Kyrgyz Parliament To Vote On Thursday On US Base

Kyrgyz Parliament To Vote On Thursday On US Base

(NSI News Source Info) BISHKEK - February 19, 2009: Kyrgyzstan's parliament will vote on Thursday on a presidential proposal to close a U.S. air base used as a staging post for U.S. forces fighting in Afghanistan, officials said on Wednesday. A lineup of U.S. air force KC-135 tanker planes seen at the Manas air base in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2009. Kyrgyzstan's parliament said Tuesday it will vote this week on a bill to close a U.S. air base that provides key support to military operations in Afghanistan. President Barack Obama's call for an increased military focus on Afghanistan could be hampered both by the potential closure of the Manas air base in Kyrgyzstan and increased attacks on the main land route for supplies through Pakistan. Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev said earlier in February he had decided to close the Manas air base because Washington had refused to pay more rent for it. The parliament in the former Soviet republic is dominated by Bakiyev's party.

NATO And U.S. Forces New Strategy: Engaging Afghans To Resolve Local Dispute, Manage Own Affairs & Intelligence Gathering

NATO And U.S. Forces New Strategy: Engaging Afghans To Resolve Local Disputes, Manage Own Affairs & Intelligence Gathering

(NSI News Source Info) February 14, 2009: NATO and U.S. forces have developed a playbook for how new replacement and reinforcing units can best fight the pro-Taliban militias in southern Afghanistan. These tips and tricks will get a lot more use soon. By the end of the year, three additional U.S. brigades will enable a new strategy, going after the heroin trade, to be implemented. The playbook, created using years of experience, exploits how the Afghans operate. For example, there are always opportunities to use tribal politics. So officers have to sit down and negotiate with likely tribal allies (usually long time foes of the drug gang leaders). This can lead to an intelligence bonanza, because lots of people know where the Taliban and drug gangs hide their assets (money, heroin and opium, safe houses). Make the right deal, and all (or at least lots) will be revealed. Without a local patron, most rural Afghans won't even be motivated by cash rewards to provide information. But if someone higher up the food chain says it's OK, you'll have more intel than you can act on at once. The decision to go after the drug trade is a big deal, because it strikes at the heart of Taliban power, and is unpopular with many in the Afghan government and media. That's because the drug trade is a huge fraction (about a third) of the Afghan economy. It's concentrated in southern Afghanistan, especially in Helmand province.

Drug money pays for most of the Taliban violence (even those Taliban fighters who volunteer to fight for free, and few do, have to be fed, armed and otherwise supported via cash). Drug money pays Afghan officials (including president Karzai's brother, and other kin) and many local journalists, to safeguard drug gang operations (poppy crops, importation of chemicals to refine poppy sap into opium, morphine and heroin, and smuggling these products out of the country). Journalists are paid to keep drug gang stories out of the media, and criticize foreign troops. Afghan officials cannot officially oppose anti-drug operations, so they must do it indirectly, by making a big deal about any Afghan civilian casualties (which are historically quite low, despite the regular Taliban use of civilians as human shields). The Taliban consider this a very effective tactic, because they can always get a local journalist, who is on their payroll, to get the initial story out. Who's going to question a local reporter's accuracy. Well, actually, many in Afghanistan do, but the farther away from Afghanistan you get, the less people know about how drug money operates in a poor country. While the Afghan government will not be enthusiastic about the new war on the drug gangs, the governments of neighboring countries, especially Iran and Pakistan, are. Most of the drugs are smuggled out via Iran and Pakistan, and a lot of the cheaper stuff (opium) is sold off to the locals (to keep them happy, and raise some operating cash). This has created millions of addicts in Iran and Pakistan, and caused major social problems.

The U.S. hopes to turn this cooperation opportunity into a relationship that will improve communications with Iran (which has been isolated for the last three decades, because Iran is run by a religious dictatorship dedicated to establishing Islamic domination of the entire planet). Iran has been fighting a low level war against drug smugglers, along its Afghan border, for over a decade.

There are hundreds of casualties and thousands of arrests there each year. But the Afghan smugglers keep coming. The money's too good, and there are over two million addicts in Iran who are really eager to stay high. There are millions more addicts in the Persian Gulf, North America and Europe as well. The drugs must get through. But the U.S. makes the case that the heroin trade has been chased out of several regions in the past half century. It can be done again. All it requires is a little international cooperation and military muscle.

