DOWNING Street yesterday bolstered speculation that ministers have been pushing for an accelerated exit of British combat troops from Afghanistan to 2013, a year earlier than planned.
The current strategy is to withdraw the bulk of Britain's 9500 deployment in Helmand from their frontline role by the end of 2014, but reports suggest ministers, led by Chancellor George Osborne, are locked in intense discussions with military chiefs over their desire to see a withdrawal by the end of next year – saving the cash-strapped Coalition £3 billion.
No 10 repeated how the current UK Government plan was to withdraw combat troops by the end of 2014 and that a decision had been made to pull out an extra 500 this year. No decisions had been made beyond that, said a spokesman.
However, when asked about a speeded-up exit, he said ministers would consider other proposals "at the appropriate time" and the matter would be discussed at the National Security Committee (NSC), which is chaired by David Cameron, and with the International Security Assistance Force.
"The Prime Minister is very clear. He does not want to see a big cliff edge [reduction in troops] in 2014. We want to see a steady and measured troop drawn down. I would expect there to be discussions at the NSC but don't expect any imminent announcement."
The spokesman added: "We are going to make an informed decision and will look at all the issues in the round."
An expedited troop withdrawal is, however, causing major concern among military chiefs with one defence source saying they were "digging in and will resist this all the way".
Another warned that a 2013 withdrawal would "risk losing everything we've fought so hard for" and leave remaining troops more vulnerable to attack.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article