Nick Harvey MP

Visiting the front line in Afghanistan

Last week I made a short and eventful visit to Afghanistan. Having debated the battles in Afghanistan many times it was very helpful to see things with my own eyes. In many ways it was harrowing, and seeing what our troops do in 50? C was truly humbling.

The national media reported that Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg had come under rocket attack, but made no mention of me or the rest of our visiting party. I realised that I'd only have got a mention if I'd come a cropper, so in the circumstances I will settle for anonymity!

Some of our young men were setting out on six hour foot patrols with 40 kg armour and 40 kg backpacks of specialist equipment. I asked one his body weight and he replied "80 kg sir". He was lifting his own bodyweight and embarking on a six hour patrol in 50?!

Others were stripped to the waist climbing in and out of armoured vehicles, anything up to 30 years past their sell-by date, trying to breathe more life into them.

But what came through loud and clear was that all of them believe in what they are doing and sincerely believe that Britain's national interest is being served through their efforts. I can only hope that people back home appreciate this.

In Kabul we met Afghan ministers and MPs, and visited aid and development workers. The MPs were downbeat: they said the security situation has worsened in the last eighteen months. One said that for a period last year he couldn't return to his constituency for six months.

I asked whether they thought President Karzai will be re-elected next year, and the almost universal response was a shrug of the shoulders and "who cares?"

Ministers were generally more positive, and very grateful that British aid is channelled through the World Bank for the Afghans to use on projects they see as a priority. Too many western nations want to specify how money is used and send it with too many strings attached. This is not nation-building and it doesn't help develop the Afghans' own capacity.

The defence minister was very optimistic about progress in building an Afghanistan National Army - now 80,000 strong. The west is investing heavily in it, and the MPs spoke positively about it, but less so about the police.

The international community has struggled to find enough spare police to send out to train Afghans, The force is perceived as riddled with corruption. Part of the trouble is that the police largely operate in their own areas where they know the tribal powers, whereas the army is more professionalised and gets sent all over the country.

Britain's colourful Ambassador kindly hosted a gathering of Kabul's diplomats in our honour, and we were able to hear first hand the differing approaches our allies take. The Americans are itching to spray the poppy crop - as they have in Columbia - but we, as the lead nation on counter-narcotics, oppose this as it would wipe out the livelihoods of many subsistence farmers. Our emphasis is on long term development work to offer farmers alternative crops. Interestingly, last year's huge poppy crop has dented its price, whereas the world shortage of wheat now makes that more attractive.

And in Helmand it was clear that the entire approach of British forces is founded on a deep commitment to helping Afghans develop and build - everything we do seeks to tie in the local leadership and communities. I was deeply impressed at how thoughtful, intelligent and far-sighted our people are, and how clearly they keep their eye on the long term impact of absolutely everything they do. Force is used sparingly.

Even when building military installations they incorporate into their thinking the "legacy" these will leave to the Afghans. The magnificent field hospital at Camp Bastion would put most NHS hospitals to shame. This is an admirable investment in our forces' welfare but is already helping locals too - and should do for decades to come.

The Paras, back after two years, told me they could see real progress since their last visit, and believe that if they are sent back in two years time there will be yet more to observe.

But after we emerged from our rocket attack, I realised that one day the Taleban may get lucky and hit something big.

How ready is British public opinion to cope with a major setback? Do people understand what we are doing in Afghanistan? I believe the public was rather sold the idea in 2001of "going in, hitting the Taleban, building a few bridges, and it will all be over by Christmas".

Too many people conflate our action there with our illegal and disastrous invasion of Iraq. The two are vastly different: the action in Afghanistan was sanctioned by the UN and therefore legal, commanded widespread international support, had a clear and justifiable purpose - to deny Al Queda its operating base - and continues to be supported by a clear majority of Afghan people.

Iraq by contrast was not sanctioned by the UN and was therefore illegal, enjoyed virtually no international support, rode roughshod over the UN's authority, had no justifiable purpose (other than ousting a monster, and we leave plenty of them in power elsewhere). And the overwhelming majority of Iraqis want us out.

Getting out of Iraq is a pre-requisite for winning British public support for a long haul in Afghanistan. The reality is that stabilising and rebuilding Afghanistan, reclaiming its place in the community of nations - let alone restoring its position in the 1960s and early 1970s, exporting cotton, almonds and dried fruit to world markets - will take at least 25 or 30 years.

But the alternative is that Al Queda will reclaim it as their international base. And they showed on 9/11 their ability to hit the West.

We need other NATO members and the international community to pull more weight, but we really have no choice but to see this through.