British Marine, advises Afghan Army soldiers during a patrol in Kajaki, Helmand province, Afghanistan. Afghan troops, along with British Marine trainers, patroled through the area near the Kajaki hydroelectric dam. NATO and Afghan forces are battling Taliban in the area, as part of Operation Achilles, trying to enlarge the safety zone near the dam so that a USAID project to upgrade the facility can begin. The military operation, involving 4,500 NATO forces, is the largest NATO offensive yet in Afghanistan. The Taliban are led by religious fanatics (many of the armed followers are in it mainly for the paycheck), and that continues to be a major liability for them. Once the Taliban have driven police out of an area, or become the largest armed group in an area where there are no police (very common in rural Afghanistan), they begin to impose lifestyle rules that most Afghans hate. In short; no music, no videos, no dancing (even traditional Afghan stuff), and no entertainment in general.

This sort of behavior made the Taliban extremely unpopular in the 1990s, and that has not changed a decade later. Some of these Taliban religious fanatics sin on the side, but they are discrete about it. This belief in old-school religious practices is actually a new thing in this part of the world, imported by Saudi Arabian missionaries in the last three decades.

There have always been Islamic conservatives among some of the Pushtun tribes, but not as hard core as the Wahhabi brand of Islam pushed by the Saudis. But it's basically a foreign import, and disliked by most of the locals.

But if a bunch of heavily armed pro-Wahhabi guys come around, you are going to listen, and obey, at least until the bastards turn their backs. The larger number of U.S. troops will force many more Taliban enforcers to turn away from the Afghans they are tormenting, giving their victims an opportunity to fight back. This gives many Afghans a sense of déjà vu (been there before…). But that's the way it is in Afghanistan. The same thing over and over again. Despite the change in strategy, many officials in Europe and America believe that more troops are not needed. The generals point out that all that drug money is buying a lot of armed men to help spread Taliban control, and eventually you have to deal with that. Negotiations will only get you so far in the face of armed and aggressive tribesmen. This dispute is being fought out in the media and Western capitals. February 11, 2009: The Taliban carried out an elaborate suicide bomb attack in the capital, against three government ministries (Prisons, Justice and Education). Such attacks in the capital are mainly for the benefit of the media, particularly foreign media. This attacks involved at least eight suicide bombers and several dozen gunmen. At least 26 people were killed, including five suicide bombers who were shot before they could detonate their explosives. Another 55 people, mostly civilians and government employees, were wounded.

Most of the dead were terrorists. Cell phones taken from dead and captured terrorists indicated that the attack had been planned in Pakistan. Most of the suicide bombing cells operating in and around Kabul have been destroyed in the last few months, forcing the Taliban to do all the preparations in Pakistan. The terrorist intelligence was apparently faulty, as the attacks were unable to get past security. Read this article from The Star.

