Clock ticks on Obama’s ambitious Afghan plan

The Guardian

KABUL: The seemingly interminable Afghan strategy debate between US President Barack Obama and

his advisers is not politically sustainable for much longer; an

announcement is expected before the Thanksgiving holiday on 26

November.

That will not be too soon for the centre-right government of French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, which increased its troop contribution last year to 3,100. It is publicly chafing at the lack of a clear lead from Washington.

After Hamid Karzai’s flawed re-election, Sarkozy joined other western governments in biting the bullet and offering “full support”.

But his foreign minister Bernard Kouchner gave a glimpse of turmoil this week.

Beyond the evident need to “legitimise” the “corrupt” Karzai, he said, bigger questions loomed. “What is the goal [in Afghanistan]? What is the road? And in the name of what?” he asked. “Where are the Americans? It begins to be a problem ... we need to talk to each other as allies.” He also said Germany should do more at the sharp end.

Unlike Britain and Germany, where all major political parties support the Afghan intervention, Sarkozy’s government faces pressure from the Socialist opposition which last year turned against what it called an unwinnable “war of occupation”. But with the Bundeswehr’s 4,500 troops sucked into lethal firefights with the Taliban in the previously peaceful northern Afghanistan, public concern is rising in Germany, too. Addressing the US Congress this week, the chancellor, Angela Merkel, promised Germany and the US would “travel the road together, every step of the way”. But she avoided saying where this shared path led, or for how long. Polls show about two-thirds of Germans favour withdrawal.

For Canada, a large contributor of combat troops which has suffered more than 130 fatalities, the main problem seems to be not knowing what Obama will do. The prime minister Stephen Harper

has pledged to pull out the 3,000-strong contingent by 2011. But the defence minister Peter MacKay

has said repeatedly that Canadian forces, currently based in strategically crucial Kandahar province, may remain beyond that date in training or advisory roles.

Canadian calculations are complicated by worries that Afghan allies will be exposed to Taliban vengeance if the troops leave.

All in all, it’s embarrassingly clear that Ottawa is not the master of its fate. Like others, it’s waiting for Washington.

The 1,450-strong Dutch force is also due to leave next year, quitting Uruzgan province after its initial two-year mission, begun in 2006, was doubled. But with one eye on next month’s Nato foreign ministers’ meeting (when troop levels and contributions will be discussed), and with one eye on the inscrutable Obama, the foreign minister Maxime Verhagen has suggested another extension is possible.

Adding to the confusion, Australia is insisting it will not increase its 1,500-strong contingent in

Uruzgan to compensate for the departing Dutch.

Like other governments, the strain of not knowing how long the war will last is telling. The prime minister Kevin Rudd insisted last month that “Australia’s policy is to be there for the long haul (but) once that mission statement is completed ... to withdraw our forces.” But the defence minister John Faulkner appeared to contradict him, saying the mission must be completed “in the shortest timeframe possible”.

Across the alliance, unhappiness with the mission is palpable. The longer Obama ponders, the stronger political and public opposition is likely to grow — and the harder it will be for Nato governments to maintain a united front.