Taliban stalls key hydroelectric turbine project in Afghanistan

[Turborama]

Source: The Guardian

An enormous hydroelectric turbine dragged at huge cost by British troops through Taliban heartlands last year may never be installed because Nato has been unable to secure a 30-mile stretch of road leading to an isolated dam in northern Helmand. The daring mission to deliver 220 tonnes of equipment to the Kajaki dam in Afghanistan in September 2008 was hailed as one of the biggest success stories of the British Army's three-year deployment in Helmand. Two thousand British troops took part in the five-day convoy through enemy territory, which was launched because the main road leading to the dam was too vulnerable to Taliban attacks.

=snip=

The dam continues to be besieged by Taliban fighters and, 15 months after the mission by the UK troops, the turbine's components remain unassembled because huge amounts of cement that are required to install the equipment cannot be delivered safely. Now the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the wing of the United States government which has so far pumped $47m (£29m) into the project, intended to electrify much of southern Afghanistan, says it is packing the turbine parts away and looking for other energy projects to invest in across Afghanistan. "Our message is that until we have a secure road we cannot continue with the installation of turbine two," said John Smith-Sreen, head of energy and water projects for USAID in Kabul. When the turbine was moved in by British and American forces it was a huge effort and it was done in a point of time. But we can't move in the large quantity of cement and aggregate that we need in a point of time, we need a sustained effort," he said.

The road would need to be secured for about half a year.

While the cement required could probably be transported in around half that time, civilian contractors would need to see the road had been secured for about three months to attract them to the project, Smith-Sreen said. He added that CMIC, a Chinese company contracted to install the turbine, "left due to security concerns overnight" when it was clear that the road would not be secured. The agency has not been able to find another subcontractor prepared to do the work.

USAID says about 30 miles of road is affected, but at a time when General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan, is pursuing a strategy of concentrating effort on protecting large towns and cities from Taliban influence, securing a stretch of road in a sparsely populated area of northern Helmand is unlikely to be a priority.

=snip=

Smith-Sreen said USAID was satisfied with the work it has been able to do to rehabilitate the two existing turbines, which since October have been transmitting around 33 megawatts to the southern provinces – "more power than either Kandahar or Helmand has seen for 30 years".

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/13/afghanistan-turbine-taliban-british-army

---

IMO this is the sort of thing the troops should be fighting for and for some reason Obama is following http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=afghanwar_tmln&afghanwar_tmln_us_invasion__occupation=afghanwar_tmln_economic_reconstruction">the same path as Busch by ignoring it.

If a construction vacancy came up on this project I'd apply straight away. I'm pretty good at mixing concrete.

This post and the links within it have a lot of background information about the recent history of this dam and why it is so important...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5777799&mesg_id=5781231">Protecting a vital dam that provides much needed electricity and irrigation for 1.5 million Afghanis


---- --- ----

[rollingrock]

1. Maybe not

"IMO this is the sort of thing the troops should be fighting for."

this might sound cynical, but I doubt if this project is being done for the benefit of the local population. they're probably building it to power the military bases that will have to be built to house the 30,000 additional US troops being sent over there, in addition to supplying power to the corrupt Karzai government and druglords, maybe even in support of the new Caspian gas pipleline that's in the works.

[Turborama]

2. You should have gone to the link I provided

Here it is again if you missed it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5777799&mesg_id=5781231

. they're probably building it to power the military bases that will have to be built to house the 30,000 additional US troops being sent over there

If you read up on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajaki_Dam">its history you'll see that the dam was built in 1953, generating units were installed in 1975 and much needed renovation work has been carried out on it since 2002.

in addition to supplying power to the corrupt Karzai government and druglords

Take a look at this map that's at the post I linked to above and you'll see that it's actually located in a perfect position to provide electricity to the south. Anyway, Kabul is now getting a new power supply from Uzbekistan, as this BBC report says: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8097865.stm">Electricity transforms Kabul living




maybe even in support of the new Caspian gas pipleline that's in the works.

That's a total stretch! It's not even remotely likely they would go to this much trouble and spend so much money and blood on it to provide the little amount of electricity someone else's pipeline would need.

Why can't you accept that we have actually been carrying out a mission to provide millions of Afghans with much needed power and irrigation, and instead have to stretch your imagination to come up with alternative unrealistic scenarios?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Turborama]

4. "They would not go to all that trouble otherwise"

"They" are the British army. That's who's been guarding the dam and http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/operation-eagles-summit-the-inside-story-of-a-daring-foray-into-taliban-territory-917197.html">who risked their lives transporting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajaki_Dam#The_Third_Turbine">the third turbine. Why would "they" go to all that trouble and risk and http://www.journalisted.com/search?q=kajaki+dam&o=relevance">spend the lives of their soldiers so some company can make money out a purported gas pipeline that would go to India?

Who's actually going to benefit from this fabled pipeline and do you really think that this is why http://icasualties.org/oef/">1538 soldiers' lives and $200+ billion dollars have been spent on this war so far? Do you really think Obama is in on this far fetched conspiracy, too?

I had hoped that this story would generate a proper/rational discussion about Afghanistan's redevelopment, for once.

