HC Deb 16 May 2002 vol 385 cc921-34 1.14 pm
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)

I should like to bring the House up to date on recent developments in Afghanistan.

On Monday, taskforce Jacana—the force based around 45 Commando Group, Royal Marines —completed the first major operation in Afghanistan, Operation Snipe, but before I report on what Operation Snipe has achieved, I should say a few words about the medical situation at Bagram air base.

Over the past three days, 18 military personnel serving with 34 field hospital at Bagram air base have been taken ill with an unidentified feverish illness. The precise nature of the illness is not yet known and medical tests are being urgently conducted to isolate the cause. The symptoms are consistent with enteric febrile illness and the illness appears to be contagious.

Two people are very seriously ill, but fortunately their conditions have stabilised overnight. One has been returned to the United Kingdom for treatment and the other has been evacuated to a United States hospital in Germany. One other person remains seriously ill. He is being cared for by the remaining medical staff at Bagram. This patient and five others are scheduled for aeromedical evacuation to the UK today for further treatment and convalescence. Six other patients are under close medical supervision at 34 field hospital. Four patients have already been discharged.

In response to the outbreak, a number of actions have been taken. As a precaution, the field hospital has been closed to all but similarly infected patients, and strict barrier nursing protocols have been implemented. The occupants of the tent in which the disease first appeared have been placed under quarantine. Fresh rations are no longer being supplied; only operational ration packs are being used. An environmental health officer and his team have been deployed to Bagram, and an infection control nurse has been deployed from the United Kingdom. A consultant in infectious diseases is to be deployed as soon as possible.

Advice has been sought from the consultant adviser in communicable disease control, who in turn has consulted other national experts. An epidemiological study has commenced to investigate the origins of the infection and the pattern of its spread. A consultant physician, an anaesthetist and two intensive care unit nurses have been deployed to reinforce 34 field hospital. In the interim, the German hospital based in Kabul will provide hospital cover for British troops based in Afghanistan.

The situation is clearly very serious. We are, however, encouraged that there have been no new cases over the past 22 hours. We will keep the House informed of further significant developments, as appropriate. I know that all right hon. and hon. Members will join me in wishing all those who have been taken ill a full and rapid recovery.

I should also like to take this opportunity to bring the House up to date on the international security assistance force in Kabul. ISAF has been doing excellent work under British leadership. On 29 April I told the House of Turkey's decision to take over as lead nation. On 7 May, Turkish Foreign Minister Cem wrote to the United Nations Secretary-General to confirm this. We are now discussing the final details of the leadership transfer and are working towards achieving that by the end of June.

On 9 and 10 May, Turkish and UK authorities co-hosted an ISAF force generation conference in Ankara, focusing on the next phase of the deployment. Twenty-six nations made offers covering almost all the force requirements. These nations are now making their final assessments of what capabilities they might be able to contribute. That includes the United Kingdom. It is too soon to say what will be the likely size of our future contribution to ISAF, but it will be a considerably smaller contribution than the number of UK personnel who are now deployed with that force. I am confident that, under Turkish leadership, ISAF will remain the well-balanced and capable force that it is today. I congratulate Turkey on its decision.

I turn now to Operation Snipe. The House should recall the context of the overall objectives of our action in Afghanistan, which we set out in detail when military action began. These are to bring Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders to justice; to prevent Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda network from posing a continuing terrorist threat; to ensure that Afghanistan ceases to harbour and sustain international terrorism; and to effect a sufficient change in the leadership to ensure that Afghanistan's links to international terrorism are broken.

Those objectives still hold and have been substantially achieved. The Taliban have been removed from power and replaced by the Interim Administration under Hamid Karzai. He is moving Afghanistan along the road towards the Loya Jirga, which will shape the Government of Afghanistan for the next stage of their constitutional development.

We have gone a long way towards ensuring that Afghanistan ceases to harbour and sustain international terrorism, and we have made progress towards preventing al-Qaeda from posing a continuing terrorist threat elsewhere, but these objectives have not yet been fully secured. Previous offensive operations, including the US-led Operation Anaconda, did real damage to al-Qaeda and Taliban forces, which have been effectively destroyed as dominant organised forces in Afghanistan.