US Navy, Russians Seize 26 Pirates Off Somalia

US Navy, Russians Seize 26 Pirates Off Somalia

(NSI News Source Info) ABOARD THE USNS LEWIS AND CLARK — February 14, 2009: U.S. Navy and Russian warships arrested 26 suspected Somali pirates this week, while a maritime watchdog warned on Friday that pirates are stepping up attacks as weather improves in the waters off East Africa. The latest arrests came Thursday, when an American helicopter from the USS Vella Gulf fired warning shots at gunmen in two skiffs that had opened fire and tried to board the Indian-flagged vessel Premdivya. U.S. forces searched the skiff and found weapons including rocket-propelled grenades, then took nine suspected pirates aboard the American ship, the Bahrain-based 5th Fleet said. U.S. Marines transfer suspected pirates, seated, to a processing area on the USNS Lewis and Clark in the Gulf of Aden, Thursday Feb. 12, 2009. The U.S. Navy Wednesday seized seven suspected pirates in the Gulf of Aden after a merchant ship sent a distress call saying gunmen had tried to board it from a skiff. On Wednesday, the same American ship detained seven other suspected pirates — the Navy's first arrests since it established an anti-piracy task force this year. The suspects, armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades, had tried to board the Marshall Islands-flagged vessel Polaris using a ladder from their skiff. The pirates were transferred via helicopter to the USNS Lewis and Clark on Thursday, according to Lt. Nathan Christensen, a 5th Fleet spokesman. Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said they could be handed over to Kenya, after the United States last month agreed to hand pirate suspects to the east African nation. Associated Press Television News footage from aboard the Lewis and Clark showed some of the men, handcuffed and wearing leg shackles and white jumpsuits, being escorted from helicopters onto the ship. They were given a meal, a blanket, a towel and a bar of soap, but they were not allowed to talk to each other. U.S. forces assisted by a translator were trying to get information from the men, such as their ages and nationalities. The men were then taken to a holding area surrounded by razor wire and guarded. Separately, the Russian navy said Friday its nuclear-powered heavy missile cruiser Peter The Great detained 10 Somali pirates closing in on an Iranian-flagged fishing trawler. Russian military prosecutors were questioning the men, who were caught on Thursday with rifles, grenade-launchers, illegal narcotics and a large sum of money, the navy said. Piracy off Somalia, which has not had a functioning government since 1991, reached record levels last year. Somali pirates, seeking multimillion-dollar ransoms, launched 111 attacks and seized 42 vessels last year, mostly in the Gulf of Aden, with attacks peaking between September and November. Somali piracy accounted for the bulk of the 49 vessels hijacked and 889 crewmembers taken hostage around the world in 2008 — the highest worldwide figures since the London-based International Maritime Bureau began keeping records in 1991. The increased danger led the United States, India, Britain, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and other countries to send warships to the area to protect commercial vessels and more quickly rush to their aid. Still, attacks have continued, and the maritime watchdog warned on Friday ships plying the popular trade route off eastern Africa to be more vigilant. Noel Choong, chief of the bureau's reporting center in Kuala Lumpur, said six ships were attacked on Wednesday and Thursday alone. "We haven't seen such an increase in attacks for some time," said Choong. Since the beginning of January, 22 vessels had been attacked, and three were hijacked. Choong said favorable weather made it easier for the smaller pirate boats to ambush ships. He also said seven ships have been released over the past month, likely pushing pirates to try to replenish their stocks. In the latest release, pirates freed a Japanese-owned cargo ship and its 23 crew members after nearly three months in captivity, a diplomat based in Nairobi, Kenya, said Friday. The MV Chemstar Venus, owned by a Japanese shipping company and registered in Panama, was seized by armed Somali gunmen on Nov. 15 in the Gulf of Aden. On board were five South Koreans and 18 Filipinos. The diplomat, who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to speak to the media, said the ship carrying unidentified chemicals was released Thursday night. There was no immediate word if a ransom was paid. In the aftermath of what was one of the most dramatic pirate heists, Ukrainian sailors returned home after four months in captivity after the seizure of their cargo ship, MV Faina, which was loaded with tanks and heavy weapons. The sailors stepped off a plane in Kiev, tanned but exhausted-looking for a tearful reunion with their families on the tarmac. Faina's ordeal began in September, when scores of heavily armed Somali pirates swarmed onboard as it carried 33 Soviet-designed tanks and crates of small arms headed to Kenya. The pirates released the vessel last week, reportedly after receiving a $3.2 million ransom. The Faina, with its cargo, docked on Thursday at the Kenyan port of Mombasa. Foreign governments had feared the Faina's weapons might fall into the hands of Somali insurgents, who the U.S. State Department says are linked to al-Qaida.

