- Holding territory depends on Afghan troops
- Only 650 Afghan soldiers fighting with U.S., British
- Training of Afghan police, soldiers needs expanding
By Luke Baker
LONDON, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. and British offensives in Afghanistan may curtail the Taliban ahead of elections next month, but long-term success depends on Afghan security forces holding the ground and they are weak and undermanned.
Britain ended a five-week operation against the Taliban on Monday, saying it had cleared militants out of towns and villages along a river valley in Helmand, a vast province of southern Afghanistan where the insurgency remains strong.
The aim was to take the territory and hold it ahead of presidential and provincial elections on Aug. 20, then build up the strength of the local government, providing reconstruction funds and other aid in the hope of keeping the Taliban out.
But even as the offensive ended, the commander who led it acknowledged that its ultimate success hinged on Afghan security forces, too few of whom have so far been trained or are capable of operating competently alongside Western troops or alone.
"In terms of the longer term, the real key is to make sure that we have enough Afghan national security forces," said Brigadier Tim Radford, speaking via video link from Helmand.
"We have had some Afghan National Army and police with us, but not enough. If we had more, we could do more. If one thing is clear, it's that we need more Afghan National Army."
That is a line that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has been pushing with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, and that U.S. commanders have also emphasised, well aware that building up competent Iraqi security forces helped quell insurgents there.
"I'm very clear that the Afghan army has got to do more," Brown said this month after speaking to Karzai about the issue, keen for more than the 650 Afghan troops sent as reinforcement.
"It would be by far the best way of moving forward if once ground is taken by our troops, then local Afghan troops and police are there on the ground (to hold it)."
TOO FEW AFGHANS
NATO powers have so far helped train about 95,000 soldiers for the Afghan army and almost the same number of police, producing a relatively small total for a country of 30 million people that has the deep security problems Afghanistan faces.
Furthermore, capabilities vary widely -- especially in the police -- and corruption, under-equipment, poor command and control and faulty logistics are constant issues to resolve.
"The security forces of Afghanistan still lack some critical capacity, especially the police," Colonel Christopher Langton, a military expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, told Reuters.
"Once we have cleared and hold the ground, the aim must be that international forces can move on and allow Afghan national security forces to continue to hold while building is done. The Afghan army's capacity at the moment is not sufficient for that."
A rule of thumb in counter-insurgency doctrine is that around 20 to 25 soldiers or police are needed to maintain security among every 1,000 members of the population.
Helmand, among the most restive of Afghanistan's provinces, has about 1.3 million residents, indicating that 26,000-32,000 troops and police should be on hand to sustain security.
Britain, the United States and other NATO allies have a total of about 14,000 troops in Helmand. Afghan soldiers and police are nowhere near numerous enough to make up the deficit.
James Cowan, a British brigadier due to take over command of a brigade in Helmand in October, acknowledged last week that having more Afghan security forces would be critical to his success, but added: "I will make do with what I have."
While NATO states leading the Afghan training efforts have stepped up the timetable for turning out more soldiers and police, cutting corners can lead to bigger problems down the road and set back the overall security structure.
What's more, even in five years' time, Afghanistan's army is unlikely to be capable of holding territory or mounting offensives against the Taliban without air support -- helicopters and fighter jets -- from Western powers.
"The effort has been to squeeze the Taliban out of certain areas, and the challenge now is to hold those areas and maintain dominance of those areas," said Paul Cornish, an Afghanistan expert at Chatham House, saying that would be a challenge.
In the past, British and U.S. troops have taken territory from the Taliban only to lose it three months later, unable to hold on to large areas with relatively few men.
Those setbacks, Cornish told the BBC, have been "a function of the lack of ground troops available to take an area and then hold on to it." (Editing by Myra MacDonald)