Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bundeswehr Restructuring

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kato,

    Under what authority did the KSK entered Afghanistan under CENTCOM's command? I mean any legal authority authorized by the Executive or the Legislative?
    Chimo

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
      Under what authority did the KSK entered Afghanistan under CENTCOM's command? I mean any legal authority authorized by the Executive or the Legislative?
      Executive, with retroactive permission by the legislative.

      Federal Parliament passed DS 14/7296 on behalf of the government on Nov 14th 2001, which retroactively permitted deployment of soldiers that had been "deployed since Oct 7th 2001".

      That law bill permitted specific troops defined in it to be deployed within Operation Enduring Freedom (e.g.: "100 special forces") and other broad details of the mission.
      Oct 7th wasn't the actual start of deployment btw, but the time when Operation Enduring Freedom was officially declared in the Security Council.

      The socalled "parliamentary reserve" (the right of the parliament to decide on deployments) was originally defined in a Supreme Court decision in 1994 and laid out this procedure. Under this the executive was allowed to deploy on its own authority initially due to "danger at hand", but required to seek immediate legislative approval.

      Comment


      • P.S:

        Full mandate was:
        - 800 soldiers NBC defense
        - 100 soldiers special forces
        - 250 soldiers medical
        - 500 soldiers air transport
        - 1800 soldiers navy including naval aviation
        - 450 soldiers necessary support forces

        With permission to change these numbers "depending on necessity" as long as overall numbers stayed within the mandate for 3900 soldiers.

        It also included a rather wide territorial scope initially, with the reservation that only forces in Afghanistan would be deployed "without permission of the respective government".

        The above served to allow specifically the three deployments Germany had in Operation Enduring Freedom:
        - a special forces company (KSK) in Afghanistan
        - an NBC Defense Battalion in Kuwait
        - a naval task force (within CTF150) on the Horn of Africa

        The NBC defense group as part of "CJTF-CM" under CENTCOM was deployed in January 2002 and very quickly reduced to about two platoons with the rest withdrawn and kept in readiness in Germany. That arrangement remained in place until the next US-Iraq war, then brought back up to two companies and actively sent on missions defensively within Kuwait during the war (which isn't really that widely known). The group was withdrawn between May and July 2003.

        The OEF mandate remained active until 2010, but was modified in numbers and scope every year in a review for parliamentary approval.
        Last edited by kato; 30 Mar 24,, 09:27.

        Comment


        • Thanks, Kato, was wondering why the SF response was so fast.
          Chimo

          Comment


          • The government deploying soldiers "ahead of" parliamentary approval was always a bit controversial in Germany too.

            The 1994 supreme court decision was due to the Bosnia deployment after the opposition complained that nominally the Bundeswehr is a "parliamentary army" and therefore they should at least have been able to vote on it.

            With the decision the procedure to "allow deployment, but require parliamentary approval asap" was instituted, although this wasn't codified until 2005. Technically if the parliament had voted against the deployment at the time then the already deployed soldiers would have had to be recalled btw.


            Most deployments between 1994 and 2005 saw someonce complaining about procedures. Often this was about the government trying to circumvent the parliament, such as by stating they didn't need approval if it wasn't a combat deployment - the government usually lost in court decisions on these (example: AWACS over Turkey in 2003).

            In 2005 the procedure was codified as a law - the "Parliamentary Involvement Law". This law addressed most complaints in previous years by exactly outlining when the parliament has to be involved, what exact data on a mission the government has to report to parliament at what point in time, codifies what parliament can do (only withdraw permission - they cannot change details about the deployment, just yes/no) and allows for a simplified procedure for "small" deployments (ahead reconnaissance teams, overall "low significance", single soldiers sent on UN missions and such).

            Comment


            • Looking at those troop lists...didn't Germany also deploy som SP artillery?
              “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
              Mark Twain

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
                Looking at those troop lists...didn't Germany also deploy som SP artillery?
                The overwhelming majority of troops in Afghanistan came under a different mandate - for ISAF. The ISAF mandate was first passed on Dec 21st 2001 and ran in parallel. The two missions were always kept separate since they had a different scope with regard to territory, mission statement, rules of engagement and political reasoning. The OEF mandate was the NATO Article 5 response, ISAF was just a NATO mission.

                Originally the ISAF mandate allowed for maximum 1200 men comprised of "infantry, helicopter forces, support forces, air transport, forces for joint HQs and liaison". Force numbers were adapted annually, offhand the maximum was 5350 soldiers around 2010.

                The description was switched to a capability-based one in 2005 laying out "command and command support, security and protection, IMINT and airborne surveillance, logistical support and medical support". Deployed artillery fell under the "security and protection" capability. In 2009 they changed the wording on that a bit and also added in "training support and CIMIC" as new capabilities. In 2015 military intelligence was added to the capability set as a last update.

                After 2005 the only troops/systems mentioned explicitly in the ISAF mandate was the Tornado RECCE group deployed in Afghanistan, since this component had a different territorial scope assigned (and this had to be declared in the mandate).

                In 2010 to 2011 there was a third parallel mandate for Afghanistan for participation in AWACS flights, which was folded into the ISAF mandate in the renewal for 2012.

                KSK initially was deployed only under the OEF mandate explicitly mentioning them, then from 2005 under the ISAF mandate (with the switch to the capability-based description there allowing to "hide" them). The special forces were formally removed from the OEF mandate in the 2008 renewal bid.
                Last edited by kato; 01 Apr 24,, 01:13.

                Comment


                • Thanks for breaking it down, Kato. I was always kind of hard who eas working for whom at times in A'stan.
                  “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
                  Mark Twain

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X