Events | 2008.12.26
Max Hastings: British troops are stuck in Afghanistan until Obama sees the war is unwinnable
The Guardian last week vividly described the shambles of Afghanistan. Simon Jenkins argued on these pages for recognition of failure. I share his analysis of the west\'s predicament. But I find it impossible to believe the British government will precipitate a crisis in Anglo-American relations by pulling out of the war.
In the new year, President Barack Obama will arrive in Europe on a wave of public euphoria. One almost inevitable consequence is that the British government will commit more troops to a campaign that is going nowhere, because we are too deeply committed to do anything else.
The incoming Democratic administration is convinced Afghanistan is a "good war", in a way that Iraq is not. General David Petraeus will be authorised by Obama to preside over a dramatically intensified military effort. It is hard to overstate the anger and resentment that will be roused in Washington if the major European powers refuse to play.
The US military believes the Taliban are much weaker than western media suggest, and that an increased commitment can tip the balance towards stability. In recent months, the Taliban have interdicted supply convoys, inflicted many casualties, and generated huge profits by levying tolls on vehicles running the gauntlet from Pakistan. Many of the 30,000 additional US troops to be deployed next year will be used to launch a blitz on the roads.
The Obama administration plans to lean on President Hamid Karzai as Bush never has, to address the corruption and inefficiency of his regime. The Americans believe that, with additional troops, they can regain territory from the Taliban. They want to enlarge the Afghan army dramatically.
Privately, they acknowledge that Afghanistan cannot afford a huge war machine. The average defence spend of developing nations is about 2% of GDP. To fund the 300,000 troops the US thinks necessary to secure the country, at a cost of $10,000 a man, Kabul would need to spend a crazy 20% of its GDP. Some Washington strategy gurus argue that the US military is promoting a model that is unsustainable.
No matter. For now, Petraeus and his colleagues are thinking short. By the end of the next campaigning season, they want to show graphs of allied casualties and bomb blasts moving downwards. To achieve this, they want more men and money from Nato allies. Most European troops are deployed under national rules of engagement that prevent them fighting the Taliban. Washington wants them to accept a common command system.
Although the British in Helmand province are trying harder than the Germans, French or Italians in their respective zones, in US eyes we, too, are relatively risk-averse. Nato troops always have a choice about whether to go looking for the Taliban - and accepting the inevitable casualties. UK commanders know body bags are bad news politically. The more aggressive our soldiers are, the more will come home dead.
The British army is chastened by its Afghan experience. Senior officers were rashly over-optimistic. Today, they realise they are making little progress in securing Helmand, and far less controlling the drug industry. The UK is getting scant thanks from the Americans, who believe we are not doing enough.
Even a reinforcement of, say, 3,000 UK troops is unlikely to alter fundamentals. More men are of limited value when the British are chronically short of helicopter lift to deploy them outside their firebases. A retired general said to me last week: "How do we keep explaining dead British soldiers to the British people, when we are getting nowhere?"
Washington keeps asking its own big question: if the allies quit, abandoning Afghanistan to anarchy, what would be the impact on the region, especially on Pakistan, itself on the brink of collapse?
US pressure on Gordon Brown is likely to be increased by the fact that most Nato leaders will reject Obama\'s appeals for extra troops. Because the British are engaged more deeply than any other ally, the new president will expect correspondingly more from us.
We cannot walk off the set unless we wish to pay the price of being seen by the American people, as well as by their government, to betray the Atlantic alliance. Only if or when Obama decides that the game is not worth the candle will the boys come home.
For more information, please visit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/[...]us-foreign-policy-max-hastings
