Troops in Europe National Caveats and Deployment in Combat Missions Public support for Europe's engagement has been plummeting and most EU governments have failed to act on NATO's request to boost troop levels. One exception is the United Kingdom, which has recently pledged to increase its troop numbers in the restive poppy-growing province of Helmand. But European troop contributions continue to fall short of the 17,000 US troops deployed with the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and its 8,000 Coalition Force troops outside of ISAF. Apart from 1,500 Dutch soldiers in the neighboring Uruzgan province and a Polish and Romanian presence in Ghazni, Paktika and Zabul, no other EU nations are willing to operate in the insurgency-ridden southern and eastern parts of the country, giving the Taliban free reign. Overall, there are at least 60 such operating restrictions -- known as "caveats" -- on European troops, preventing commanders from deploying military assets where they are most needed. The most difficult and politically controversial issue in this context concerns the willingness of the 39 countries that are contributing troops to the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) not only to send a sufficient number of personnel but also to deploy them in combat missions and in the more dangerous regions of Afghanistan. Four countries – Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands – currently make up the bulk of the ISAF forces in southern and eastern Afghanistan, the most volatile areas. Most of the other countries contributing to ISAF have so far been unwilling to make significant contributions to security – including through counter-insurgency operations – in southern and eastern Afghanistan, such as by offering to replace Canadian troops in Kandahar when their current mission ends in February 2009. In addition to limits on where troops are deployed, some countries have imposed restrictions – often referred to as “national caveats” – on what their troops can do in Afghanistan: “These restrictions, for example, may prohibit forces from engaging in combat operations or from patrolling at night due to a lack of night-vision equipment.” (5) In some cases, national caveats would prevent military units from being released to assist allied forces “in moments of danger.” (6) It should be noted that it is quite common for governments or military superiors to place written or unwritten caveats on their forces deployed abroad. Often, this is linked to the type of units deployed, their training and their equipment, but it can also reflect domestic political pressure. National caveats can substantially limit the operational capability of multinational forces and their ability to accomplish their missions. The British government strongly supports the ISAF mission and a more assertive approach to stabilization efforts. It has backed its commitment with significant troop deployments and development assistance funding. In many ways, the approach taken by the government of the UK is similar to that of the Canadian government: both believe that democratization, good governance and development cannot be achieved without security, and that security requires robust military capabilities and combat operations. In keeping with this view, both have simultaneously invested heavily in military, development, governance, and diplomatic efforts. As in Canada, there are no constitutional As in Canada, there are no constitutionalor legal requirements in the UK for a parliamentary mandate to send troops abroad. The UK is second to the United States with respect to troop contributions to ISAF. Currently, over 7,700 British personnel are deployed to Afghanistan as part of the ISAF mission, up from 4,600 in May 2006. The BBC reported in October 2007 that the UK government is considering sending additional reinforcements. Most British ISAF troops belong to combat units and are deployed in the southern Helmand province, the main poppy-growing region of Afghanistan. The UK has the lead in ISAF counter-narcotics efforts and has run the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Helmand since May 2006. It previously led PRTs in Mazar-e-Sharif (2002-2006) and Meymana (2002-2005), both in northern Afghanistan. The UK also provides service personnel to the headquarters of ISAF and of OEF, both located in Kabul. Eighty-six British Forces personnel and Ministry civilians have died while serving in Afghanistan since October 2001. As well as being an important player on the diplomatic front, Germany has been one of the largest contributors of military personnel and development assistance to international efforts in Afghanistan. Insofar as the German government has adopted a comprehensive “civil–military approach,” arguing that both of these elements are necessary and complementary prerequisites for reconstruction and development, the country’s position on what the international community needs to do to bring security, good governance and development is broadly similar to that of its major allies. However, Germany has been widely criticized for its unwillingness to contribute to ISAF combat missions, in particular in eastern and southern Afghanistan, for what many consider to be the inadequate capabilities of its ISAF forces, and for imposing some of the most restrictive national caveats of ISAF contributing nations. Unlike Canada, the UK and the Netherlands, Germany requires an explicit mandate from the lower house of parliament – the Bundestag – before German troops can be sent on military missions abroad. As a result, German participation in ISAF and OEF is widely seen as being particularly susceptible to domestic political pressures. In addition to concerns about the impact of combat operations on stabilization and reconstruction efforts, and about exposing German troops to greater risks, German politicians and the public are also particularly averse to accepting the possibility of civilian casualties of ISAF and OEF combat operations. After a lengthy public debate, the ISAF mandate – including that for six reconnaissance planes and ground support – was extended in October 2007 for one year. But the government rejected calls from NATO for Germany to send troops to participate in combat operations in the south. The mandate for German OEF participation, which was extended in November 2007, allows the government to deploy a total of 1,400 armed forces personnel – including 100 special forces and 1,000 marines. Currently 300 marines are deployed in the Mediterranean and at the Horn of Africa. German special forces have in the past participated in OEF combat operations in Afghanistan. There are currently 3,140 German troops in Afghanistan, making it the third largest contributor of military personnel to ISAF (as of 1 November 2007). They are equipped and trained for stability operations but not for combat and are deployed in northern Afghanistan, where Germany runs two PRTs – in Kunduz (since October 2003) and Feyzabad (since September 2004). Germany has been the “lead nation” of ISAF Regional Command North, which is responsible for five PRTs. Germany has six Tornado reconnaissance planes stationed in Mazar-e-Sharif. The German army has also leased 20 Leopard 2A6M tanks to Canada. Twenty-two German service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan.