Russia May Fly Military Cargo to Syria: Report------------Defense News

MOSCOW — Russia may decide to fly a controversial military cargo of helicopters and air defense systems to Syria after it abandoned an attempt to ship the material by sea, according to a June 27 report.
The West wants Russia to halt military cooperation with Syria because of the escalating conflict between the Damascus regime and rebels, but Moscow has insisted it cannot break contracts.
A freighter, the Alaed, docked in the Russian Arctic port of Murmansk over the weekend after turning back off the British coast. The ship halted its voyage to Syria to deliver the military cargo when its British insurer dropped coverage.
“The three Mi-25 helicopters and air defense systems could easily be delivered to Syria by air,” a military source, who was not identified, told the Interfax news agency.
“Russia has to fulfill its obligations. But everything will depend on if we can resist pressure from the West, who want us to break military cooperation with Syria,” the source said, adding a decision would be made soon.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has confirmed the Alaed was carrying three attack helicopters Moscow had repaired for Damascus under a previous agreement.
He said last week the cargo also included air defense systems but gave no further details on the type or quantity on board.
Russia delivers a range of limited air defense systems to Syria but reportedly has refused to provide the more advanced S-300 technology that it had previously also failed to give to Iran under Western pressure.
The Vedomosti business daily reported June 26 that Russia this year chose to withhold the S-300 from Syria, despite a $105 million delivery contract being signed by the system’s producer and Damascus in 2011.
Military experts have speculated that the Alaed was carrying the more basic Russian Buk-M2e air defense systems for Syria, whose forces last week shot down a Turkish warplane off the Syrian coast.
In Murmansk, the Alaed’s flag has been changed to a Russian flag from that of the Caribbean island of Curacao.
But Russia has yet to confirm if the ship will now make a repeat attempt to reach the Syrian port of Tartus or travel on to Russia’s Far East port city of Vladivostok as originally planned.

U.S. Pays High Price for Pakistan Route Cut-Off: Admiral

WASHINGTON — Moving supplies to NATO troops in Afghanistan via Central Asia costs three times as much as routes through Pakistan, which Islamabad shut seven months ago in anger, a senior U.S. officer said June 27.
“On the ground, it’s almost three times more expensive to come from the north as it does from Pakistan. More expensive and slower,” said Vice Adm. Mark Harnitchek, director of the Defense Logistics Agency.
NATO now uses an alternative network of northern routes that pass through Russia, Central Asia and the Caucasus.
Transporting a container from the United States to Afghanistan costs about $20,000, he told a group of defense reporters.
But the cost of ferrying cargo to the Pakistani port of Karachi and then over roads to the Afghan border amounts to only a third of that price, he said.
Pakistan imposed a blockade on NATO supply convoys after 24 of its soldiers were killed by mistake in a U.S. air strike in November along the Afghan border.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said earlier this month that the Pakistan border closure costs the United States an additional $100 million a month.
Before the route cut-off, about 30 percent to 40 percent of the fuel used by coalition forces came through Pakistan.
Fuel is now transported over land via the northern routes, while food is flown in on cargo aircraft, he said.
“It was challenging initially and we took a bit of a dip there in terms of days of supply. But now our stocks of food and fuel have never been higher,” Harnitchek said.
The supply routes will be on the agenda when the commander of NATO-led forces in Afghanistan, General John Allen, meets his counterparts in Pakistan on June 27, officials said.
U.S. officials raised expectations in May that a deal was imminent with Pakistan on the reopening of the routes, but no announcement came and Washington withdrew its team of negotiators.
The United States has refused to issue a formal apology over the air strikes, despite appeals from Pakistan.
Amid continued deadlock, the Pentagon on June 27 expressed hope that a deal eventually could be reached on the supply routes.
“I think there is reason for optimism. I think we’re reaching a point in our relationship with Pakistan that suggests that things are settling down a bit,” spokesman George Little told reporters at a Pentagon briefing.
“I think the basis for some kind of agreement on the GLOCs (ground lines of communication) is there and is real and we hope that we reach a resolution,” he said.

Early French Departure is a Mistake---------Defense News

KABUL, Afghanistan — France’s decision to pull its forces out of Afghanistan early has been condemned by an Afghan lawmaker and analysts who called it a “mistake” that would benefit only the Taliban.

Tahira Mojaddidi, a member of parliament from the eastern province of Kapisa where most of the 3,600-strong French contingent is based, said Afghan forces were insufficiently prepared to take on the Taliban on their own.

“We absolutely disagree with the remarks of the French president that he would pull his forces out of Afghanistan by the end of 2013,” she said Jan. 28. “I think this is a mistake because the Afghan forces are not well equipped and well trained in the province of Kapisa.”

Mojaddidi said Afghan forces needed training and equipment.

“Presently the Taliban hold sway in the Tagab district of Kapisa and there are no Afghan forces there. If France leaves in 2013, Kapisa province will fall to the insurgents,” she said.

After meeting Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Paris on Jan. 27, Sarkozy said France had decided to transfer security in Kapisa to Afghan forces from March.

The decision came a week after the killing of four French servicemen by a renegade Afghan soldier there.

“The pursuit of the transition and this gradual transfer of combat responsibilities will allow us to plan for a return of all our combat forces by the end of 2013,” Sarkozy said, adding that 1,000 troops would return in 2012.

“A few hundred” French troops will stay on after 2013 to train Afghan troops, Sarkozy said.

He will also encourage NATO to consider transferring all its combat operations to Afghan forces in 2013, instead of the scheduled deadline of the end of 2014.

Political analyst Wahid Taqat said the decision would be a boost for the Taliban.

“The withdrawal ... will demoralize the other international forces in Afghanistan as well as Afghan forces. Instead of a rushed withdrawal, France should have strengthened their position and forces in Afghanistan,” Taqat said. “It gives a lot of morale to Taliban but demoralizes the Afghan security forces.”

Taqat condemned the move as a capitulation.

“[It makes them look] like a country that is afraid of terrorists. It is a bit shameful for the French,” he said.

“The Taliban will definitely use this as winning propaganda for their future operations in Afghanistan.”

Karzai is on a five-day European trip to sign long-term strategic partnership agreements aimed at bolstering support for Afghanistan’s reconstruction and development.

Political analyst Ahmad Saeedi accused the French of taking a hasty decision following last week’s shooting.

“He was angry and the announcement was made in a rush,” he said. “The only winner in this announcement is Mr. Sarkozy, who has his elections on the way [in April and May], and the Taliban who could use this announcement for their propaganda.”

Sarkozy warned after the attacks that he might accelerate France’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, prompting NATO’s chief to call on contributing nations to remain committed to the security transition.

The United States, Britain, Germany and Italy are the main contributors to the NATO-led force of some 130,000 troops fighting a 10-year insurgency by hard-line Islamist Taliban forces ousted from power after the 9/11 attacks.

A total of 82 French troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the start of their deployment in 2001.

German Parliament Agrees to Reduce Afghan Troops-----------Defense News

BERLIN — German lawmakers voted Jan. 26 to extend the mandate for German forces in Afghanistan by one year but for the first time cut the number of troops to be deployed there.

The maximum number of troops will be set at 4,900 from Feb. 1, down from 5,350 now, while another 500 will be withdrawn by 2013.

“It is clear that the work there is not yet done,” German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said in a statement. “The path to peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan is still long.”

Germany, which has the third biggest NATO-led force in Afghanistan behind the United States and Britain, said at the start of the year that it aimed to begin pulling out its forces, eyeing 2014 for a complete withdrawal.

Opinion polls have shown the mission, the first major Bundeswehr deployment outside of Europe since World War II, has been consistently unpopular in the country.

The NATO-led forces are all due to be withdrawn in 2014.