Afghanistan May Need Larger Troop Increase

Afghanistan May Need Larger Troop Increase

(NSI News Source Info) February 13, 2009:WASHINGTON – The United States may need a military buildup in Afghanistan larger than the one President Barack Obama is considering, experts said on Thursday. The analysts, in testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives, said a larger U.S. force could be necessary to turn the tide against the Taliban so long as reluctant NATO allies and a nascent Afghan army are unable to field major reinforcements. Afghan National Army (ANA) - RAG TAG ARMY, soldiers listen to a speach in Nadi Ali district, one of the Afghanistan's top opium producers in Helmand province. In the heart of Afghanistan's opium-farming area, police use red tractors to churn up a small field of young green opium plants in a large sandy desert. Such action would have been inconceivable a year ago because of attacks from Taliban-linked gunmen protecting their share of the impoverished nation's illegal four-billion-dollar-a-year opium trade. "We must provide most of the additional troops, advisers and resources to reverse the situation," Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies told the House Armed Services Committee in written testimony. "It may well be that the current proposals for 30,000 more U.S. troops are the bare minimum necessary," he said. Obama, who has made Afghanistan the U.S. military's top priority, is expected to decide soon how many extra forces to send to a combat zone where commanders face an intensifying insurgency from the Taliban and other militant groups. The Pentagon has proposed increasing the current U.S. presence of 37,000 troops to about 60,000 in coming months in a bid to improve security and facilitate long-term development. There are also about 30,000 troops from other NATO countries in Afghanistan. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has warned that a larger military presence could backfire if Afghans view Western troops as an occupying force. But he told reporters on Tuesday there was no cap on the number of troops that could be sent. Stephen Biddle of the Council on Foreign Relations also said higher U.S. troop levels may be necessary in Afghanistan and warned the U.S. counterinsurgency strategy could mean heavy casualties early on. "Even when (counterinsurgency) works, it looks bad early. And this will promote a growing debate over the wisdom of the U.S. commitment," Biddle said in written testimony. "It would be prudent to assume that fatality rates of perhaps 50-100 per month could persist for many months, if not years," he said. There have been 576 U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion that toppled the former Taliban government. U.S. military deaths hit a high of 26 last September. There were 12 deaths in January. Cordesman did not say how large a force might ultimately be needed in Afghanistan. Biddle said Afghanistan might need a combined Afghan and Western force of 300,000 troops in southern and eastern provinces where the Taliban is strong. "If any significant fraction of this total must be American, then the resources needed will be very large," he said.

China Military Eyes Global Role, Says US Intel Chief

China Military Eyes Global Role, Says US Intel Chief

(NSI News Source Info) WASHINGTON - February 13, 2009: China's military remains primarily focused on recapturing Taiwan but the country's naval and missile build-up portends a global role for the Asian giant, the head of US intelligence said.

"China's desire to secure access to the markets, commodities, and energy supplies needed to sustain domestic economic growth significantly influences its foreign engagement," retired admiral Dennis Blair told Congress.

The priority of Chinese diplomacy is to remain on friendly terms with other major powers, especially the United States given the primacy of US demand to China's own economic growth, he said. "But Beijing is also seeking to build its global image and influence in order to advance its broader interests and to resist what it perceives as external challenges to those interests or to China's security and territorial integrity."

Blair, the new director of national intelligence under President Barack Obama, was presenting the US intelligence community's annual "risk assessment" to a Senate select committee.

He noted that under President Ma Ying-jeou of the nationalist Kuomintang party, Taiwan has resumed dialogue with China after a nine-year hiatus, and there is cautious optimism "for a period of less confrontational relations."

But Beijing's communist leadership sees eventual reunification with Taiwan to mend the rival Chinas' 60-year-old split as "vital to regime legitimacy," the US official stressed. "Preparations for a possible Taiwan conflict continue to drive the modernisation goals of the People's Liberation Army and the Chinese defence-industrial complex," Blair said. "At the same time, we judge that China over the past several years has begun a substantially new phase in its military development by beginning to articulate roles and missions for the PLA that go well beyond China's immediate territorial interests."

Blair cited China's development of a blue-water navy that can range far afield from East Asia, highlighting its decision in December to start anti-piracy patrols in the lawless waters off Somalia.

Chinese infantry troops were also extending their international presence through a higher peacekeeping profile, and may take on combat missions beyond their current role in logistical support for the United Nations.

Blair said China's space programmes, including anti-satellite weapons, "also rank among the country's highest military priorities." Of most immediate concern to far-flung US forces in the western Pacific and Asia is China's refinement of ballistic and cruise missile capabilities, while its nuclear weapons capability will increase over the coming decade.

"China also is developing conventionally armed short- and medium-range ballistic missiles with terminally guided manoeuvrable warheads that could be used to attack US naval forces and airbases," Blair said. "In addition, counter-command, control, and sensor systems, to include communications satellite jammers, are among Beijing's highest military priorities."

