Obama must prove he wants to win this war

• Last Updated: November 25. 2009 7:30PM UAE / November 25. 2009 3:30PM GMT

It may not have the sting of “dithering”, but the British defence secretary Bob Ainsworth’s criticism of the Obama administration’s slow progress on a new Afghanistan strategy must hurt nonetheless. He suggested that America’s “period of hiatus” is making it harder for its allies to justify staying in the fight. But according to Barack Obama, Mr Ainsworth need not fret for much longer.

The US president held the final meeting of his war council on Tuesday and has promised to announce a new strategy next week. Let us hope that this will spell the end of nearly a year of hand-wringing over the war. Most news sources report that the review has taken three months, but that is only partly true. This was merely the latest in a string of strategic reviews, which began almost as soon as Mr Obama took the oath of office. The delay has had an adverse impact on nearly every aspect of the war in Afghanistan, which is all the more frustrating since the outcome was never really in doubt – not if the US intends to win this war.

In all likelihood, the military presence in Afghanistan will be considerably increased over the next year. Mr Obama may have been infuriated when Gen Stanley McChrystal’s dire assessment of the war effort was leaked, but he did not say anything that has not been known for some time: the US is losing this fight. To begin winning, it needs more troops on the ground.

That is not what has occupied the Obama administration. Rather, the concern is that the US cannot sustain this increased commitment alone, but its allies appear unwilling to shoulder any significant additional share of the burden. Of further concern is whether the fecklessness of the Karzai government will render their efforts ultimately futile.

Even the most ardent advocates of a troop increase admit that military efforts can go only so far. Any security gains must be accompanied by improved governance to undercut the Taliban’s appeal. Mr Karzai’s re-election, the questionable nature of his victory, as well as his tendency to surround himself with the corrupt and power-hungry, do not inspire much confidence in ordinary Afghans or the international community. He has promised to change, but few believe that this is more than lip service.

But the US cannot simply throw up its hands and leave. It has little choice but to choose the best from among a host of bad choices. What is more concerning is Mr Obama’s promise to end the war by the time he leaves office. It is difficult to believe he is serious. He could be forgiven for taking his time on restructuring a war effort that has been mismanaged on almost every level, but applying an artificial expiry date for the war would be the height of naivety. Perhaps he meant to tell the Afghans that the US will not hold their hands for ever. Perhaps he did it to assure his countrymen and allies that the war will not go on for ever. Perhaps he meant all these things; the US president has many people to please. Mr Ainsworth is only one of them, which should concern those who have a stake in regional stability.