ten downing street

Britain will not send substantially more troops to Afghanistan, the defence secretary, Des Browne, said today.

Browne's statement followed reports that an extra brigade would be sent next year after US pressure for an increase in the UK's force of around 8,000 soldiers in the southern Helmand province.

He said he had "no plans" for an increase and denied that military commanders had asked him for additional troops.

"I think I have made our commitment in terms of troop levels very clear," Browne, who is hosting a meeting of Nato defence ministers in London, told the BBC.

"I last told parliament on June 16 that we would carefully increase the number of troops by a few hundred to about 8,000 over the period from October, going forward.

"I have not been asked by military commanders for additional troops."

The US has around 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, but General David McKiernan, the US commander in the country, has asked the Pentagon for three more brigades in addition to an extra one to be deployed in January.

This would increase the number of US troops in the country to almost 44,000.

Washington is seeking $20bn (£11bn) from its allies to help stabilise Afghanistan, officials said yesterday.

The defence secretary, Robert Gates, said the US was considering a fundamental review of its strategy.

However, he clearly indicated that Washington expected countries that did not contribute troops to Afghanistan to give money instead.

"Lessons had been learned from Iraq ... that means more forces," Gates told journalists in London.

He said he expected "substantial commitments" from other allies for other purposes.

"One of the issues I will be raising at the [Nato] meeting is that we need, as an alliance and with our partners, to figure out a way to help pay for [doubling] the size of the Afghan army," he said.

"The capability of the Afghan army ultimately is the exit strategy."

A US official said yesterday that the plan would cost an estimated $20bn, adding: "We can see what those countries which are not contributing troops can contribute financially."

It had been unclear, however, whether Britain would increase its military presence in the country after the bulk of the 4,000-strong garrison stationed at Basra airport leaves Iraq in the first half of next year.

When Gates indicated yesterday that the UK could increase its troop numbers in Afghanistan, the Ministry of Defence was quick to deny any such plans.

"Force levels are kept under continual review, and an uplift of approximately 230 personnel was announced ... on June 16," an MoD spokesman said.

Britain's priority was to get more and better equipment, notably helicopters and armoured vehicles, to its troops in Afghanistan, officials said.

Admiral Michael Mullen told the US Congress last week he was "not convinced we're winning it in Afghanistan".

However, Gates yesterday distanced himself from the comment and instead referred to "increasing challenges" and a more complex conflict. He said Afghanistan would remain a "long-term" problem.

The US defence secretary addressed two other sensitive and difficult issues - relations with Pakistan and the number of civilian deaths caused by US bombing raids in Afghanistan.

He said US military chiefs, including Mullen, were in close contact with the new Pakistani leaders, adding that the "most productive path" in dealing with al-Qaida, Taliban and other insurgents in north-western tribal areas was "in cooperation with Pakistan".

Gates did not comment on the role of US special forces - which do not come under the command of US generals in Afghanistan - in cross-border raids.

He also revealed he had issued new orders to US commanders in Afghanistan, instructing them to consider carefully the risks of civilian casualties.

He added that the US had been "on the wrong side of strategic communications", and would in future apologise and compensate families before investigating.-link

time will tell.