Skip to main content

The commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, U.S. General Stanley McChrystal, arrives at the Baraki Barak Joint combat Outpost in Logar Province on Aug. 21, 2009.MANAN VATSYAYANA

An urgent appeal for more troops by the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan has put Barack Obama in a tight spot - lose the war, or risk losing the American people.

General Stanley McChrystal has warned the U.S. President in a grimly worded memo that the eight-year-old conflict will fail unless he commits more forces within the next year to battle the Taliban insurgency.

"Failure to provide adequate resources … risks a longer conflict, greater casualties, higher overall costs and ultimately, a critical loss of political support," Gen. McChrystal, who also heads NATO forces in the country, argued in a 66-page document.

"Any of these risks, in turn, are likely to result in mission failure."

The ultimatum, sprinkled with the words "failure" and "defeat," comes as the White House struggles to figure out exactly what it's doing in Afghanistan, where 60,000 Americans are already fighting alongside 40,000 NATO troops, including 2,500 Canadians.

Last month's fraud-plagued Afghan election, won by President Hamid Karzai, has complicated Mr. Obama's task of casting NATO as the force of good versus the Taliban insurgents and al-Qaeda.

The Afghan dilemma has come at a bad time for Mr. Obama, who is already facing a tough time selling his signature domestic policy: reforming a health-care system that still leaves nearly 47,000 Americans without coverage.

"What [Obama]really needs at this point in time is for the world to go away, since he's got more than his hands full with the domestic agenda," pointed out Robert Jervis, a political science professor at New York's Columbia University, who specializes in international security issues.

"It isn't as though anything he can do in Afghanistan will help him domestically. It doesn't get him any votes in Congress or points in public opinion."

Recent polls suggest a narrow majority of Americans now believe the war in Afghanistan isn't worth fighting.

The Pentagon hasn't yet spelled out how many more U.S. troops may be needed to get the job done. But experts expect Gen. McChrystal, who was tapped by Mr. Obama to lead the Afghan mission, to seek as many as 36,000 additional combat troops and another 4,000 to train the Afghan army.

The Obama administration has already sent 20,000 extra troops to the country. Any new request would be on top of that.

The White House has so far been non-committal. In a series of weekend interviews, Mr. Obama said he would only send additional forces if it furthers the ultimate U.S. aim of preventing al-Qaeda "and its extremist allies" from attacking the United States and its allies.

"Until I'm satisfied that we've got the right strategy, I'm not going to be sending some young man or woman over there - beyond what we already have," Mr. Obama told NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Mr. Obama is reviewing Gen. McChrystal's memo. But the decision to send more troops, if it is made, won't come until the White House is convinced it has the strategy right.

"We're going to conduct that strategic assessment and do that in a way that lays out the best path forward before we make resource decisions, rather than having this go the other way around where one makes resources decisions and then finds a strategy," Mr. Gibbs said.

Experts said Mr. Obama is caught between a war he says is vital to U.S. interests and waning public support, even within his own party.

Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the top Democrat in the House of Representatives, said she doesn't think "there's a great deal of public support for sending more troops to Afghanistan, in the country or in Congress."

A declassified version of the McChrystal memo, leaked to The Washington Post on the weekend, appears to be part of an effort by the military to "put the heat on the White House," Prof. Jervis said.

In the end, the White House will probably acquiesce and commit more troops, he added. But measuring the success of the mission will continue to be difficult, he said.

Mr. Obama's challenge will be to convince Americans that the Afghan mission is crucial to going after al-Qaeda and the Taliban and preventing future terrorist attacks, said Scott Payne, a national-security expert at Third Way, a Washington think tank.

"This is about U.S. national security," he said. "It's not about building an Afghan democracy."

Prime Minister Stephen Harper reiterated Monday that Canada's activity in Afghanistan will shift from combat to development and humanitarian aid in 2011.

"It is critical that we and NATO and the United Nations more broadly develop a plan to shift responsibility for the security of Afghanistan to the Afghans themselves," Mr. Harper said in Guelph, Ont., at the opening of a research and development centre built by auto-parts maker Linamar Corp.

"In 2011, we will have been - meaning Canada and other NATO allies - we will have been in Afghanistan almost as long as we were in the two world wars combined, and I think [with]this kind of time frame, we've just got to see some results from the Afghan government on the ground as pertains to their own security."

Geoff Morrell, a deputy assistant secretary of defence for communications issues, said in a statement that Gen. McChrystal's assessment "is a classified, pre-decisional document, intended to provide President Obama and his national security team with the basis for a very important discussion about where we are now in Afghanistan and how best to get to where we want to be."

Among the key recommendations and observations in the Gen. McChrystal memo: The Afghan government is dysfunctional and riddled with corruption. The tactics of NATO forces alienate Afghan citizens. The country's prison system is a dangerous recruiting ground and a sanctuary for insurgents. NATO forces must change their "operational culture" and get out of their armoured vehicles and compounds to increase Afghans' sense of security. More coalition casualties are inevitable. Better co-operation is needed with Afghan troops as well as ramped up training for its forces.

With a report from Greg Keenan

Interact with The Globe