But al-Qaeda and the Taliban have not completely disappeared. The terrorists have not been finally defeated. Elements of these organisations continue to pose a threat inside Afghanistan. The enemy still exists. We need to keep up the pressure and prevent them from re-establishing themselves in Afghanistan. We have good evidence that small groups of terrorist forces continue to prepare for and conduct operations and to attack opportunity targets. In recent weeks there have been a number of—fortunately ineffectual—attacks against coalition bases throughout Afghanistan. Left to regroup, these terrorists would easily pose a direct threat—even, ultimately, to the people of the United Kingdom.

That is why ISAF has been deployed to Kabul, to help the Interim Administration to maintain security in these difficult early days. That is why, with allies, we continue to work with the Interim Administration on wider security sector reform, to ensure that the Afghan people are able to take on the responsibility for the long-term security of their country.

It is also why there is a continuing need to prosecute offensive operations against al-Qaeda. It is why, in March, we deployed the 1,700 strong group formed around 45 Commando, Royal Marines, to Afghanistan to play its part, with other coalition forces, in countering the threat from al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants. And that is why these Royal Marines carried out Operation Ptarmigan, from 13 to 18 April, and Operation Snipe, from 1 to 13 May.

The decision to deploy the Royal Marines on Operation Snipe was taken on the basis of clear military advice. As the Chief of the Defence Staff has set out, its strategic objective was to ensure that al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants were not able to regroup and launch new offensives against the Interim Administration or coalition forces. This is even more important as the country moves towards the Loya Jirga.

Operation Snipe's objectives were to search the area of operations, 220 sq km of land, for terrorists and terrorist infrastructure—the caves and bunker complexes, the arms caches, and supply dumps—and, when found, to destroy them. Had the Royal Marines encountered any terrorist groups, they would have dealt with them. The area of operations for Operation Snipe was chosen carefully as part of a wider coalition plan to deny space in Afghanistan to the terrorists. The area was chosen specifically because we knew it was where terrorist forces had operated, and where they were still capable of operating. It was chosen because it was somewhere that coalition forces had not previously operated.

This was a major operation, the largest offensive ground operation UK forces have undertaken since the Gulf conflict. In all, around a thousand personnel were involved—mostly drawn from 45 Commando, Royal Marines, ably supported by 3 Commando Brigade's brigade reconnaissance force; the 105 mm guns of 7 Battery, 29 Commando Regiment; 59 Independent Commando Squadron, Royal Engineers; the Commando Logistics Regiment; and Chinook helicopters from 27 Squadron.

This was a powerful, balanced, and capable force operating in close co-operation with other coalition forces. They worked closely with the Afghans, who provided guides, and also with American forces. They came under the local command and control of the United States 10 Mountain Division. US forces also provided helicopter support and, had it been required, were ready to provide close air support, a divisional reserve in the event of serious opposition, and medical support in the event of casualties.

The Royal Marines who deployed on Operation Snipe displayed the skill and professionalism that we have come to expect. Once again, they proved just how fortunate we are to possess forces of such high quality. They scoured terrain as rugged as any in the world, at extremely high altitudes—between 8,000 and 13,000 ft above sea level for two weeks.

The success of Operation Snipe should not be measured by the number of dead al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters. No terrorists were killed or detained by the Royal Marines. There were no close contacts with the enemy, but to say this means that somehow the operation was a failure or a waste of time, as some have suggested, is quite wrong.

One obvious and tangible proof of the operation's success was the destruction of a massive arms cache. The Royal Marines found 2,300 rocket-propelled grenades, 1,200 mortar rounds of varying calibre, 200 land mines, and 30,000 other types of munitions ranging from heavy machine gun bullets to 155 mm artillery shells, spread over 10 caves, bunkers and other sites. Other than a small quantity of bullets and mortar rounds that were transferred to the new Afghan national army, this has all been destroyed. That means that Afghanistan is a safer place, as a direct result of Operation Snipe. The cache belonged to al-Qaeda or the Taliban, not to a local warlord. The types of munitions found, the fact that the area is one where we know that terrorists have operated in the past, and the location of the weapons and munitions at a point where the territories of three rival warlords intersect all indicate that they belonged to terrorists.