NATO Russia Missile Defence Confidence deteriorating -----Defense News

BRUSSELS — NATO has made little progress on missile defense cooperation with Russia, possibly jeopardizing a planned summit in May, said NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen.

“Maybe we won’t clarify the situation until a few weeks before the [Chicago] summit,” Rasmussen said Jan. 26 at his monthly press conference.

A summit with Russia is scheduled to take place just before the NATO summit May 20-21.

“If there is no deal, there will probably be no [NATO-Russia] summit,” Rasmussen added.

Asked what he expected to come out of the NATO summit in terms of smart defense, Rasmussen said he hoped NATO would “adopt a political declaration” containing “a political commitment to a number of specific projects.”

It was “premature” to talk about them today, he said, adding that missile defense was “an excellent example of smart defense” with a number of allies providing input, such as hosting radar facilities.

He cited air policing as another example.

“At some stage, we’ll have to decide on a long-term arrangement for air policing in the Baltic countries,” he said. He cited it as a good example “because a number of allies do it on behalf of the Baltic countries so that the Baltic countries can focus on deployable armed forces for international operations.”

In summary, he described smart defense as “a combination of a number of concrete multinational projects and a long-term political vision of how to do business in the future.”

Looking ahead to the Chicago summit, he said, “We must renew our commitment to the vital trans-Atlantic bond” as it is “the best security investment we ever made.”

Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities are an area that NATO is looking into in terms of its smart defense project. According to a NATO official, it is “no coincidence” that NATO officials have been invited to the U.S.’s Schriever space and cyber defense war games in the last week of April, before the Chicago summit.

As to the growing concerns over the Strait of Hormuz, Rasmussen said individual allies are involved in the Iran question but that “NATO as an organization is not.” He urged Iran’s leadership “to live up to its international commitments, including stopping its [uranium] enrichment program and ensuring free navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Referring to his 2011 annual report, Rasmussen said NATO had weakened the insurgency, strengthened Afghan forces and brought enemy attacks down by 9 percent; had conducted a “highly effective operation protecting the civilian population” in Libya; and captured 24 pirate ships off Somalia (half the figure for 2010).

Asked about Libya, he said, “NATO is not present in Libya and has no intention to return.”

USAF to Retire Block 30 Global Hawk

The U.S. Air Force is likely to retire its fleet of Block 30 Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk high-altitude unmanned surveillance aircraft, an industry source confirms, breathing new life into the five-decade-old U-2 program.

On Jan. 24, analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute, Arlington, Va., said the Pentagon is planning to mothball its recently acquired Block 30 Global Hawks, which are designed to collect imagery and signals intelligence. Not only would the Air Force stop building the aircraft, but existing planes in the current inventory would be retired.

The Air Force had been planning to buy 42 Block 30 aircraft. According to 2011 budget documents, the cost of each aircraft was around $215 million. It was not immediately clear how many Global Hawks the Air Force has.

The aircraft is being terminated mainly due to its high cost to buy and maintain, but it has also failed to live up to the promises that the program had originally offered, sources said.A knowledgeable industry source confirmed that the Air Force is killing the program.

“Yes, this is accurate — been a lot of discussion on the possibility of this a long while,” said the source, who was not authorized to speak to the media. “There is a high probability it will come to pass now unless Congress takes a major exception.”

But the industry source said that’s not likely to happen due to budget constraints.

“I don’t think that’s likely in the economic environment of this year’s DoD budget, and there are no real ‘hawks’ in Congress from California,” he said. The aircraft is built is both built and based in California.

A senior Air Force official would neither confirm nor deny that the Pentagon had deleted the Global Hawk from its proposed budget. But “clearly, FY13 is going to be a particularly tough budget year for the DoD,” he said. The official is not authorized to speak to the media.

Northrop Grumman officials could not immediately comment.

The Air Force declined to provide an official comment, other than to say that no budget details will be made available before the budget is released.

If the program is killed, Thompson said the cost of the U.S. Navy’s Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) variant of the Global Hawk could go up, which could render that aircraft unaffordable. There is a proposal to equip the Air Force with the naval variant, he said, but that is unlikely to happen.

