Afghan war: worth the effort?

The war in Afghanistan has dominated the headlines with a major US-led offensive against the Taliban being waged in the south of the country. Coalition troops, especially British, have suffered an increased number of casualties, which raises questions about both public opinion in the UK as well as how the war is actually proceeding.

This war has its challenges; the present security situation is certainly cause for concern and it will be a while before the Taliban are defeated, but this is not a time to lose heart.

It is a time to review strategy and to remain determined to contain the Taliban in Afghanistan.

It is important to realise just what is at stake in this conflict. Should Afghanistan be allowed to fall to the Taliban, this could well lead to the collapse of Pakistan - which means Al-Qaeda and the Taliban will possess nuclear weapons.

Afghanistan and Pakistan would become failed states promoting global terrorism and the whole world would suffer as a result. Nato's credibility would be reduced to an all-time low. This is a situation which the international community must never allow to emerge; the cost of failure in Afghanistan is just too great.

US President Barack Obama is deploying an extra 20,000 troops in Afghanistan and has placed an increased emphasis on the country's civilian reconstruction. This is certainly to be welcomed and only time will tell if these measures are to bring the desired effects.

Some Nato countries, such as Canada and the Netherlands, have unfortunately already identified the date of their departure from Afghanistan, the former in 2011 and the latter next year. This certainly does not help as the Afghan conflict is expected to be a long drawn out one.

Britain is playing a major role in the war in Afghanistan and has the second highest number of troops there, after the Americans. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has been criticised not only by MPs but also by the military - both those serving and retired - for not providing enough troops in the troubled Helmand province. What is perhaps even more troubling is the fact that Brown has been accused of not providing his troops with vital helicopter support.

The time has probably come for Brown to review Britain's war strategy in Afghanistan. For example, Britain is sending 700 additional troops to the country on a temporary basis to help with security during the upcoming Afghan elections.

The Prime Minister could easily announce that these additional troops are to remain in Afghanistan on a permanent basis. Furthermore, the question of helicopter support - which the UK media has been repeating over and over again - needs to be addressed.

If Britain believes it should have a global role - as indeed it should - it needs to act as a truly global power, which means being able to properly fund its war effort in Afghanistan.

Even though the situation in Afghanistan is far from ideal, opinion polls regularly show the majority of the Afghan population want the coalition forces to remain in the country to prevent the Taliban from ever returning to power.

The international community must therefore remain committed to the war in Afghanistan even though things are not looking particularly good at the moment - July witnessed the largest number of coalition deaths since the 2001 invasion - 56 fatalities, two thirds of which were caused by roadside bombs.

Obama first announced his new Afghan strategy in March and now another review is being undertaken, this time by the new US commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal. Most analysts expect one of McChrystal's main recommendations to be a large increase in the size of the Afghan security forces, even greater that what has already been proposed, namely an increase in troop numbers, from 85,000 to 134,000.

US Vice President Joe Biden last week told the BBC that the Afghan war was worthwhile. During a trip to Ukraine and Georgia he said: "In terms of the national interest of Great Britain, the US and Europe, the war in Afghanistan is worth the effort we are making and the sacrifice that is being felt. And more will come."

I sincerely hope Biden is right. Everyone knows the challenges in Afghanistan are huge, but failure is really not an option.

Yes, the Taliban have proved to be a formidable enemy and, yes, the Soviets were defeated in Afghanistan in a war that lasted 10 years - although the Mujahadeen were then backed by a superpower, the US, as well as the Saudis and Pakistanis, so the situation today is different.

The military aspect of this war is, of course, crucial but what is equally important is a constant review of strategy, the strengthening of the rule of law, a strong clampdown on corruption, increased economic activity and tangible benefits for all Afghans and real worthwhile incentives for the insurgents to defect, even if this means negotiating with so-called 'moderate' elements within the Taliban.

This is the only way this war will ever be won.