Plausible Deniability in Afghanistan
Two stories from two different sources show how the war in Afghanistan is now being fought on a Plausible Deniability basis .
First we have from EUReferendum more on a story which I highlighted last month about dodgy firms being contracted indirectly by the MOD. This allows the the UK government to plausibly deny as the AP report states
Intermediaries such as Toronto-based Skylink Aviation often handle the actual subleasing for NATO forces, giving governments an element of “plausible deniability,” these experts say. The Fluor Corporation, a Texas-based company providing logistical back-up to U.S. military operations, said Skylink provided the Vertikal-T helicopter that most recently crashed in Afghanistan. The helicopter was transporting contractors on behalf of Fluor. Vertikal-T’s reputation is as the “hot zone provider of choice,” said Mark Galeotti, a military and organized crime expert at New York University. “If you want a pretty professional but slightly cowboyish outfit that doesn’t mind flying into war zones, doesn’t mind taking off from unsurfaced runways, then Vertikal-T now seems to be the front runner,” he said.
The second story is from Subrosa who highlights another story of Plausible Deniability. As Subrosa says
Did you know we supply the Taliban with free bomb making materials? The fertiliser for agricultural projects is brought from Pakistan and we probably pay a ‘tax’ to the Taliban to ensure its safe arrival. Then we give it to the Taliban.I’m also very reliably informed that to get supplies to British troops from across the Pakistan border, the transport contractors have to pay the Taliban a ‘tax’ for safe passage. This is built into the price we pay the contractor. My source states: We do not pay direct… in order to maintain “plausible deniability“.
So a war which we are supposedly fighting on High Moral issues is continuing to be fought on the basis of Plausible Deniability. Surely this is not right.





