London — Britain and other NATO partners could join Canada in withdrawing from active combat in Afghanistan, shifting the war to the Afghans in a process that could begin by the end of next year, according to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Mr. Brown announced in a speech Monday night that he hopes to hold an international conference in London in January to decide on a withdrawal timeline in which his country's 9,000 troops, along with the rest of the NATO force, would hand over power to the Afghan National Army.
“I want that conference to chart a comprehensive political framework within which the military strategy can be accomplished,” he told the audience at the Lord Mayor's Banquet in London's Guildhall. “It should identify a process for transferring, district by district, to full Afghan control and set a timetable for transfer starting in 2010.”
This would likely mean that the more secure and peaceful provinces of the Afghan north could be transferred to ANA control by the end of next year.
That would leave Britain in control of high-conflict Helmand province, where it has suffered almost 100 soldier deaths so far this year, possibly for a number of years in the future.
A spokesman at 10 Downing St. said the announcement should not be construed to mean that Britain is planning a withdrawal, but rather a shift of front-line fighting in deadly Helmand province to Afghan troops.
Some British officials have suggested that the country's troops shift to a “training and mentoring” role by the end of next November – a sharp change in the country's approach to the war.
This could put Britain, the second largest participant in the 40-nation coalition fighting in Afghanistan, in line with Canada, which has pledged to withdraw its 2,500 or so soldiers by the beginning of 2011, and the Netherlands, which will be out at the end of the year.
The withdrawal-timetable proposal appears designed to reassure voters, who have become increasingly skeptical of the war, at a moment when several of its major contributors are planning to escalate the conflict with the addition of new forces.
Mr. Brown is also preparing to announce the addition of 500 more troops to Britain's Afghan force of 9,000, the second largest after the United States. The announcement will be made in concert with U.S. President Barack Obama, who is expected to announce the addition of thousands of U.S. troops any day now.
Britain has recently asked its NATO allies, including Canada, to contribute hundreds of additional soldiers. “I am asking them to help. I think we could probably get another 5,000 forces into Afghanistan,” Mr. Brown said. There has been no indication that Canada intends to increase its troop strength further.
Mr. Brown will face an election before the summer against Tory challenger David Cameron, and the Afghanistan war is threatening to become a major issue. Polls have shown British opinion turning against the war, and Mr. Brown last week faced a media embarrassment after the mother of a dead soldier chastised him on tape.
But the announcement seemed to have been aimed equally at Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who is under strong pressure from U.S. and British leaders to reform his corrupt administration and announce some dramatic military initiatives or lose the support of foreign governments.
The United States is demanding that Mr. Karzai use a speech this week to announce major commitments, and Mr. Brown's announcement of a possible handover seemed designed to goad him.
“Following the inauguration this week of President Karzai, I'm urging him to set out the contract between the new government and its people, including early action on corruption,” Mr. Brown told the audience Monday night.
“The international community will meet to agree to plans for the support we will provide to Afghanistan during this next phase,” he said, and then announced the January meeting – strongly suggesting that its outcome, and the degree of foreign troop presence and financial support, will be contingent on Mr. Karzai's words this week.
