The resignation of a senior British general has exposed a widening rift between the military leadership and Prime Minister Gordon Brown over how the war in Afghanistan is being fought. Major-General Andrew Mackay, a former brigade commander who oversaw critical operations in Afghanistan, resigned on Thursday, the Ministry of Defence said, asking for the reason behind his decision to remain a private matter.
But since returning from Afghanistan in April 2008, he had been critical of the conduct of the conflict, saying the government was not providing the right equipment or support to troops on the ground or delivering a clear strategic direction.
A parliamentary report which drew on his opinions concluded that Britain's deployment in southern Afghanistan "was undermined by unrealistic planning at senior levels, poor co-ordination between (government) departments and, crucially, a failure to provide the military with clear direction". His resignation follows consistent murmurings from senior military staff and some officials in the defence ministry that Britain needs more than its current 9,000 troops if it is to make progress against a strengthening Taliban insurgency.
Even the new head of the army, General David Richards, hinted as much in comments in Washington this week, saying that Britain was drawing up plans to provide more troops as a "prudent anticipation of what might be required".
That line goes against the grain of the prime minister's position, which has consistently been that Britain is satisfied with its current deployment and that, while numbers are kept under constant review, any increase would likely be for training of Afghan security forces rather than for combat.
The depth of the rift will be tested as early as next week when General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of US and Nato forces in Afghanistan, presents his assessment of what is required to take back the initiative in the eight-year war. The review, parts of which have been leaked, is expected to say failure is possible unless more troops are sent, with up to 30,000 more needed for combat and training of Afghan forces.
While Britain's military leadership may want more boots on the ground as they struggle to contain the Taliban, Brown's reluctance to bolster the deployment is based partly on electoral considerations, experts say. The war, which began in 2001, has become a millstone for the government, with opinion polls consistently showing voters are opposed to the conflict, even if they support the troops. A rising British death toll - 217 to date - is also troublesome.
With an election due by June 2010, and Brown's Labour party widely expected to lose after 12 years in power, the prime minister is sensitive to Afghanistan's ramifications. "Fundamentally, the government is decision-shy at the moment," said Paul Cornish, the head of international studies at foreign affairs think-tank Chatham House. "It is stunned and floundering and doesn't know what to do on issues like Afghanistan. At the risk of sounding cynical, it's basically being driven by electoral politics."