement on the Government's previous policy of silence regarding the activities of the SAS. The Government had made advances in saying they were to be going at all.

However, the abuses committed in Afghan detention centres meant handing over prisoners to US forces was problematic for the Greens.

The first time around people weren't fully aware of the treatment of prisoners, he said. For New Zealand to send an SAS contingent knowing any prisoners they took would be handed over to such conditions was worse than last time.

Mr Locke is also concerned the SAS activities could contribute to the deaths of innocent Afghan civilians. He is afraid they will be involved in the bombing of suspected targets solely on the strength of electronic information, such as cellphone co-ordinates.

Helen Clark said the Government decided to announce the second deployment to Afghanistan because it had become impractical to say nothing. During the last mission in 2002, the Government had refused to provide any information on the SAS, even after the injury of three soldiers by a land-mine.

However, details of the SAS activities later emerged on two US websites and early last year Hager published an article exposing the structure and activities of the SAS in the first mission, Operation Concord.