But it was not just the discovery of those weapons that made Operation Snipe a success. Two hundred and twenty sq km of land that provided a safe haven for terrorists has been checked and cleared for the first time in this campaign. Also, taskforce Jacana gained valuable intelligence, which is still being assessed. Moreover, al-Qaeda and Taliban members have been prevented from carrying out offensive operations from the areas covered by Operations Ptarmigan and Snipe. That is particularly important at a time when the country is moving towards the Loya Jirga. I ask the House to bear it in mind that the direct distance from Khost to Kabul is just under 100 miles. Operation Snipe there fore achieved its objectives.

There are those who may have been disappointed that there were no contacts with the enemy. Certainly, some Royal Marines were frustrated by that, but that does not detract from what they have achieved. Clearing country like this is hard, slow, difficult and dangerous work. It is not glamorous, nor is it spectacular, but it played, and continues to play, an important part in denying a large area of Afghanistan to the remnants of al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

On 16 October last year, when some were questioning the shape of the military campaign, I explained to the House that what was in prospect in Afghanistan was not a classical military campaign—because we were not, and are not, facing a standing army—so the phasing, tempo, and scale of operations differed from what would be used against a conventional opponent. That remains the case. One of the lessons of unconventional campaigns of the past is that ultimate success depends on action on many fronts—political, social and economic, as well as military—and cannot be measured in days. At the military level, comparable campaigns have been marked not by pitched battles, but by prolonged periods of patient, painstaking patrolling and information gathering. At times, direct offensive action may be required—Operation Anaconda was an example of such action—but that tends to be the exception, rather than the norm.

Operation Snipe must be seen in the context of a developing pattern of operations. Those operations will be intelligence-led and will vary in scale and intensity. Brigadier Lane, the commander of taskforce Jacana, was right when he said that offensive operations like Operation Snipe were drawing to an end. Taskforce Jacana is now in a period of recovery and preparation for further operations. The House would not expect me to set out where or when those operations will take place. They may look rather different from Operation Snipe— sometimes there may be no visible activity—but they will all be focused on the destruction of the terrorist infrastructure and, where terrorist groups are encountered, of the terrorists themselves. By conducting such operations, we will seek to ensure that al-Qaeda and Taliban remnants cannot regroup in a way that allows them to launch operations to undermine the stability of Afghanistan or to disrupt the emergency Loya Jirga—or, indeed, to threaten lives elsewhere.

To ensure that we are able to carry out continuing operations, we are announcing today the compulsory call-out of medical reserves. Five anaesthetists and two surgeons will be called out in mid-June for deployment in early July, and a further four surgeons will be called out in mid-July for deployment in early August. The period of call-out will be three months —they will then be replaced by others. Reservists play an increasingly important part in current operations. Those personnel will provide essential medical support to operations.

Ultimately, the future of Afghanistan is a matter for the Afghan people. It is their right, and ultimately their responsibility, to govern themselves in a society free of oppression or the malign influence of terrorists. We shall continue to support the Afghan people as they begin the long process of restoring the stability and prosperity of their country.

Mr. Bernard Jenkin (North Essex)

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and I am grateful for sight of it in advance.

I shall not dwell at length on the outbreak of illness among personnel attached to 34 field hospital, but I entirely echo the sentiments expressed by the Secretary of State and his concern for those infected and for their families. We wish them a speedy recovery, and I am sure that the Secretary of State will do everything that can be done to assist them. There will inevitably be questions to answer about the cause of the outbreak. For example, is there any connection between this outbreak and the soldier who contracted something similar two weeks ago? Could a local person who was being treated in our hospital have brought in the infection?

Although the Army takes pride in lightly equipped deployments, as they extend from weeks to months are we cutting corners and adding to health risks by refusing to replace trench latrines and basic washing facilities with portakabins containing proper showers and flushing toilets? The contrast between our operations in Kabul and those of other nations brought that matter to light when I was there a month ago.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that an inquiry will be undertaken into the outbreak, and that it should not rule out any possible source of the infection? I look forward to its conclusions.

Is not the compulsory call-out of Territorial Army medical staff a good reminder of the valuable role that the TA plays in our armed forces?

The statement has much greater import, too; I suspect that the Secretary of State felt the need to make it so as to respond to the chorus of media disenchantment with recent operations in Afghanistan. Many commentators share the palpable frustration of the Royal Marines, to which the Secretary of State referred, because they did not get the engagements with the enemy that we had been led to expect. However, I agree with the Secretary of State and the Government that that does not mean that Operations Ptarmigan and Snipe have been a waste of time.