Thousands Of US Weapons Astray In Afghanistan: Auditors

Thousands Of US Weapons Astray In Afghanistan: Auditors

(NSI News Source Info) WASHINGTON – February 13, 2009: Lax controls mean that tens of thousands of US weapons, including assault rifles and grenade launchers, risk ending up in the wrong hands in Afghanistan, congressional auditors warned on Thursday. The Pentagon has failed to track an estimated 87,000 weapons given to Afghan government forces by the United States, or a further 135,000 donated by NATO allies, a report by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office said. US military officials' neglect to record serial numbers or conduct inventories once the weapons were shipped to Afghan forces risk them ending up in Taliban hands and being turned on NATO troops, the report indicated. "Given the unstable security conditions in Afghanistan, the risk of loss and theft of these weapons is significant," said the evaluation, which was submitted to a House of Representatives hearing taking place Thursday. GAO inspectors visited Afghanistan last August and found a worrying failure to conduct basic checks by US forces on the ground. "Lapses in accountability occurred throughout the supply chain," the report said. "This was primarily due to a lack of clear direction from (Department of) Defense and staffing shortages." Aside from weaponry including rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers and mortars, the report found inadequate oversight of night vision goggles issued to the Afghan National Army. There was no immediate comment from the US government but a senior Pentagon auditor, Thomas Gimble, was testifying at the hearing of the House subcommittee on national security and foreign affairs. The subcommittee's Democratic chairman, John Tierney, said the "disturbing" GAO report exposed the risk of US troops being killed by their own government's weapons.

US Supplies Shrinking In Afghanistan

US Supplies Shrinking In Afghanistan

(NSI News Source Info) KABUL, Afghanistan - February 3, 2009: The milk is now pulled from the mess hall by 9 a.m., to ration the limited supply. At the Camp Phoenix base store nearby, the shelves look bare. There's no Irish Spring Body Wash, no Doritos, no Tostitos Scoops, no Bayer Aspirin. "We're having the same problems all over Afghanistan," said Randy Barnes, who manages warehouses for the Army & Air Force Exchange Service, which operates stores at many of the bases where U.S. troops are deployed in the war on terror here. For the Soldiers at Camp Phoenix, about 650 of whom are from the Illinois National Guard, the missing supplies underscore what senior military officials have been saying for months: U.S. and coalition troops must find new routes to supply what will be a rapidly growing force in Afghanistan, ones that avoid the treacherous border areas of Pakistan where convoys have been ambushed. Supplying an army in any war is crucial; it's not just bullets and bombs, but everything from fuel to lettuce, that must be shipped in by the ton and the truckload. And a country like Afghanistan -- landlocked, mountainous and with few good roads -- poses enormously difficult challenges even without attacks by militants. Gen. David Petraeus, the chief of U.S. Central Command, announced late last month that the military had reached transit deals with Russia and several Central Asian states to the north of Afghanistan, to provide an alternate route from Pakistan. But it's not yet clear whether any new route would be able to absorb the heavy traffic. "It is very important as we increase the effort in Afghanistan that we have multiple routes that go into the country," Petraeus said. President Barack Obama has made the fight against militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan -- rather than in Iraq -- his top priority in the war on terror. His administration is expected to send as many as 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan in the coming months. The supply-route challenge is politically sensitive; as long as the U.S. and coalition troops depend on Pakistan to move supplies, it's difficult to be too critical of its government's help in the war on terror. Some in Washington have questioned Pakistan's commitment. But a route through Russia and neighboring countries is not necessarily a long-term solution either. The over-land route is much longer and more expensive, and dealing with repressive regimes in Central Asia also could pose political dilemmas. Sensitive military goods, such as weapons and ammunition, are transported by military convoy or air, and have not been hurt by supply-route problems, officials say. Air transport for non-combat goods is prohibitively expensive and also logistically difficult. Right now, subcontractors transport about 75 percent of non-sensitive military goods for U.S. troops and a smaller but significant amount for NATO troops from the port in Karachi, Pakistan, through the Torkham border crossing into Afghanistan. About 125 shipping containers pass through that crossing daily. It's the shortest route to Kabul and Bagram Air Base, the largest U.S. base in Afghanistan, yet it goes through narrow roads, mountain passes and hostile areas. Despite the risk, security is often lax. In recent months, Taliban-led militants have frequently attacked the military shipping containers, often stored by these subcontractors just outside Peshawar, Pakistan, in five ramshackle yards with little security and no barbed wire. Militants have destroyed more than 300 shipping containers so far, torching at least 80 Humvees for the Afghan National Army. Pakistani officials blamed the subcontractors for sacrificing security for profit. "There are two or three guards, no lights, no cameras. An office consists of an empty container, two broken-down chairs, no phone and no fax line," said Tariq Hayat Khan, the political agent for Khyber tribal agency, which includes the main road from Peshawar to Torkham. "By no stretch of the imagination can you call them shipping terminals. They've just started leveling fields and stacking containers. All they do is charge money and deliver from Point A to Point B." Because of the escalating number of attacks, Pakistan has suspended traffic through this crossing three times in the past seven weeks to launch offensives against militants. At the other major crossing in Pakistan, through Chaman in Baluchistan province, tribesmen blockaded the road for five days recently because a tribesman was killed, stranding hundreds of trucks and fuel tankers. Barnes said some of the destroyed containers set on fire near Peshawar were bound for stores at U.S. military bases. He said his company was still determining what was lost. In a roadside bomb attack on the route a couple weeks ago, four shipping containers filled with "near beer," soda and water for the troops were hit, dooming the entire shipment bound for Camp Phoenix and Camp Eggers, said Lt. Col. Eric Little, 37, of Springfield, the garrison commander for Camp Phoenix. Only at the end of January -- a month late -- did the last of 21 shipping containers with the personal goods of Illinois National Guard Soldiers arrive at Camp Phoenix. "The majority of stuff makes it from Point A to Point B -- but not necessarily timely," said Little, adding that finding other supply routes was a necessity. Taliban-led militants are not the only ones to blame. Some drivers are known to steal fuel and supplies from the trucks, or fake militant attacks and sell the goods, commonly available at markets in Kabul and near Bagram. Islamic holidays and tribal conflicts have also been used as an excuse for the massive delays. Although the supply-route problems are not yet hurting the military effort here, they affect daily life at the bases, at least at Camp Phoenix, usually one of the most well-stocked because it is in the capital. "I've never seen the store this empty, ever," said Ula Loi, the store manager. The troops can still get medicine from the medical tents, where the stocked supplies are plentiful, so the only immediate shortages are quality-of-life ones, which probably won't win much sympathy from Soldiers in more remote bases. Still, most snacks, half the beauty products, and all the adapter plugs and combination locks are sold out. Last week, several Illinois National Guard Soldiers complained about the empty shelves -- one traded a pack of spare razor blades for a bag of chips, neither of which were available. "They don't even have any Vaseline," said 2nd Lt. Michael Quam, 27, from Dubuque, Iowa, who wanted Vaseline for an Afghan friend whose wife just had a baby.

