Brown: 5K More NATO Troops for Afghanistan

(CBS/ AP)  Britain's prime minister said Friday he could secure commitments for 5,000 more NATO forces in Afghanistan, offering key backing to the U.S. as it weighs increasing troop levels.

Gordon Brown robustly defended Britain's mission in Afghanistan, but he acknowledged in an interview with the BBC that Britain needed to "adjust our approach" amid rising casualties. He insisted that Washington and London need the 43 other nations involved in the International Security Assistance Force to step up to help share the burden.

"I think we can probably get another 5,000 forces into Afghanistan," he said.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan

Brown has already pledged 500 more troops to the war effort under certain conditions. Brown has offered unwavering support to President Obama as the U.S. leader considers a troop increase of as much as 40,000 soldiers.

"I have taken the responsibility of asking others in Europe, and outside Europe actually, if they will back this strategy which is partnering the Afghan forces, mentoring the Afghan forces," he said.

Meanwhile, a White House official traveling with President Obama to Asia said late Thursday that Mr. Obama's decision on future war strategy for Afghanistan is expected no sooner than the first week in December.

The official tells CBS News "there is a sense of urgency to get it right," without rushing the announcement.

White House: No Troop Decision Until December
Gates: Obama Wants to Combine Afghan Plans
Official: Obama Wants New Afghan Options
Source: U.S. Ambassador Objects to Afghan Surge

Brown's remarks come a day after he met with NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. The NATO chief said that other allied nations have privately pledged more help, but Rasmussen stopped short of saying that countries would send more troops.

Canada, Finland and the Netherlands have either pulled troops out or set withdrawal dates. Other countries, such as Denmark, Italy, Germany, Norway and Sweden, say they will maintain current troop levels but have no immediate plans to increase them. Only Britain and Turkey have made significant pledges, and Turkey — a Muslim country — has committed noncombat personnel only.

It was unclear how many pledges had been made or whether assistance would be in the form of troops, trainers or other resources.

Europe has been reluctant to continue supporting the U.S.-led mission that began in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. Public opinion has wavered as more troops die, and as fewer known terror plots are traced back to Afghanistan.

Questions are being raised why Europeans are asked to die for a corrupt and inefficient government in Kabul that shows little signs of wanting to change.

[babooph]

Like adding one more deck chair to the Titanic....

[ramos1129]

Note to PM Brown......sorry but no pat on the back for the extra 5K troops (if they do go). A big thank you when England matches the 68K troops we presently have there.

[benHAY262779]

That is impossible, as the British army is far smaller than the american army. Britain has about 90,000 combat ready troops whereas the US has about 800,000 I think. So the current deployment of about 9,500 brits to 68,000 americans is about equal if you take into account the number of troops each country has.

[ramos1129]

Brown's remarks come a day after he met with NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen. The NATO chief said that other allied nations have privately pledged more help, but Rasmussen stopped short of saying that countries would send more troops.

Canada, Finland and the Netherlands have either pulled troops out or set withdrawal dates. Other countries, such as Denmark, Italy, Germany, Norway and Sweden, say they will maintain current troop levels but have no immediate plans to increase them. Only Britain and Turkey have made significant pledges, and Turkey ? a Muslim country ? has committed noncombat personnel only.
------------------------------------------------------

In Korea, we contributed over 90% of the troops; the same for Vietnam: the same for Iraq and now the same for Afgan even though each was deemed an international problem. The reason for this? We are willing to be taken advantage of. This is true whether or not the President is a Democrat or a Republican. This mentality deeply harms the USA.

[bubbadubba]

The EURO's really need that pipeline through Afghanistan and the US doesn't.
Let the Euorpean union fight for their pipeline.

[finkfurst]

by aresnaut November 13, 2009 8:26 AM EST
Actually, they sell more North Sea oil if the pipeline does NOT get build ;-)
-------------------
.......... and that is now running out, which is exactly why the pipeline IS needed.

[Cyber998]

aresnaut: Shush, you're letting facts and logic get in the way of Rhetoric. Rhetoric is far easier.