In the areas at the heart of al-Qaeda's state within the state, those operations have denied the ground to al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Is not al-Qaeda dispersed and disrupted a much better prospect than al-Qaeda massing to destabilise the new Government in Kabul? Is that not a success? The terrorists ran away from the British Royal Marines, whereas previously they felt able to stand and fight. Is that not a testament to the fearsome reputation for bravery and professionalism of our Royal Marines? We should congratulate all those in taskforce Jacana on a job well done.

What now? Where does the war on terrorism go from here? The Secretary of State referred to the continuing need to prosecute offensive operations. He said that we were not considering a classical military campaign and stressed the need for better intelligence. He mentioned the varying scale and intensity of operations, and said that there was sometimes no visible activity. He described the focus on terrorist infrastructure and the disruption of the terrorists' ability to operate. Is that not a description of what is becoming a classic counter-insurgency war? Is not better intelligence the key to successful operations?

What is the Secretary of State's assessment of the strength, capabilities and current activities of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, and especially in Pakistan and elsewhere? It is obvious that its members are not simply hiding in Afghanistan; they have fled. What is his latest assessment of the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden? As the right hon. Gentleman reminded us, his capture was the Government's stated objective at the outset. Where does all that leave our future commitment?

What relationship will the United Kingdom and ISAF have with the new permanent American headquarters, which is being set up with 500 staff at Bagram? That signals a long-term United States commitment to Operation Enduring Freedom. What is our commitment? What is its duration? What progress is being made on training an indigenous Afghan army? It has been said that Afghanistan needs an army of 60,000.

The Secretary of State referred to action on many fronts—political, social and economic. What further military and other activities will the UK undertake to continue what the Government have started—the stabilisation of the Government of Afghanistan? I remind the right hon. Gentleman of the frustration that the British military expressed when I was in Kabul last month. They said that it was often hard and complicated to use British aid money to fulfil projects such as getting the electricity back on or repairing the water supplies. Those are projects for the population among whom our soldiers have to live and work. We promised so much that any failure to deliver may make them a focus for frustration and ultimately a target for public disappointment and protests.

We welcome the fact that Turkey will take over the leadership of ISAF, but when will the Government make a clear statement about the way in which a military civil aid programme will be delivered? All we hear is that the Secretary of State for International Development is reluctant to co-operate with projects led by the military—and that the problem is not that she cannot help, but that she will not help.

Is the Secretary of State aware that many of our soldiers feel a bit used because of the involvement in what might be called "eye-catching initiatives", while small sums are denied for less glamorous projects that could make a big practical difference to the people whom the British armed forces are there to help? Will he explain to the House how this frustration can be resolved? The lessons of previous successful counter-insurgency operations in Kenya, Malaya, Borneo and Oman teach us the need to win over the hearts and minds of the indigenous population. If that is the road that the Government are choosing to go down, that is the task that we must put at the top of the agenda.

Mr. Hoon

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his thoughtful and considered comments on the medical outbreak at Bagram. I know that his good wishes will be well received by the people affected and by their families. I assure him that, as I said in my statement, a determined effort will be made to identify the cause of the outbreak. Obviously, we need to understand its cause to ensure that no similar outbreak can occur again.

I agree with the hon. Gentleman about the invaluable role played by the Territorial Army; that is a subject to which we are likely to return shortly. I want to emphasise the commitment that the Government give to reservists of all kinds, and how much we appreciate the efforts that they make.

The key to the general military operation is certainly intelligence. The extent of al-Qaeda and Taliban activity, particularly along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, continues to cause concern. Any future operation will be specifically directed towards dealing with the ability of terrorists to operate freely in that area. I can confirm that Osama bin Laden and the leadership of al-Qaeda and the Taliban continue to be targets for our operations.

I am not in a position to be able to answer directly the hon. Gentleman's question about the duration of the commitment; I am sure that he did not expect a specific answer. All I can say is that we have a continuing responsibility to prosecute offensive operations against those who would seek to destabilise not only Afghanistan but the peace and security of the world, and we will ensure that ours is an appropriate contribution.

