Manpower and strategy needed for Afghan victory 'lacking'

The Nato-led coalition in Afghanistan lacks both the troops and the strategy needed to defeat the Taliban and al-Qaida, a leading foreign affairs think tank warned today.

A briefing paper by Chatham House said that “sheer lack of manpower” was becoming an increasing problem with Western and Afghan National Army forces spread too thinly on the ground.

It warned that the coalition would never gain control of the country as long as the Taliban and al-Qaida fighters were able to find “safe haven” across the border in Pakistan.

The paper said that the shortage of troops was becoming a “particularly sensitive” issue in southern Afghanistan where the majority of British forces are concentrated.

“Manpower shortages mean units assigned to attack the Taliban are unable to control areas for any length of time,” it said.

“Hence coalition forces are capable of achieving tactical victories over the Taliban and controlling areas for short periods, but remain unable to defeat them.”

Low troop levels, combined with lack of equipment, meant that commanders were increasingly turning to air power, the paper said.

The result was an increasing toll of civilian casualties, which was undermining the legitimacy of the coalition forces in the eyes of both Afghans and the wider international community.

The difficulties were exacerbated by the restrictions imposed by some Nato members on the deployment of their troops, preventing them from taking part in combat operations.

In the case of Germany, it had even placed restrictions on the use of reconnaissance data gathered by its aircraft.

And when the Canadians appealed for reinforcements during a major operation against the Taliban last year, they were turned down by at least four Nato allies because of the legal restrictions on their troops.

The paper said that the result was that the internal cohesion of the coalition in Afghanistan was becoming “increasingly fragile”.

“The willingness to share risks has become a key issue. Not all Nato member states are prepared to send their forces into combat. This puts the fundamental principle of alliance solidarity on the line,” it said.

Overall, the paper said that the coalition had never been able to develop a coherent strategy which combined military operations with the reconstruction effort.

“Right from the start, reconstruction efforts lacked the necessary degree of coordination and political support,” it said.

“As a result, the coalition forces’ initial military successes could not be translated into sustainable degrees of security and stability throughout the country.”