UK's Brown Wants NATO Summit For Afghan Exit Timetable (Updated)

By Steve Hynd

Faced with cratering support for the occupation in Afghanistan, Britain's Gordon Brown is trying to thread the needle by claiming that the UK's presence there is justified while looking for the fastest possible exit strategy- preferably a strategy that shows tangible progress before next year's general election. In what was billed by the government as a major foreign policy speech today, Brown has called for a London summit of NATO members to come up with a handover and withdrawal plan. The London Standard got advance notice of the speech.

�Since January 2008 seven of the top dozen figures in al Qaeda have been killed, depleting its reserve of experienced leaders and sapping morale,� Mr Brown was to say in his annual Guildhall foreign policy speech tonight. �And our security forces report to me that there is now an opportunity to inflict significant and long lasting damage to al Qaeda.�

Mr Brown will also confirm he is planning a Nato summit in London to put together an exit strategy for Afghanistan, including a timetable for handing over districts to local forces.

Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, will be invited in January with senior military commanders, diplomats and foreign ministers from the US and other allies. The conference is hoped to have a galvanising effect on the war after a period of uncertainty, just as this year's G20 summit in London led to a united approach on the economy.

Mr Brown will also use the summit to increase pressure on Nato allies, particularly in Europe, to send more troops and military resources. In his speech tonight he will say: �I want that conference to chart a comprehensive political framework within which the military strategy can be accomplished.� Mr Brown's plans suggest a withdrawal of British forces could begin in 2011, providing handovers go to plan.

This has been on the cards for a while now, and Brown's public announcement will likely get support from European NATO members. But it will also have an effect on President Obama's decision about escalation of U.S. forces. It's inconceivable that Brown might make such an announcement without first discussing it with his American ally, or that Obama will wish America to "go it alone" when the rest of NATO want to bail at the earliest responsible opportunity. Thus, Brown's speech makes it as nigh certain as it could be that Obama will opt for a minimal escalation of U.S. troops focussed mainly on a mission to rapidly train Afghan security forces and paired with a NATO-agreed timetable for drawdown and withdrawal.

Update: The Telegraph has more:

Mr Brown will say: �I have offered London as a venue in January.

�I want that conference to chart a comprehensive political framework within which the military strategy can be accomplished.

�It should identify a process for transferring district by district to full Afghan control and set a timetable for transfer starting in 2010.�

It is likely that the London conference would form the first stage of a two-part event, with the second round of talks held in the Afghan capital of Kabul.

Mr Brown is keen for the Nato allies to agree a timetable which would see British troops restricted to a training and mentoring role, rather than front line fighting against the Taliban, by the end of November.

Obama has a simple choice - he can follow NATO to the exit or he can decide that America can stand alone as the sole occupier of Afghanistan, without any coalition backing. Despite the howls neocons are going to raise once this percolates through America's punditry, he's not going to decide the latter.

Update 2: The Guardian reports the actual speech just after Brown finished, and it's all exactly as the Standard said.

[Brown] said a London-based UN conference in January could "chart a comprehensive political framework within which the military strategy can be accomplished. It should identify a process for transferring district by district to full Afghan control and, if at all possible, set a timetable for transfer starting in 2010". Downing Street hopes the UN, Nato and Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, would attend a London conference, which could name some provinces that could be handed over to Afghan control quickly, while acknowledging some would take years to transfer.

Obama has repeatedly said he does not want plans to increase US troops to Afghanistan to be seen as an open-ended commitment to the country. Brown and Obama appear to be working on an Iraq-style strategy in which Afghan security forces take over areas on a phased basis as foreign troops increasingly concentrate on training rather than fighting.

And the Telegraph's James Kirkup blogs:

Note that word timetable. A timetable for transferring districts. Hmm. If you had any doubt about the Prime Minister�s signals on Afghanistan, drop them now. This is as clear a sign as we�ve had that Mr Brown is thinking about a way out.

The search for an exit strategy raises questions. For one thing, can Mr Brown�s timetable for handover be reconciled with the estimates of Britain�s commanders, who reckon it�s going to be five years before we can start reducing troop numbers?

What does this tell us about what the UK expects Barack Obama to do on Afghanistan? The signs from DC are than an American exit is on the cards.

It looks very like the beginning of the end for the Afghan occupation.