As for the other activities being pursued right across government, there is a significant aid programme and we have pledged economic support to the Interim Administration, policing training is being provided by Germany, and we are involved in an extensive programme of military training—although the United States is firmly in the lead there. There is, therefore, a determined joined-up effort right across government to ensure that there will be a reconstructed Afghanistan. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept, however, that the key to this lies with the Afghans themselves, which is why it is so important to give such strong support to the Loya Jirga and to the process of rebuilding the Government and the Administration of that country.

If I may say so, I think that the hon. Gentleman was unfair to the Department for International Development and inaccurate in his comments about the co-operation between the Ministry of Defence and that Department. On a number of occasions it has been possible for forces that arrive early in a situation that requires stabilisation to carry out reconstruction tasks with funding from DFID. That is perhaps the best example of joined-up government that I can give. Such activities also occurred in Sierra Leone, and I anticipate that they will occur again in Afghanistan. I have seen for myself the British forces in ISAF engaged in rebuilding schools and creating the conditions in which the people of Afghanistan can again live a full and peaceful life in that society.

Mr. Paul Keetch (Hereford)

I, too, thank the Secretary of State for giving me notice of his statement. I also thank his colleague the Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the consultations and the advice that I received on this subject yesterday.

May I also send my best wishes and those of my colleagues to the people involved at Bagram and their families? Our first hope is that they all make a speedy recovery. Those affected and their families will want to know whether this outbreak could have been prevented. Our forces have encountered medical problems on deployment before. In Sierra Leone, for example, 159 of them returned with malaria. Were any lessons learned from that incident, and can the Secretary of State assure us that all our forces in Afghanistan were fully inoculated before they left? Are other nations also involved? Are troops from other nations suffering such problems?

The Secretary of State mentioned the defence medical services. The shortages have been highlighted by many Members, not least my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell). We understand that there are only enough staff from the regular forces to maintain one field hospital, and that, given a strategic defence review target of 14 deployable field hospitals, we can muster only five at a push for the reserve forces. Is it not the case that unless we get the manning in the defence medical services right, there may come a time when we will not be able to deploy on combat operations because we will not have proper medical support?

May I give the Secretary of State a chance to scotch some of the more ridiculous rumours that appear to be coming out of Bagram, especially those about the number of people in quarantine? I have heard journalists mention figures ranging from 60 to 300. Can the Secretary of State tell us roughly how many people are in quarantine? Can he confirm that all those in quarantine are medical staff, and that none are combat staff—or even special forces, as has been suggested in the press? Is it not the case that if our combat staff were being detained in quarantine, Operation Veritas would be considerably affected?

I am pleased that Turkey is taking over the leadership of ISAF. How long does the Secretary of State expect that to last, and what preparations are being made for another nation to take over? Does the Secretary of State share my hope that some of our European partners will consider taking over, as they have the ability to do so?

I join the Conservative spokesman, the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin), in congratulating our forces on Operation Snipe. They did an excellent job. The Secretary of State mentioned other nations, however. Do we not know that many al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists are hiding in Pakistan? What possibility is there of cross-border co-operation with Pakistan? Might our forces have hot pursuit into Pakistan, or would there be Pakistan forces on that side of the border to deal with the terrorists?

I welcome the call-up of reservists from the Territorial Army. It shows once again how heavily we rely on the TA. Finally, let me assure the Secretary of State of our continued support for the operations in Afghanistan.

Mr. Hoon

As I said in answer to earlier questions, it is vital for us to understand the cause of the outbreak to ensure that no further difficulty occurs in future. The hon. Gentleman specifically mentioned the way in which malaria affected operations in Sierra Leone. I assure him that checks have been made in relation to the forces in Afghanistan to ensure that appropriate medication has been available.

As far as we know, this is an isolated outbreak not affecting the forces of other countries. We are, however, working hard to understand the nature of the illness, and we will take appropriate steps.

Let me emphasise that all appropriate action has been taken in relation to quarantine measures. I have described a series of steps that have been taken. The hon. Gentleman has had a copy of my statement, and I assure him that the best possible medical and prevention advice has been made available and acted on.

