German Views On Afghanistan

TW: The German news magazine Der Spiegel summarizes some reaction from German editorials regarding the latest initiatives in Afghanistan. What strikes me is the lack of any consensus or clear mission in the editorial voices.

One sees the center-right paper patting Germany on its back for having invented the concept of nation-building (huh?) and excusing Germany's ability to avoid combat because they picked the quiet region first before others picked their regions (a kind nyah, nyah approach). The lefty paper rightly mocks the German commitment to increase their police training force by a whopping 150 or so while acknowledging even that paltry change will run into resistance. The German financial paper basically says the U.S. will be left holding the bag.

I have read before that European public opinion has melded the extremely unpopular Iraq situation with the poorly understood AfPak conflict far more so than even here in the U.S. Obama and European leaders have much work to do in order to motivate the European publics to commit their blood and treasure to the AfPak theater.

From Der Spiegel:
"In the run-up to next week's NATO summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel gave a speech on Thursday in which she offered support for Obama's plan and described the war in Afghanistan as the "most important contemporary test" of the 26-state NATO alliance. At the same time, she said Germany had no plans to send any additional troops to the country. The relatively small number of additional civilian helpers Berlin plans to dispatch to the country has come in for some criticism. On Germany's editorial pages on Friday, commentators are scathing of the country's contribution.

The financial daily Handelsblatt writes:
"Every member of NATO wants a success in Afghanistan But it is the US that has had to handle most of the military work. That will be the conclusion at next week's NATO summit after the niceties have been filtered out of the closing statement. German Chancellor Merkel made that very clear for Germany on Thursday. Germany will not increase its number of troops in Afghanistan. Instead it wants to intensify its civilian reconstruction efforts. But that can't be truly successful without the security that only the military can provide."

"If Obama had any illusions whatsoever when he took office about whether his partners would abandon their increasing reserve on the issue of Afghanistan, then those have been buried by now...Germany may be willing to keep its current 3,400 troops in the country, but other countries are firmly holding to their plans to withdraw. Holland will pull out 1,700 troops by 2010, and a year later Canada's 2,800-soldier contingent will return home. The success or failure on the main front in the battle against radical Islam will be determined by the US's engagement there."

The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:
"Germany can 'really stand by' what it has achieved in Afghanistan since December 2001 -- and with that remark, Chancellor Merkel was right...The fact that NATO's most important mission is in the Hindu Kush is, after all, due to a German initiative. And because Germany was the first to send a reconstruction team to the region, it gave them the chance to select the comparatively peaceful north of the country. There the German forces...were able to fulfil the task set before them."

"Now they are boosting the size of the team, they are sending more trainers for the Afghan army, and more troops in time for the election. But they are always being deployed in the north. Sending troops to other parts of the country, places where there is fighting, will become difficult to avoid in the long term. And experience shows: Taking the initiative yourself early is preferable to being forced into something late in the day."

The left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes:
"..NATO, of course, understands that, in places like Afghanistan, it can only play a small part in any solution and that the rebuilding of civil society is the most important priority."

"It is a platitude which fails to gain extra meaning through repetition in parliament. Merkel's suggestion would only be revolutionary if it were followed by action. But in that respect, Merkel keeps quiet. The fact there are German forces in Afghanistan speaks for itself, according to the chancellor -- and that was all she had to say. There was no mention of Germany sending more police trainers to Afghanistan than those already planned. In total 120 are due to be sent, along with 45 military police. But that's a joke. What is needed are hundreds of civil trainers."

"But that would leave the chancellor in a difficult conflict with the German states, which would be in charge of committing police. Angela Merkel sidestepped this conflict by announcing a revolution -- and then taking a well-trodden path. That is nothing more than political window dressing."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,615878,00.html