The Navy wants to use the BAMS aircraft as a communications relay and maritime surveillance tool with its 360-degree sensors that include radar, an electro-optical/infrared camera, Automatic Identification System receiver and electronic support measures.

One source close to the Air Force said the sensors, data links and other equipment on the Global Hawk are less accurate, and provide less resolution, less range and less collection capability than other intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms, particularly the U-2.

“As for the Global Hawk system’s capabilities, it is good at long-endurance flight with its so-so sensors,” the source said. “They are currently and will continue to be well below par.”

The Global Hawk has never lived up to the Air Force’s original expectations, critics have said.

Even if additional resources were added to the program, “it will never live up to the hype the Military Channel, Aviation Week, etc., have been leading the public to believe,” the source said. “The technology advertised as currently on-board many UAVs is nothing short of science fiction, not mature and won’t be until billions are spent to make it happen.”

Additionally, the Global Hawk doesn’t have the U-2 Optical Bar Camera, which creates 6-foot-long wet-film images of the ground. Congress had barred the Air Force from retiring the U-2 until all of that aircraft’s capabilities are replaced.

The Global Hawk is also far less reliable than the Air Force had hoped, he said. The aircraft “spends most of its time hiding in its hangar broke.”

The fate of the Block 40 Global Hawk, which is equipped with the Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program (MP-RTIP) radar, is not clear. The MP-RTIP is a powerful ground surveillance radar designed to create photo-quality imagery of the Earth’s surface and overlay moving ground targets over those.

Nor is it clear if NATO’s proposed buy of five modified MP-RTIP-equipped Global Hawks for its Alliance Ground Surveillance program or if Germany’s EuroHawk program will be affected.

The demise of the Global Hawk means that the U-2 has a new lease on life. Thompson said the venerable aircraft will now remain in service till at least 2023.

Pakistan Responds Harsh to NATO strike

ISLAMABAD — While the Pakistani military is in no mood to quietly return to full cooperation with NATO/ISAF forces in the aftermath of the Nov. 25-26 attacks on Pakistani border posts, a “restart” in the Pak-U.S relationship is still possible, experts said.

Brian Cloughley, former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad, said the Pakistani military — specifically the Army — does not want to settle for a low-key response from the U.S.

“The Army doesn’t want a ‘quiet’ acknowledgement. What it wants is a proper apology — publicly,” he said.

The Army is united in this opinion, and if a public apology is not forthcoming the considerable ill-will directed toward the U.S. will continue, “and there will be continuing lack of cooperation.”

The Pakistani response to the Jan. 23 NATO/ISAF report into the attacks, which killed 24 Pakistani troops, was predictable, he said.

The accompanying Inter Services Press Release (ISPR) statement says Pakistan disagrees with “several portions and findings” of the NATO/ISAF report, which are deemed to be “factually not correct.”

The basis of the NATO/ISAF report, “self defense” and “proportional use of force,” is rejected as “contrary to facts.”

The ISPR statement reiterates Pakistan contacted NATO/ISAF forces “within minutes of initiation of US/NATO fire,” and rejects attributing partial responsibility for the attacks to Pakistani forces as “unjustified and unacceptable.”

It also states, “The fundamental cause of the incident of 26th November 2011 was the failure of US/ISAF to share its near-border operation with Pakistan at any level.”

In addition, it lists “the complicated chain of command, complex command and control structure and unimaginative/intricate Rules of Engagement, as well as lack of unified military command in Afghanistan,” as further causes of the attacks.

It ends by stating NATO/ISAF forces “violated all mutually agreed procedures with Pakistan for near-border operations put in place to avert such uncalled for actions,” and reiterates the attacks were an “unprovoked engagement” that took place inside Pakistan and were therefore a violation of NATO/ISAF’s mandate.