As for the defence medical services, I have spoken a number of times in the House about the difficulties that we inherited with regard to that vital contribution to our armed forces. We are making determined efforts to improve the position—which indeed already has been improved. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin) is muttering about the time that that has taken. He knows, or should know, how long it takes to train doctors and others with appropriate experience; if he does not know, I must tell him that it takes rather longer than five years. None the less, we are taking appropriate action to resolve the problems affecting that important contribution to the health and success of our armed forces.

I hope that the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Keetch), and the House, will bear with me, but ensuring that Turkey takes over the ISAF leadership has been a long and careful process. If the House will forgive me, I will not speculate on what further negotiations might be necessary in the future. I congratulate Turkey on its decision, and feel that, as a European nation, it is making an important contribution to ISAF.

As for co-operation with Pakistan, it is important that we work with Pakistan's forces, as we have done in the recent past. They have played a valuable role along the border, and in that regard I should like to see improvement.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his observations about reservists.

Mike Gapes (Ilford, South)

I join others in congratulating our forces on their work in Afghanistan, and on their efforts to liberate the Muslim people of Afghanistan from Taliban tyranny. The Secretary of State mentioned the wider, non-military aspects of the campaign. Does he agree that one of those is the information campaign, and that it is vital that we redouble our efforts internationally to correct the distortions and downright fabrications put out by some organisations? In particular, I draw my right hon. Friend's attention to ummahnews.com—a website edited by Faisal Bodi, terrorist apologist and columnist for The Guardian—which includes articles claiming that the attacks on 11 September were carried out at the instigation of the CIA or Mossad. Will my right hon. Friend therefore ensure that the international information campaign is redoubled so that, in the Muslim world in particular, such lies are taken into account?

Mr. Hoon

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who clearly has rather more time available for surfing the web than I do. He raises an important issue that is not limited to websites; difficulties with information distortion also occur rather closer to home. He rightly points out that it is crucial that we set out our aims and objectives, and that they are properly understood and represented.

Hugh Robertson (Faversham and Mid-Kent)

The Secretary of State is right to highlight the successes of Operation Snipe, but he will be the first to admit that such an operation will necessarily be less effective without the existence of operations of equal, or greater, intensity on the other side of the border. He touched on that matter in his reply to the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Keetch), but could he tell us more about operations conducted by Pakistan's military, or by other forces, on that side of the border to root out al-Qaeda terrorists?

Mr. Hoon

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will understand if I do not go into too much detail about the precise nature of those operations. However, with his characteristic common sense on such matters, he has identified an important change in the way in which those particular deployments will be made. They will be much more responsive to intelligence on the ground, and the concept of operations will reflect not only the nature of information about current conditions, but the importance of co-operation of the type that he rightly identifies as necessary.

Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak)

I agree with my right hon. Friend that by destroying weapons and terrorist infrastructure our troops are playing a valuable role, and I join others in wishing those who are ill in quarantine a speedy recovery. Does the announcement that medical reservists will be called up imply that our troops are likely to be involved in combat in the near future, and is it still a campaign objective to apprehend and bring to justice Osama bin Laden and other terrorist leaders? My right hon. Friend said that had the troops engaged in Operation Snipe found terrorists, they would have dealt with them. What does he mean by that phraseology? How will the British Government ensure that terrorists who might be detained in such circumstances receive justice by due process?

Mr. Hoon

I assure my hon. Friend that medical reservists have been called up to ensure that appropriate medical cover is available to our armed forces in the event of their being engaged in combat and requiring appropriate treatment. There is no specific connection between the two issues, other than the importance of having available the right people to deal with any problems as they arise. The specific reasons for the call-up at this stage are to give those who have been serving in the area so far a break, to allow us to rotate new people into that theatre and related theatres, and to ensure that we have appropriate resources available for the length of the current operation. In connection with encounters with al-Qaeda and the Taliban, I used the words "dealt with" advisedly. In the event of suspect terrorists surrendering, they will be dealt with according to proper procedures under international law, which has always been the British Government's position. In the event of the terrorists offering resistance to our armed forces, we have robust rules of engagement that will allow them to deal with any threat effectively.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)

I thank the Secretary of State for his very long-winded statement, and I agree with him that Operation Snipe was clearly a success in that it denied the ground to al-Qaeda. An important role remains to be played—not dissimilar to that carried out with great brilliance and distinction by British troops in Sierra Leone—in the increasing stabilisation of Afghanistan, and allowing its fledgling Government to take root and their writ to run throughout the country.

