U.S. wants bigger war role
NATO's continuity in Afghanistan at issue

BY ROBERT BURNS • ASSOCIATED PRESS • May 1, 2008

WASHINGTON -- Pentagon officials are quietly considering a significant change in the war command in Afghanistan to extend U.S. control of forces into the country's volatile south. The idea is partly linked to an expectation of a fresh infusion of U.S. combat troops in the south next year.

Taliban resistance has stiffened in the south since NATO took command there in mid-2006, and some in the Bush administration say the fight against the Taliban could be strengthened if the United States, whose span of control is now limited to eastern Afghanistan, were also in charge of part or all of the south.

The internal discussions about expanding the U.S. command role were described in recent Associated Press interviews with several senior defense officials who have direct knowledge but were not authorized to talk about it publicly. All said they thought it unlikely that a decision would be made anytime soon.

Giving the United States more control in the south would address one problem cited by U.S. officials: the NATO allies' practice of rotating commanders every nine months -- and their fighting units every six months, in some cases. The 101st Airborne, by comparison, is in eastern Afghanistan on a 15-month deployment. In the U.S. view, nine-month commands are too short to maximize effectiveness.

U.S. combat tours in Afghanistan and Iraq are to shrink to 12 months starting in August.

The idea of changing the command structure has not yet developed into a proposal to Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The internal discussions reflect concern about a lack of continuity among NATO forces and a view that, in the long run, NATO may be better off focusing mainly on areas of Afghanistan, like the north and west, where there is less fighting but a great need for noncombat aid.

Changing the command structure to give a U.S. general more control in the south would, in effect, mark a partial "re-Americanization" of the combat mission. That could be politically controversial, given U.S. interests in maintaining a close partnership with NATO in fighting terrorism.

NATO has overall responsibility for the mission in Afghanistan, and that would not change if a U.S. general were to be put in charge in the southern sector. But it would give the Americans a greater degree of control.

There are now about 34,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan -- the most at any time during the war, which began in October 2001. They include 3,400 Marines who arrived last month as reinforcements for combat missions in the south and to help train Afghan security forces. Those Marines are to leave in October, but if replacements are not offered by allies soon, the Pentagon likely will either extend the Marines' deployment or tap another unit to fill the void.

Ellie