US commander weighs more troops in Afghan war

By Dan De Luce (AFP)

WASHINGTON - The commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan is weighing advice that thousands of additional American forces are needed to prevail in the fight against insurgents.

Stanley McChrystal

A number of analysts who helped draft an assessment for the new commander, General Stanley McChrystal, are publicly advocating a major increase in US troop numbers in Afghanistan -- a politically-sensitive proposal that could meet resistance in the White House and Congress.

A prominent Washington military analyst who was part of the assessment effort, Anthony Cordesman, said it was crucial that more combat brigade teams -- which range from 3,000 to 5,000 troops -- be deployed as part of a shift in strategy.

"Certainly there's a need for more US combat brigade teams. Exactly how many I think is a calculation that the military were making when I left," Cordesman, recently returned from Afghanistan, told AFP.

"That's only part of the story. You're also going to need civilian aid workers, and you're going to need more people who are involved in the Afghan national security forces," said Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Cordesman and other analysts on the team said the mission had been neglected for years and that the target for Afghan security forces also needed to dramatically increase from current goals of 134,000 for the army and about 82,000 for the police.

Cordesman was among a dozen analysts from across the political spectrum invited by McChrystal to offer their advice as he prepares his official review of strategy due in mid-August.

"If we're going to make a serious go at this, I think we need to increase the troop count and the amount of money that we direct at the problem," said Stephen Biddle at the Council on Foreign Relations, who was also part of the team.

The analysts said they were not speaking on behalf of the assessment team but US media reported the team had agreed that more resources were needed for the war.

Their advice likely will carry weight with McChrystal, who is under pressure to deliver results and seize the initiative from the Taliban and its allies.

Thousands of US troops are already pouring into Afghanistan as part of a buildup ordered by President Barack Obama earlier this year, with the US force in Afghanistan soon to reach 68,000.

A request for more troops will present a political dilemma for the US president, as members of his own party are increasingly anxious about the Afghan mission and openly questioning the US commitment there.

"There's a widespread perception that within the next 12 to 24 months something has to change in Afghanistan, sufficient to persuade skeptical Americans and especially skeptical lawmakers that this thing is not hopeless," Biddle said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who as a career CIA officer saw Soviet troops chased out of Afghanistan, has warned against creating too big of a US "footprint" that could sow resentment.

Apart from troop numbers, McChrystal also will consider changing the way US soldiers operate, with analysts suggesting Americans patrol more on foot and live among the population at smaller outposts instead of at heavily-fortified bases.

Such a move would help US soldiers win the trust and confidence of Afghan civilians, which commanders say is essential to turning the tide against the Taliban and its allies, Biddle said.

"The only way you can find the guerrillas in an insurgency is if the civilians tell you who they are," Biddle said.

"You have to be living among them, patrolling on foot, visible, available, and familiar."

The approach, however, could trigger higher American casualties initially as it would put US soldiers at more risk without the protection of armored convoys and secure bases, he said.

The analysts also said improving governance in the impoverished country was as vital as bolstering security -- a view often voiced by military leaders.

Washington could no longer provide aid without demanding accountability from the corruption-plagued government in Kabul, the analysts said.

Although a call for a much larger Afghan security force was expected, it was still an open question as to what McChrystal would propose for US troop numbers, said Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution, who did not join in the assessment.

"I believe that the view about US forces is less developed and perhaps still forming -- most of all, we need more evidence about what additional troops would do before McChrystal commits to asking for them," he said.