However, all the indications and suggestions from this end that this was to be a major operation, in which it was likely that casualties would be sustained and contact would be made with the enemy, were ill judged. The hyping of military operations is unhelpful, and causes great anxiety to the families and frustration to the soldiers. There was no reason to assume that they would bump into al-Qaeda. On this occasion our intelligence was not good, because it is difficult to have good intelligence on the ground in Afghanistan.

Will the Secretary of State consider bringing the Royal Marines home and allowing some of our other first-class infantry regiments of the line to go out and gain some experience in harsh terrain?

Mr. Hoon

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman, who normally deploys good sense and sound judgment in his military observations, has allowed himself to make an uncharacteristic misjudgment of the nature of the operations. Perhaps he has been away from the Ministry of Defence for too long; I would certainly allow him the opportunity to refresh his knowledge and understanding, because he normally speaks with much thoughtfulness.

I invite the hon. Gentleman to return to the statement that I made at the start of the operations and read what I said to the House. He would, rightly, have been the first to criticise me if I had not warned the House of the potential risks of such an operation. If he thought a little more carefully, he would bear in mind that it followed Operation Anaconda, in which the United States conducted a similar sweep through territory in Afghanistan in order to conduct the same sort of operation as the Royal Marines have recently undertaken, but instead of taking to the hills or fleeing to Pakistan, al-Qaeda stood its ground and fought fiercely. That was the context in which I made the statement to the House. I hope that the hon. Gentleman, whose statements are not usually long-winded, will reflect on what I have said and return to his normal good humour and good form.

Mr. Marsha Singh (Bradford, West)

It would be a serious mistake to look at the present situation and claim that al-Qaeda had fled in the face of the brilliance of our Royal Marines—although I have no doubt that they are brilliant. It is clear that al-Qaeda and the Taliban are in Pakistan and other countries waiting to launch raids and attacks across the border when the time is right. If those raids start and we do not have the right of hot pursuit into Pakistan or other countries, how will we deal effectively with such incursions into Afghanistan? The long and medium-term aim should be to equip Afghanistan with its own army and security forces, because we cannot be there for ever.

Mr. Hoon

My hon. Friend has touched on two vital points. It is right to say that al-Qaeda and the Taliban are still operating in Pakistan, and that they are also operating across the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The purpose of my statement was in part to inform the House of the need for further action to deal with that. As my hon. Friend noted, co-operation along that border between allied forces and the forces of Pakistan is vital.

That is why it is important that Afghanistan should ultimately be in a position to deal with security issues itself. In my statement, I mentioned the help and support that we have received already from Afghan nationals. We are participating in a training programme for the Afghan army, which is being led by the US. In due course, we want Afghanistan to be in a position to be responsible for its own security, especially along its borders.

Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby)

Does the Secretary of State agree that close co-operation between the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development is vital to the future development of a peaceful and stable Afghanistan? Will he confirm absolutely that there has been no breakdown in communications between the two Departments?

The Secretary of State has access to information from more than 3,000 pairs of eyes in the area, so will he comment on a report that I received late last night from Kabul that there are acres and acres of poppy fields alongside the road between Jalalabad and Kabul—the road that all visitors travelling by the overland route use. That report directly contradicts what the Foreign Office said on Tuesday.

Mr. Hoon

On the aid point, I have mentioned the nature of the co-operation that existed in the past between the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development. The Department for International Development now has a specific liaison officer based with the ISAF headquarters, whose specific task is to resolve matters such as those that the hon. Gentleman and others have raised. I therefore anticipate that co-ordination will not be a problem in the future.

As for the poppy fields, the House knows the difficulties suffered by the international community at the hands of those who grow, transport and supply the products of Afghanistan's poppy fields. It is thought that 90 per cent. of the heroin sold in the UK originates in Afghanistan. Britain and other members of the international community have achieved considerable success in reducing the supply from the current crop. Recent estimates suggest that about one third of the crop has been destroyed, but it is clear that we need to maintain the pressure and deal with the problems that poppy cultivation has caused not only in recent times but over a very long period of Afghanistan's history.

