Germany failing to fight Taliban, US claims

Nato has faced one of its greatest tests since the Cold War after America accused Germany of failing to fight the Taliban and urged Berlin to send more combat troops to Afghanistan.

Frontline: The latest news from Iraq and Afghanistan Nato troop numbers in Afghanistan Behind this disagreement between the two allies, disclosed in a "stern" exchange of letters between their defence ministers, lies a crucial dispute over "burden sharing" which threatens the credibility of the alliance.

German soldiers drive through Kabul: but the US say more combat troops are needed in Afghanistan The dispute over Afghanistan will be the dominant subject when the Nato leaders gather for a summit in the Romanian capital, Bucharest, in April. Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, is also due to visit Britain next week to discuss the issue.

All of Nato's 26 member states agreed to mount the mission in Afghanistan and 42,000 troops have been deployed in the country.

However, only four Nato members - Britain, America, Canada and Holland - have sent large numbers of soldiers to southern Afghanistan, where the Taliban insurgency is strongest. These countries, notably Britain with 7,800 troops, are conducting the lion's share of the campaign against the Taliban.

Germany has 3,200 troops in Afghanistan - but they are deployed in the relative safety of the north.

America has now asked Germany to send about 1,000 combat troops to southern Afghanistan. Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, made the demand in a letter to Franz Josef Jung, his German counterpart.

Mr Gates's missive was partially leaked to the German press, which described its contents as "unusually stern".

But Mr Jung, who replied with a "stern" letter of his own, said Germany's troops would continue to observe their parliamentary mandate. This imposes a limit of 3,500 troops, restricts the force to the safer areas of northern Afghanistan, other than in exceptional circumstances, and makes its primary role reconstruction and development not combat.

After its disastrous military history in the 20th century, Germany remains wary of joining any armed conflict.

advertisementBut unless more troops are sent to southern Afghanistan, other Nato countries might withdraw their contingents.

Stephen Harper, the Canadian prime minister, has told Gordon Brown that his country will withdraw the 2,500 troops it has in the southern province of Kandahar unless other Nato countries contribute 1,000 troops.

If this happens, the Dutch government would come under pressure to do the same, leaving America and Britain to fight the Taliban with little help.

"The greatest threat to Afghanistan's future is abandonment by the international community," Richard Boucher, the US assistant secretary of state, told American senators this week. "Too few of our allies have combat troops fighting the insurgents, especially in the south."

Paul Cornish, the head of the international security programme at the Chatham House think tank, said that this dispute was "more serious" than any previous argument about burden-sharing.

"Nato is in operations now and the whole of Nato has made this commitment to Afghanistan, so why should it be mainly American and British and Canadian boys who are fighting and dying?

"This all goes back to the key question about the health and vitality of the trans-Atlantic security relationship. Here we are, in extremis, and other Nato member states just don't stump up the troops."

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said: "It's been clear for some time that the patience of Britain and America was being tested by the lack of willingness of some of the biggest military powers in Europe to deploy in adequate numbers.

let me put it that way.

As far as i know are the remaining US forces in germany because you can reach these places you named easier cheaper and faster from here.

As i called it logistic reasons and given the fact that the infrastructure is there and germany is a political stable country these troops stay here to fight in the middle east or where ever you need. You also have a lot of legal advantages in terms of the use of airspace, your military in general and other smaller advantages remaining parts of the post war times. So i believe it is a mix of all these things why some troops are still here. Given the fact that we clearly do not need them anymore.

In the end it is a problem or a question that has to be answered in washington. (a financial and cost problem) and as a strong fiscal conservative i could really understand if the troops leave when there is a better or cheaper solution. It is US taxpayers money and i personally do not like paying taxes and i do clearly not like governments wasting my (or any other taxpayer) hard earned money.

Germany or the german people really play not a important role here beside the smaller towns i mentioned that would be hit hard if the remaining US troops leave germany.

This request was IMO a gift to Jung so he could score with the general population while the German Army slowly and sneakily starts to introduce fighting soldiers into the North of Afghanistan. There will only be ~250 soldiers for the North with a combat mandate, but to introduce them is a delicate issue anyways, because a majority of Germans does not believe in the Afghanistan mission, either because out of area missions are essentially against the Grundgesetz, or because there’s really nothing to get in Afghanistan for Germany, even if it should be a Democracy some day.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.