The top U.S. general in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, has acknowledged that the U.S. could lose the war with the Taliban in Afghanistan in the next 12 months. He says, "we could defeat ourselves." I must say I agree with his assessment. I haven't been surprised by his statements as well. The Taliban may well prevail in the coming months, if there isn't enough political will amongst European countries, especially towards committing more troops on the ground. However, as unwilling and seemingly uncooperative that Europe has been, President Obama has his own problems on the home front - there has been growing opposition within his party to the war. This most certainly will complicate things, quite unfortunate!!

Its unfortunate because, I believe, this is a war worth fighting for. History has taught us that turning our backs on Afghanistan doesn't solve anything. On the contrary, leaving a mess behind, might prove costly!! Are NATO countries willing to risk that? The Taliban aren't going anywhere. They know they can wait for the impatient and battle weary Americans and Europeans to leave on their own, leaving behind an ill-equipped Afghan Army and fragile state institutions to battle the Taliban. It seems to me that we are on course to repeat the mistakes of the past. It follows a similar pattern. Enter a battle with a bang, leave with a whimper without accomplishing anything!!

General Stanley McChrystal has requested some 30,000 additional troops, according to most reports, but its anybody's guess how much he will really get and in what time duration. The Europeans have been more than shy offering any troops. The ones they do, I am not sure how many take part in combat operations, which is what is really needed to defeat the Taliban and gain back the vast swathes of land that they've gotten control of and sought to establish their influence on.

It seems to me that there is no clear strategy inside the White House on what should be the way forward in Afghanistan. The strategy thus far seems to be to continue the status quo. This is, I am afraid, not a good option. It can only result in continued casualties and a hardening of public opinion against the war.

A better strategy would be to take a more comprehensive view to include training Afghan forces on a fast-track basis by inducting more NATO troops, part of whom can combat the Taliban, whereas the others can train an increasing number of Afghan forces. However, apart from the military aspect, there is an immediate need for fast-tracking nation-building by primarily rooting out corruption in the local Afghan Govt. Its imperative that NATO leaves behind a country with strong, lasting institutions - apart from a capable Army. Some might scoff at the idea of nation-building; however, leaving Afghanistan in a mess would be unforgivable after all the resources that have been invested there thus far. There's also the need to keep Pakistan in check and ensure that they don't meddle in Afghanistan and give safe haven to Taliban in an effort at destabilizing the Afghan Govt.

Wars aren't pretty, they certainly aren't popular. However, it is at such times that leaders are called upon to use their wisdom and make the right decisions for their peoples. I hope Obama can make his decisions based on the objectives on the ground in Afghanistan!!