Barack Obama is expected to send 34,000 more US troops to Afghanistan when he unveils his long-awaited strategy for the Afghan conflict next Tuesday, US media reports said today.The Politico website said the US president would make a prime time address to the American people to announce his plans for what he has described as "a war of necessity".Just as significant as the number of troops, however, will be pointers to a US exit strategy - something that will be closely watched by the British government, which is under public pressure to withdraw 9,000 UK troops from Afghanistan.
Barack Obama is expected to send 34,000 more US troops to Afghanistan when he unveils his long-awaited strategy for the Afghan conflict next Tuesday, US media reports said today.
The Politico website said the US president would make a prime time address to the American people to announce his plans for what he has described as "a war of necessity".
Just as significant as the number of troops, however, will be pointers to a US exit strategy - something that will be closely watched by the British government, which is under public pressure to withdraw 9,000 UK troops from Afghanistan.
Die hören sollen, sie hören nicht mehr, Vernichtet ist das ganze Heer, Mit dreizehntausend der Zug begann, Einer kam heim aus Afghanistan.
The US special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, spoke to SPIEGEL about Washington's goals in Afghanistan, President Obama's new war strategy and the prospects of handing over responsibility to the government in Kabul. SPIEGEL: You were part of President Johnson's Vietnam team, you even wrote some parts of the Pentagon Papers, which uncovered the real history of the Vietnam War. What have you learnt from that experience and can you draw it in your current job? Richard Holbrooke: I was a very young man when I worked on Vietnam between 1963 and 1969. I worked in the field and in the Johnson White House, as well as being a member of the negotiating team in Paris. I watched people confront great decisions, and from that close observation, I think I learned how to approach such difficult moments and try to analyze them. SPIEGEL: With that experience in the back of your mind, do you think it really pays for the United States to fight wars in far-off and unstable lands, especially those that have acquired a reputation for being a "graveyard of empires?" Holbrooke: Of course it's difficult to fight in Afghanistan. But it's necessary because of 9/11. That is the core difference between Afghanistan and Vietnam. We're not in Afghanistan to build a perfect democracy. We know these were not perfect elections. But we must go ahead, we must help the Afghans strengthen their own capabilities. We're not there to take over the country, we're there to help the Afghans build their own capacity so that their security forces can replace the international forces over an acceptable period of time.
The US special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, spoke to SPIEGEL about Washington's goals in Afghanistan, President Obama's new war strategy and the prospects of handing over responsibility to the government in Kabul.
SPIEGEL: You were part of President Johnson's Vietnam team, you even wrote some parts of the Pentagon Papers, which uncovered the real history of the Vietnam War. What have you learnt from that experience and can you draw it in your current job?
Richard Holbrooke: I was a very young man when I worked on Vietnam between 1963 and 1969. I worked in the field and in the Johnson White House, as well as being a member of the negotiating team in Paris. I watched people confront great decisions, and from that close observation, I think I learned how to approach such difficult moments and try to analyze them.
SPIEGEL: With that experience in the back of your mind, do you think it really pays for the United States to fight wars in far-off and unstable lands, especially those that have acquired a reputation for being a "graveyard of empires?"
Holbrooke: Of course it's difficult to fight in Afghanistan. But it's necessary because of 9/11. That is the core difference between Afghanistan and Vietnam. We're not in Afghanistan to build a perfect democracy. We know these were not perfect elections. But we must go ahead, we must help the Afghans strengthen their own capabilities. We're not there to take over the country, we're there to help the Afghans build their own capacity so that their security forces can replace the international forces over an acceptable period of time.