Ways out of Afstan

Everyone seems to be scurrying around trying to find the exits, at varying velocities:

1) Sunday Telegraph:

[UK] Government gives up hope of more European Nato help in Afghanistan
The Government has given up all hope of its European Nato allies sending more troops to fight in Afghanistan, it can be revealed.
...
Sources have also indicated that both Britain and America may have to commit extra forces to the campaign if Canada withdraws all of its 2,800 troops in the next 18 months from the troubled Kandahar Province...

...the only country to make a significant response was France when it sent around 1,000 extra troops to Afghanistan last year...

...Britain, with 9,000 troops in the country, has suffered 212 fatalities.

By comparison Canada, with 2,800 troops have lost 124; Germany with 4,050 have 33 dead; France with 3,160 has 28 dead and Denmark with 700 troops has lost 24...

Some more (likely non-combat) Spaniards may be sent. But there are airstrike repercussions in Germany [Update: more here].

2) Independent on Sunday:

British troop numbers to be cut in Afghanistan
Gordon Brown tells US he will scale down UK military involvement in the next three to five years. Brian Brady and James Fergusson report

Britain has laid plans to begin winding down its military involvement in Afghanistan, by slashing its troop presence by at least half within five years.

Gordon Brown has put the United States on notice that he wants to cut UK troop numbers from more than 9,000 to fewer than 5,000 in "three to five years, maximum", according to senior sources at the Ministry of Defence. Ministers stress that they will not abandon Afghanistan, but they want to scale back the UK presence to levels similar to those committed by other Nato member states...

The developing British strategy for scaling back troop numbers relies heavily on their ability to increase the rate of Afghan security forces being trained to take over the job of fighting the Taliban – and the willingness of fellow Nato countries to commit more troops to Afghanistan...

At least the current commitment is firmly defended--see "Brits" here.

3) Some pretty clear thinking in the Washington Post:

For much of the 20th century before the Soviet invasion in 1979, Afghanistan was a peaceful country living in harmony with its neighbors.

There was a king and a real government, which I witnessed in the 1970s when I frequently traveled there. Afghanistan had what I'll call a minimalist state, compared with the vast governmental apparatuses that colonialists left behind in British India and Soviet Central Asia.

This bare-bones structure worked well for a poor country with a small population, few natural resources and a mix of ethnic groups and tribes that were poorly connected with one another because of the rugged terrain. The center was strong enough to maintain law and order, but it was never strong enough to undermine the autonomy of the tribes...

Today Washington is bickering over what constitutes success in Afghanistan, whether the Obama plan will work, how long American public opinion will hold up, how many more troops and dollars are needed and how to stop its alleged NATO allies from slipping out through the back door. Asked what success would look like, Holbrooke even quipped: "We'll know it when we see it."

Many dissenters in Washington, such as columnist George Will, insist that the Afghans are incapable of learning and unwilling to build a modern state. Others, including former British diplomat Rory Stewart, argue that Afghan society should be left alone. But the dissenters do not sufficiently acknowledge the past failures of the Bush administration that led us to this impasse. What's worse, they offer no solutions...

Governments...need to explain that the terrorist threat has grown and that al-Qaeda has spread its tentacles throughout Africa and Europe. And the West must admit that the Taliban has become a brand name that resonates deep into Pakistan and Central Asia and could extend into India and China.

...the minimalist state must be rebuilt at breakneck speed. President Obama understands this. His plan for the first time emphasizes agriculture, job creation and justice; on paper, at least, it's an incisive and productive blueprint. But will he be given the time to carry it out?

The Democrats want to give him just until next year's congressional elections and then start bringing the troops home....

The Obama administration can come out of this quagmire if it aims low, targets the bad guys, builds a regional consensus, keeps the American public on its side and gives the Afghans what they really want -- just the chance to have a better life.

There is no alternative but for the United States to remain committed to rebuilding a minimalist state in Afghanistan. Nothing less will stop the Taliban and al-Qaeda from again using Afghanistan and now Pakistan to wreak havoc in the region and around the world.

Ahmed Rashid, a Pakistani journalist who has covered Afghanistan for 30 years, is the author of "Taliban and "Descent into Chaos: The U.S. and the Disaster in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia."

More from Mr Rashid here.

Update thought: A relevant observation from a friend:

The greatest problem is not the backwardness and barbarism of so much of the "developing" world. It is the frivolousness and narcissism that dominates the politics and culture of the world's most privileged countries.

Related:

Afstan and Canadian political attitudes

A question of commitment

On Afghanistan: Stop Wasting Time, Stop Whining.

Upperdate: Seeking multilateral cover for an eventual bug-out:

Europe 'big three' call for Afghanistan conference

Britain, France and Germany have unveiled proposals for an international conference on Afghanistan later this year in order to press Afghans to take more responsibility for their own country...

The conference, the location of which is yet to be decided, "is to create some momentum and to say that we are now coming to a transitional phase following the second presidential election" in Afghanistan, she said.

With the help of an upcoming review by the new US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, it will make clear to countries involved in Afghanistan "what job they have to do and what our common aim is", Merkel said.

"The Afghan government will then know what growing responsibilities are going to be coming their way," she said, "and of course so that the international engagement ... can be reduced [emphasis added]."..

The conference, which Merkel said had been "informally agreed upon" with the United States and which would include the United Nations, would be focused on three areas: security, government and development, Brown said...

A CNN poll last week showed 57 percent of people in the United States, which provides around two-thirds of the foreign troops, now oppose the war in Afghanistan and 40 percent believe it cannot be won. In France, 64 percent are opposed to the mission, according to a survey last month...

Uppestdate: It's now the EU's gang of four:

Italy backs calls for international Afghan meeting

Talk about a herd mentality.