[rollingrock]

5. One, the British would benefit from a gas pipeline

two, the fact that President Karzai is a former executive of the US oil company Unocal, and is now the head of a thoroughly corrupt, widely detested, unelected Afghan government, ought tell you all you need to know about our motivations in the region IMO.

[Turborama]

8. One, re-read the 1st question in post #4

"The British would benefit from a gas pipeline" doesn't sufficiently answer the questions. Who exactly and how?

Two, saying that we've spent everything I mentioned above to help detested & corrupt Karzai get his hands on some gas revenues is another stretch that doesn't even make sense.

I'll ask you as well, do you really think Obama is in on this far fetched conspiracy, too?

[rollingrock]

9. You forget who Karzai is working for

karzai benefits personally from the arrangement, but the primary beneficiaries of the pipeline are Washington and London, various western corporations, oil companies, etc. the US and britain are the primary investors and backers of the pipeline, therefore their corporations will receive the largest cut of the profits from the gas sold to India, Pakistan, consumers in the west, etc. Unocal which is now owned by Chevron will obviously benefit because Chevron is one of the major contracted parties involved in the construction of the pipeline. The US defense industry is another big player, of course, because various American companies are contracted to provide the security for the gas pipeline project.

[Turborama]

13. Got any links from reliable sources that are less than a year old? n/t

[muriel_volestrangler]

15. Gas pipelines don't need hydroelectric dams for support

gas pipelines have their own power supply - the gas itself. They just bleed off a little gas, and burn it to get the power to turn the pumps or generate electricity.

A hydroelectric dam is a competitor to a gas pipeline, not a prerequisite.

[Coventina]

6. "I had hoped that this story would generate a proper/rational discussion"

"about Afghanistan's redevelopment, for once."

On DU?

Good luck with that.

I salute your optimism.

:-)

[Turborama]

16. Thanks

I think it's really important seeing as, even though no-one wants to discuss it, it is one of the main reasons we're still there.

I'm currently working on a detailed piece about it that's taking longer than I expected. I can PM you the link to it when it's done, if you're interested?

[Psephos]

14. Military in the field do not depend on local suppliers for power.

Or much of anything else for that matter.

Cynicism is easy. It requires only an opinion. I guess that's why it's so prevalent.

[Arctic Dave]

7. While I think this project is a neccessary project to advance Afghanistan out of

the conditions they live in, I don't think it is what we should be having our military doing. Our military should be used to defend OUR country and not nation building exercises over there. This is a project the afghanis need to fight and die for, not us.

If we have to be over there to destroy the Taliban, then do that and do that only.

Note:
I am not for the military being over there to begin with. I believe this is a police issue not a military issue when it comes to terrorism. Sprinkled with an occassional predator strike.

[pampango]

10. Update from the BBC-"Afghan Kajaki dam project delayed by security concerns"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8412602.stm

"The US foreign aid agency USAid has indefinitely postponed the Kajaki hydroelectric power project in southern Afghanistan amid a lack of security.

Some 5,000 mainly British soldiers took five days last year to transport a huge turbine through Taliban-held territory to the dam in Helmand province. USAid said the road was not secure enough for delivering cement needed to install it at the site."

"It would have been the third turbine at the dam, which was originally built by USAid and supplies power to Helmand's provincial capital, Lashkar Gah.

UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown described the operation at the time as a reminder of Nato's "fundamental purpose" in Afghanistan."

If they know they can't protect a road leading to a dam, I think they probably know that they can't protect a 1000 mile long pipeline through Taliban-controlled territory. If they stay, it must be for a different reason.

[BeFree]

11. Huh?

If this dam and the electricity is so great, then why are the locals not allowing it to happen?

Maybe we shouldn't be forcing anything on these people that they obviously are fighting against.

In the US we have a court system that examines such issues. There is no such system in Afghanistan... maybe the first thing we should be doing is to establish a proper government and failing that, get the hell out?

Nope, we are sending in bombs first. Bombs first, judges later. Fail.

[Turborama]

12. The locals are "allowing it to happen", why wouldn't they?

The dam is a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajaki_Dam">vital source of water and electricity for hundreds of thousands (and potentially millions) of Afghans.

Check out this video that shows how the local people feel about the British Royal Marines protection of the dam. Particularly 0:55 to 2:26 & 5:58 to 7:05 of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5MpZ1aWJXw">Part 1 and 0:00 to 0:57 & 6:16 to 6:46 of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRQ6FImu0I8">Part 2. If you want to watch the rest of it, part 3 is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzP9FmY9SPI">here.

The Taliban don't want it to happen for obvious reasons and are continuously fighting to take control of it. For example, according to these articles, http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSSP235102">700 Taliban, http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c2254a,4565c25f5a5,469f5b74a,0.html">including Arabs, Uzbeks and Chechens came over from Pakistan to fight for it in 2007.

When you say "we shouldn't be forcing anything on these people", it seems like what you're actually saying is you think we shouldn't be helping "these people". Did you know that only 7 percent of Afghans have electricity?


Graphic sourced from here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89821168">NPR: Restoring an Afghan Dam in a Taliban Stronghold

Why would a court need to get involved with protecting a dam that provides water and electricity?

How do you propose we "establish a proper government"? Personally, I think there should be another election called and overseen by international montiors once the 37,000+ extra troops arrive and can provide adequate security for it.