NATO has agreed to plans extending its International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) peacekeeping mission into Afghanistan's more volatile south, but concerns remain over who will provide troops amid growing security fears on the ground, officials said.
The operational plan to send up to 6,000 extra troops for the next phase of expansion of the ISAF was provisionally agreed last Thursday by ambassadors at the military alliance's Brussels headquarters.
But sources underline that concern about sending troops into potentially frontline combat situations, as opposed to a strictly peacekeeping role, is raising questions in NATO capitals, notably the Netherlands.
"ISAF will be faced with a more dangerous situation in the south. There are countries which are hesitating," said one source at the 26-nation alliance.
NATO has been in charge of ISAF since 2003, and has gradually expanded the force out of Kabul into the north and west of the country, chiefly through establishing civil and military Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT).
A separate US-led coalition of nearly 20,000 mostly US troops, Operation Enduring Freedom, is based mainly in the more volatile south and east, the focus of attacks by Taliban and other insurgents.
Under the operations plan agreed last week, NATO troops will also move into the south in May with the help of "up to 6,000" extra troops to add to the currently 9,500-strong ISAF force.
The plan -- expected to be submitted for final approval by NATO in Brussels on Dec. 8 -- underlines that any ISAF troops dispatched to the south would have more robust protection and beefed up "rules of engagement".
It also sets out in detail command arrangements between ISAF and the US-led anti-terror operation, a subject which has fueled intense debate for months at NATO headquarters.
Under the agreed plan, a NATO commander for the whole of Afghanistan would be backed up by three deputies, one in charge of security, who would be "double-hatted" in the sense of being answerable to both ISAF and the Americans.
At NATO headquarters, officials insist this will allow for a clear distinction between troops involved in anti-insurgent combat and ISAF, while underlining that NATO troops must all be able to defend themselves.
But in private military sources concede that it may be difficult, on the ground, to distinguish what is self-defense and more "pro-active" operations. Grey zones also exist for example in the fight against drug trafficking.
To cloud matters further, attacks on ISAF forces have intensified in recent months, fueling concerns in national capitals over the protection of soldiers they provide to NATO.
So for example in the Netherlands, the two main political parties have voiced reservations about sending Dutch troops, as scheduled, to the difficult southern province of Oruzgan.
"The secretary general is fully aware of the discussions taking place in the Netherlands," a NATO official said, referring to the alliance's chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.
"No country intends to send their troops to the south with one hand tied behind their backs," the official said.
Britain, which will take over command of ISAF in May, is expected along with Canada and the Netherlands to lead PRTs in the south.
RSS