By Li Qinggong
On July 20, US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced a temporary increase of American troops by 22,000 in the next three years. The increase, which will raise the number of US active-duty troops from 547,000 to 569,000, is said to ease the strain on US troops in Afghanistan and not as a move to expand its combat forces.
The Pentagon's listing of $11 billion in its new annual budget and the defense chief's decision to temporarily increase the number of troops is obviously a premeditated military move, and highlights Washington's long-term strategic aims in the changed international and regional situations.
American forces have been overstretched across the world in recent years. The deployment of about 150,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan alone, along with a large-scale regularly rotating combat force and the presence of about 100,000 troops in Europe, Asia and other regions, takes up a large portion of the Pentagon's mobile forces. As a result, the US has fewer troops to mobilize back home. This constraint is increasingly becoming one of the strongest factors to affect the US military mission in Afghanistan.
US President Barack Obama had previously planned to withdraw some of the US troops from Iraq and re-deploy them in Afghanistan. But any plan to withdraw soldiers from violence-ridden Iraq and move them to the restive Afghan battlefield cannot be completed overnight. To make up for the shortage of troops, the Obama administration has thus pushed for a temporary increase in their number. With this move, the White House aims to present a picture of accountability to the US Congress and test the American public's reaction. It is also a step to facilitate further expansion of US forces in the future if necessary.
The worsening military situation in Afghanistan has put the US forces in a very disadvantageous position in that country. According to a previous reinforcement plan of the Obama administration, the US forces in Afghanistan would have increased by 21,000 to 55,000 by June 30. But even that increase would make the number of US troops in Afghanistan only one-third of those deployed in Iraq.
The US failure to quell insurgency in Iraq is a strong indication that a smaller number of American troops is unlikely to deal a decisive blow to Taliban and Al-Qaida insurgents. In the face of the more complicated and harsher situation in Afghanistan, Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, conceded that US troops face an arduous task. According to the US Defense Department, 761 American soldiers have died in Afghanistan, with 31 killed in July alone - the highest death toll since the US launched a war on Afghanistan in 2001.
Facing an ever-worsening military situation there, it seems the US has two options: To withdraw its troops from the restive country, which might be Washington's long-term plan (though time is not ripe enough for that), or to reinforce its military presence.
Apart from the aim of easing its military problems in Afghanistan, the US' latest decision to temporarily increase the number of its troops is also aimed at mitigating mounting concerns over the forces of the allies.
US coalition forces have suffered a heavy death toll because of intensified offensives by Taliban and Al-Qaida militants. According to the British Ministry of Defense, the country's troops in Afghanistan have suffered heavy casualty this year. The United Kingdom has lost more troops in Afghanistan (188) than in Iraq. Canadian and German forces have reportedly suffered 125 and 35 deaths.
The growing number of casualties the coalition forces have been suffering have generated dissatisfaction among US allies. It is precisely this problem that has made the US army decide to expand the number of its troops. By doing so, it plans to reinforce its deployment in Afghanistan and influence its allies. British Defense Secretary Bob Ainsworth has reportedly said he would like to increase UK troops by 125 in Afghanistan. Germany, too has said it would add 600 soldiers to strengthen its 3,800-member military formation in Afghanistan, which goes to the polls on Aug 20. This could be interpreted as the allies' positive response to Washington's plan to expand its military forces.
The US move augurs a delicate change in its long-established military development strategy. The US has been pursuing a synchronized development of its land, Marine and air forces, with more attention on the building of the Marine and air forces. But the two wars the US has launched this century poses a challenge to its traditional military strategy.
In the early stages of a war, military actions such as abrupt assaults, decapitation attacks, and destructive strikes do play a crucial role. But as the war prolongs, ground forces turn out to be the key factor in determining victory, while Marine and air forces' roles tend to become less important. Such a change presses the Obama administration to change its military mindset and strengthen its non-conventional fighting capability.
The author is deputy secretary-general of the China Council for National Security Policy Studies.
(China Daily August 18, 2009)