Zafar Nawaz Jaspal, associate professor at the school of Politics and International Relations at Islamabad’s Quaid-e-Azam University, said Pakistan’s response to the NATO/ISAF report has tried to prove what has already been stated by the Pakistani side, and that there “doesn’t seem to be a desire to let this go.”

It details that NATO/ISAF forces had carried out previous operations in the vicinity and were fully aware of the course of the border and location of Pakistani positions. It also says that some operations on the Afghan side of the border were undertaken by NATO/ISAF forces in support of Pakistani anti-Taliban operations on its side of the border.

Using photographs and aerial images to reinforce its assertions, the Pakistan statement also rejects claims NATO/ISAF forces were fired upon by the Pakistani posts. It specifically criticizes the NATO/ISAF report’s mandate, which did not include affixing direct responsibility for the attacks, and that it implied “Pakistan was considered in an adversarial role.”

Lt. Col. Jimmie Cummings, ISAF spokesman, was unable to comment on the Pakistani response and referred questions to CENTCOM as the investigative report into the attacks was carried out by CENTCOM, not ISAF.

He said ISAF was only able to comment on “the recommendations that CENTCOM made in the original report.”

“The recommendations in the CENTCOM report are designed to work toward building a positive relationship and constructive cross-border coordination measures to ensure this type of incident does not ever occur again. US and ISAF are taking these recommendations and are moving forward toward full implementation,” he said.

No response was forthcoming from CENTCOM, however, or from the defense section at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad.

Jaspal is optimistic there is a chance for the Pak-U.S. relationship to be “restarted,” but “not as it was previously” “There won’t be a ‘blank check’ as there was previously; there will restrictions,” he said.

The main factor is the ongoing block on NATO supplies transiting Pakistani territory.

“The Pakistan supply route will probably remain closed, and the northern routes will continue to be used and expanded, if possible,” said Cloughley. “There is already a mammoth increase in air supply. The costs are horrific.”

Poland spent Around half a Billion on Afghan Missions

WARSAW — Poland spent 2.02 billion zloty ($606 million) on arms for its military mission in Afghanistan from 2007 to 2011, Jacek Sonta, the spokesman for the Ministry of Defense, said in a statement.

Poland spent the most in 2010 at 925.6 million zloty for new gear, and the least in 2008, at 125.5 million zloty, the spokesman said.

Since April 2007, when the country increased its military presence in Afghanistan from 150 to 1,200 troops, the Polish Ministry of Defense has launched a series of arms procurement programs, dubbed “the Afghan package.”

The purchases include 8,400 assault rifles, radio communication systems, 10 Israeli-made UAVs, C4ISR systems, five Russian-built Mi-17 transport helicopters and a wide range of munitions.

A significant portion of Poland’s 380 Rosomak armored modular vehicles was also deployed to Afghanistan. The eight-wheel-drive Rosomak is made by Polish state-owned manufacturer Wojskowe Zaklady Mechaniczne Siemianowice under a license from Finland’s Patria.

In 2009, Poland’s military took over responsibility for the troubled Afghan province of Ghazni. A year later, the Polish force in Afghanistan was increased to 2,600 soldiers, making it the fifth-largest among NATO states present in the country.

Poland plans to withdraw all combat troops from Afghan soil by the end of 2014 along with the remaining NATO forces. Over the past five years, 37 Polish soldiers were killed while on duty in Afghanistan.

Cherming eyes growth in Mid East and Asia

LONDON — British-based Chemring, which produces munitions countermeasures, managed to grow its non-NATO business on the back of a huge rise in munitions sales in the Middle East and Asia, the company announced as it rolled out 2011 results on Jan. 24.

With austerity measures reducing defense spending across the alliance, Chemring said it is succeeding in building its non-NATO order book, but the downturn is threatening further rationalization in its key U.S. business, the company said.

Companies’ abilities to grow their businesses outside of depressed North American and European markets will likely be a growing theme as they turn to burgeoning spending in South America, the Middle East and Asia.