Obama Agrees To Major US Force Increase In Afghanistan: Report / Obama Again Vows To Send More US Force To Afghanistan

Obama Agrees To Major US Force Increase In Afghanistan: Report / Obama Again Vows To Send More US Force To Afghanistan (NSI News Source Info) WASHINGTON - January 13, 2009: President-elect Barack Obama intends to sign off on Pentagon plans to send up to 30,000 more US troops to Afghanistan to gain time to review the conflict, the Washington Post reported Tuesday. The new deployments would nearly double the current US force in Afghanistan of 32,000 troops. According to the Post, which cites unnamed senior Obama team members and Bush administration officials, the goal is not for an Iraq-like "surge" but rather to gain time for a fresh look at US goals and develop a comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan. Obama, who takes office on January 20, has vowed to boost development in Afghanistan and shift the focus of the "war on terror" from Baghdad to Kabul. A US troop increase in Afghanistan was anticipated. "We have no strategic plan. We never had one," an unnamed senior US military commander told the Post, describing the Afghan strategy under President George W. Bush. According to the Post, the outlines of the new strategy will not likely emerge before early April, when Afghanistan and Pakistan will top the agenda at a NATO summit in France. Obama hopes to present the Europeans a comprehensive plan, then ask them for increased military and financial contributions. "What they've got to say is 'Okay, if you love Obama, show us how much'," another retired senior military officer told the Post. There are currently between 60,000 and 70,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan, about three-quarters of them under NATO command, helping the government of President Hamid Karzai battle a mounting Taliban-led insurgency.