US Technology Protects Taliban

Washington, June 23: Taliban fighters in war-torn Afghanistan have managed to escape US and NATO attacks and carry out painful assaults against foreign forces, thanks to an American state-of-the-art military technology that reached their hands.

Department of Defense told “terrorists have used US uniforms and the infrared patches to get close to US and allied forces on the battlefield and at bases,” Jonathan Meyer, of the Government Accountability Office (GAO), told. “This is more of a potential suicide-bomber risk.”

A recently concluded GAO report found that Taliban fighters avert attacks by wearing special infrared patches designed to protect foreign forces from being targeted by friendly fire during battles.

The report said by using the US patches, Taliban can prate among US and NATO military, while signaled as friends rather than foes, to make severe attacks.

“An enemy fighter wearing these infrared flags could potentially pass as a friendly service member during a night combat situation, putting US troops at risk,” the report said.

GAO affirmed that Taliban seized a huge amount of the patches mainly over the inte, where it can be easily purchased online for about $10 each.

During its investigation, GAO bought patches using fake names and a front company with only a valid credit card. It also purchased the patches from a New York-based military-supply dealer.

“These items are completely legal to buy and sell within the United States.”

Some of the patches were also stolen during raids on US convoys in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Meyer, who led the GAO investigation, said.

Former ruler Taliban is engaged in protracted guerrilla warfare against foreign forces and the Kabul government since the 2001 US invasion.

Many recent reports have affirmed that the movement is growing more technologically capable with high-tech tools and powerful online and media machine.

The year 2008 has proved the worst for US-led troops and Afghan forces since the invasion with 290 foreign soldiers and 1,000 Afghan troops have been killed.

Just on Sunday, two US soldiers were killed and six more wounded in a daring Taliban attack on the main US base in Afghanistan, Bagram, taking the death toll of US forces to more than 712 and of the foreign forces to over 1,194 since 2001.

Overstated

US lawmakers were worried by the GAO report, saying that the US should take necessary time to avoid such equipment do not reach its adversaries.

“If there is an item that has only a military use, like the patches, the fact that they are non-lethal doesn’t mean we should not treat them as munitions,” Brad Sherman, California Democrat congressman who chairs the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee that deals with export controls, told.

“The term ‘munitions’ perhaps should apply to anything that does not have a legitimate civilian use.”

But Senator Bart Stupak, chair of the House Energy and Commerce oversight and investigations subcommittee, believes the measure would not make a lot of change.

“It is rather simple technology,” Stupak said.

“We not only sell this to domestic people here, and they sell them to anybody, but you can get them from China, and the Chinese will sell them to others.”

Experts, however, believe the fear from the risk patches bring to troops in Afghanistan is very much overstated.

“Since the beginning of warfare, people have been dressing up as the enemy to infiltrate,” Jack Keane, a retired four-star general, said.

“We certainly have done this in the past to our enemies, and our enemies have done this to us.”

Keane, who played a key role in developing the counterinsurgency strategy for Iraq, said the patches are not everything in the battle.

“There are other safeguards in addition to these patches,” Keane noted. “A visual identification and other identification are in the soldier’s possession. There are multiple things that are being checked.”

Nevertheless, the expert backed the call for measures to make it difficult for military equipment to reach US enemies.

“It would seem to me that something we are using to help identify ourselves should not be available to the general public.”

-Agencies