“The continuing problems of the Eurozone and the impact of possible sequestration in the U.S. indicate that our traditional markets will not be any easier this year. We continue to pursue our policy of reducing our dependence on these markets,” Chemring chairman Peter Hickson said in a statement.

Chemring reckons there will be a boom in the South Asia market until at least 2015 and says the major economies in South America will see defense budgets grow between 6 and 16 percent a year. The Middle East will see a 3.5 percent rise in defense budgets until 2015, Chemring said

“It’s encouraging to note that 44 percent of today’s order book emanates from non-NATO markets, compared with 33 percent at the same time last year,” Hickson said.

Overall, the company-reported revenues rose 25 percent to 745 million pounds ($1.16 billion). Non-NATO revenues rose 81 percent to 29 percent of total revenue compared with 20 percent in the previous year. Organic growth accounted for 9 percent of the total revenue growth.

Underlying profit before tax was up 6 percent to 125 million pounds ($194 million) even though the company reported pressure on margins across all of its business sectors.

It wasn’t all good news in the non-NATO markets, though. Chemring had to rely on a 216 percent rise in munitions sales to the Middle East and Far East to achieve its figures with countermeasures and pyrotechnics, both registering hefty reductions across the regions.

The company said it is looking to form a countermeasures joint venture in Saudi Arabia later this year and is looking for a similar arrangement in Brazil in a non-specified sector.

The picture is not so positive in its principal market. Chemring said it is looking at further possible rationalization of its business in the U.S.

The company closed an Alloy Surfaces countermeasures plant in the U.S. last year with the loss of 120 jobs and said it was reviewing further site rationalization at Alloy and Niitek, its strong growing counter-IED business.

Chemring was hard hit by a 31 percent slump in helicopter and transport-aircraft flares demand from NATO nations. The reduction was more severe than anticipated, said the company.

The U.S. markets accounted for 43 percent of Chemring revenues last year.

France considers Afghan pull out after Troop loss

PARIS — President Nicolas Sarkozy warned Jan. 20 he may accelerate the French withdrawal from Afghanistan after an Afghan soldier shot dead four unarmed French troops during a sports session inside a base.

Sarkozy suspended French military training and joint combat operations and dispatched Defence Minister Gerard Longuet to probe Friday’s attack in which at least 15 French soldiers were wounded, eight seriously.

“The French army stands alongside its allies but we cannot accept that a single one of our soldiers be wounded or killed by our allies, it’s unacceptable,” Sarkozy said.

“If security conditions are not clearly established, then the question of an early return of the French army will be asked,” he said.

A security source said the shooting happened as “the French were just finishing their sports session” at the Gwam base.

“The soldiers were not protected. They could not defend themselves. He fired at the group. Then they neutralized him,” the source said.

Longuet described the attack as “murder.”

“They were not armed, they were literally murdered by an Afghan soldier. We don’t yet know if it was a Taliban who infiltrated or if it was someone who decided to act for reasons as yet unknown,” Longuet said.

Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said France would await a report from Longuet and military chief of staff Admiral Edouard Guillaud on their return from Afghanistan before taking any decision on an early pull-out.

“Their main task will be to establish the circumstances and responsibilities of this tragedy and then report to the French government what measures the Afghan authorities promise to undertake to sort out Afghan army recruitment and ensure the French contingent’s security,” Juppe said.

“Based on this report, the president and the government will decide whether the security conditions are credible.

“If this is not the case, we will draw the conclusions... including the acceleration of a complete withdrawal of our contingent set for the end of 2013,” Juppe said.

France has about 3,600 soldiers serving in the country, mainly in the provinces of Kabul and Kapisa, the scene of Friday’s shooting.

Their deployment is deeply unpopular in France, and Sarkozy is facing a tough reelection battle in less than three months.

French troops have fanned out around their base in the eastern province and are not allowing any Afghan soldiers to approach, a security source told AFP. The French force currently in Afghanistan will be reduced to 3,000 by late 2012, with 200 due to leave in March. NATO is due to hand security over to Afghan forces before withdrawing all its combat troops by the end of 2014.