Dr. Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes, South-West)

My right hon. Friend may not be aware that a delegation of parliamentarians from the Iranian Parliament has been meeting British parliamentarians this week. The Iranian delegation strongly made the point that unless security is established across Afghanistan, the 2 million refugees from Afghanistan who are currently in Iran will not feel able to return home. Will my right hon. Friend say what steps the British component of the next phase of ISAF deployment will take to help the Afghan Government to establish security across the whole country?

Mr. Hoon

My hon. Friend is right to say that security is crucial in Afghanistan, and is also vital for refugees. I am not so familiar with the problem on the border with Iran as I am with the situation on the border with Pakistan, but I can tell my hon. Friend that refugees are streaming away from the camps in Pakistan and returning to their homes and livelihoods in Afghanistan. That is an enormous and positive contribution to their country. I shall look at the situation along the border with Iran to see whether more action can be taken in the parts of Afghanistan that are close to it to give refugees the security and confidence that they require to return home.

Mr. Michael Weir (Angus)

On behalf of the Scottish National party and Plaid Cymru, I should like to add our good wishes for those who are ill in Bagram. I also thank the Minister of State, who last night made the effort to tell me personally about the outbreak. Although no members of 45 Commando, based in my constituency, are affected, the Secretary of State will appreciate that their families are concerned about the outbreak. I know that the Minister of State was due to visit Arbroath today to meet the families, and I hope that he will rearrange that visit for the near future.

As for Operation Snipe, despite what is said in some sections of the media, I—and, I am sure, the families of the troops involved—greatly welcome the fact that the Marines have been able to deny territory and ordnance to the enemy without suffering any casualties themselves. What is the Secretary of State's assessment of the ability of al-Qaeda to come back into that area, given the amount of ordnance that has been destroyed in the operation?

Mr. Hoon

In fact, my right hon. Friend the Minister of State is not in the House today because he has gone to Arbroath to fulfil the commitment that he entered into previously. I take this issue seriously, because of the support that members of our armed forces receive from their families, and I am grateful for the way in which the hon. Gentleman has raised it.

The destruction of the arms cache has denied a valuable prize to al-Qaeda and the Taliban. It is part of the reason why I am confident that we can say that Operation Snipe was a considerable success. It clearly undermined the ability of al-Qaeda to deliver its threat—but that does not mean that we can lessen our vigilance, because there may be other caches or stores to deal with.

David Hamilton (Midlothian)

I should like to pass on my congratulations to all our armed forces on the work that they are doing in the region. I have supported this campaign from the beginning—although I am not likely to support others—and they are doing an excellent job.

My right hon. Friend indicated that the reservists have been pulled across because they are needed in the area. Does that mean that our armed forces are overstretched? If so, would it not be better to diminish our nuclear capability so that we can pay our armed forces a decent wage and give them decent conditions?

Mr. Hoon

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his observations. On his specific point about reservists, I emphasise that it is unlikely that any who have been called out by the announcement that I made today will go to Afghanistan. The important point is to have enough people available to cover the requirements of our armed forces in their various deployments across the world. Certainly, we have never tried to disguise the fact that when it comes to medics and medical support, we do not have as many people as we would like. We have to improve the necessary degree of support for our deployed armed forces.

Dr. Andrew Murrison (Westbury)

Our thoughts are very much with those who have fallen ill in Bagram. I suggest that the Royal Army Medical Corps must by now have a fairly good idea of what is causing the illness. It is very important to have our troops vaccinated properly. I should like to draw the Secretary of State out concerning a comment made by the Under-Secretary of State for Defence in the armed forces personnel debate on 11 April. In answer to an intervention by me, the hon. Gentleman said: Nowadays nobody is deployed who has not had their vaccination and health status properly checked."—[Official Report, 11 April 2002; Vol. 382, c. 220.] Does that advice still stand?

Mr. Hoon

There are considerable advantages in having ministerial experience of the medical world in dealing with this kind of outbreak. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the work that he has done in dealing with this difficult issue. There are a number of ideas about the cause of the illness but, as I said earlier, it is important that we get to the bottom of the specific cause of the outbreak if we can, so that we can take appropriate action in future. I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that he requires regarding the preventive steps that are taken elsewhere.

Several hon. Members

rose

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord)

Order. I realise that these are important matters but we must move on to the main business.