"The American ambassador to Kabul has accused European members of Nato of jeopardising the future of the alliance by refusing to send troops to Afghanistan, or banning their forces from entering areas with heavy fighting." writes the British
Telegraph:
Ronald Neumann, who has survived two attempts on his life this year, said European nations must not turn "coward" and "run away" from fighting terrorism in Afghanistan. In an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegel, Mr Neumann said some Europeans "obviously resist the idea that you have an army in order to fight. And I have very little patience for that". (...)
Spanish officials briefed the Madrid press that their government -- in conjunction with France, Germany and Belgium -- had seen off a request from the military commander of Nato, Gen James Jones, to mobilise ground forces from the "Eurocorps" -- a rapid reaction force made up of troops from several European nations. Spanish sources told El Pais newspaper that the four European nations had told Gen Jones the rapid reaction force was for unforeseen emergencies, and not for propping up an existing mission.
Isn't Afghanistan an emergency? Clearly, more troops are urgently needed. Even compared to Iraq, there are too few troops in Afghanistan.
The situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and all three international editions of Newsweek's latest issue have "Losing Afghanistan" on the cover. "The Rise of Jihadistan" is the cover story: "Five years after the Afghan invasion, the Taliban are fighting back hard, carving out a sanctuary where they -- and Al Qaeda's leaders -- can operate freely." The U.S. edition, however, has a cover story about Annie Leibovitz's Amazing 'Life in Pictures'. This is not the first time for Newsweek: See the Atlantic Review post: "Dream on America".
President Bush is often asked why he does not send more troops to Iraq (Afghanistan does not seem to be that much of an issue compared to Iraq). He often replies that he would send more troops, if the military commanders would request them. Well, U.S. generals request more troops for Afghanistan, but it seems primarily the Europeans get blamed for not sending additional troops. More about NATO's Increasing Involvement in Afghanistan, NATO's Difficulties to Get More Troops for Afghanistan, and A Global NATO for more Burden Sharing?
Crossposted at Atlantic Review.
A few comments have already been made at the Atlantic Review and deal with Europe's responsibility to help the US in Afghanistan (as opposed to Iraq) and Krepinevich's "oil spot" strategy and fighting insurgents vs. providing security. You are invited to cross-post your comments at the Atlantic Review.
Below is a poll. I probably forgot some answer option you might want to select. In that case, please check "other" and write you answer in a comment. I think neither Europe nor the United States provide enough troops to Afghanistan. In order not to make the poll to complicated, let's just ignore the US here and focus on the EU countries only. We probably agree anyway, that the US has sent too few troops to Afghanistan.