Training Afghan forces and accompanying them into battle against rebels is the core of the French mission within the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan, the force having already scaled down its own operations.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai sent his condolences to the French people over the deaths, saying relations between the two countries had “always been based on honesty, which makes Afghans happy.”

“The president is saddened at the incident and expresses his deep sympathy and condolences to the president and people of France and the victims’ families,” his office said in a statement.

NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen also expressed his condolences, but insisted the attack was isolated.

“This is a sad day for our troops in Afghanistan and the French people,” Rasmussen told reporters during a visit to NATO ally Latvia.

“I would like to express my condolences for the four French soldiers who were killed today and my sympathy to those who were wounded,” he said, warning against seeing a new trend of attacks from renegade Afghan troops.

“Such tragic incidents are terrible and grab headlines but they are isolated,” he said, noting that 130,000 NATO-led international forces are still serving alongside more than 300,000 Afghans.

The latest deaths brought to 82 the number of French soldiers killed in Afghanistan since French forces deployed there at the end of 2001.

Suicide attacks, roadside bombs and insurgent attacks had a heavy toll on French troops in 2011. A total of 26 were killed, the most in a single year during the 10-year war.

The shooting was the latest in a string of incidents of Afghan soldiers turning their weapons on members of the foreign force fighting an insurgency by hardline Taliban Islamists.

Last month, two soldiers of the French Foreign Legion serving in Afghanistan were shot dead by a man wearing an Afghan army uniform during a mission in Kapisa, site of the main French base in Afghanistan.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for that attack.

In April last year eight U.S. soldiers were killed in a shooting at a military airport in Kabul, but a Pentagon report this month said the killings were the actions of a disturbed Afghan military officer who acted alone.

While some attacks have been claimed by the Taliban, others have been put down to arguments or personal animosity between soldiers from the two forces serving together.

NATO warns Russia on Military build up

VILNIUS — NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen urged Russia on Jan. 19 to refrain from building up its military near the alliance’s borders, saying it was a concern.

Rasmussen questioned Russian moves to bolster its forces in its Kaliningrad territory, which borders NATO members Lithuania and Poland, part of Moscow’s Cold War-era stamping ground.

“These Russian statements are, of course, a matter of concern for NATO allies,” Rasmussen said. “It is a complete waste of Russian financial resources because it is a buildup of offensive military capacities directed against an artificial enemy, an enemy that doesn’t exist.

“NATO has no intention whatsoever to attack Russia,” he added, speaking alongside Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite.

Moscow has warned that it plans to deploy Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad, and earlier this month, Russian media reported that an S-400 Triumph anti-aircraft missile system would go into service there in April.

Russia repeatedly has said it will be forced to take additional measures if it fails to agree with NATO on a missile defense shield.

The U.S. insists a shield is needed against potential threats from Iran, but Russia counters that anti-missile facilities planned in Poland would undermine its own security.

Rasmussen said it was time for a reality check.

“It doesn’t make sense to build up offensive military capacities in the Kaliningrad region,” he said. “I would encourage the Russians to face a new reality. We are not enemies. We are not adversaries. We should be partners, and it would be of mutual benefit if we develop peaceful cooperation.”

Lithuania and fellow Baltic states Estonia and Latvia are nervous about Russian military moves. They won independence in 1991 after five decades of Soviet rule, joined NATO and the EU in 2004, and have strained relations with Moscow.

“Russian actions do not increase trust between NATO and Russia,” Grybauskaite said. “We invite Russia to be open for dialogue, to see new threats and realities, and to seek smart defense.”

With a population of 6.3 million and professional forces of 20,500, the Baltic states lack enough fighter planes to police their skies. Other NATO members therefore take turns doing so, from a base in Lithuania.

Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia want to extend the air patrol accord, which expires in 2014. Rasmussen said he was hopeful NATO’s upcoming summit in Chicago would approve a “long-term arrangement.”