British troop surge: 'mid to high hundreds'

So are more British troops going to Afghanistan on top of the 8,100 or so already there? The PM is “very seriously” considering it, I’m told. This is what I can glean from snooping about in the Nato summit press centre corridors…

Troop numbers will be in the mid to high hundreds. Their deployment will probably be for four months, alongside those already in southern Afghanistan, to help allow elections currently set for 20 August to happen without the Taliban blowing up the polling stations first – and allowing voters to register in relative safety.

But there’s a catch. The British, not surprisingly, want some “burden sharing” first. So the message is “pony up”, all those among Nato’s 28 members (Croatia and Albania joined this week) who aren’t doing enough.

And the British contribution is not the 2,000 add-ons the Americans wanted. So will the Obama Colgate smile we saw in London fade?

Afghanistan will dominate tomorrow morning’s session. We just don’t know if anybody will join the British in helping provide up to two more battalions (up to 4,000 troops) which the Nato command wants for the elections to go ahead.

The French are saying “non”.

They and others would rather a “civilian surge” – trainers, money, experts – than more troops on the ground.

Nato also wants a new dual US-Nato training command for training soldiers and police, and liaison teams working with the Afghan army, so that it can be brought up to a strength of 120,000 by the end of 2010.

And a Nato “trust fund” to pay for this. Half a billion dollars would be nice.

Big wish list. But unless more “pony up” in various shapes and forms, the credibility of the alliance will be pretty battered on this, Nato’s 60th birthday bash.

Channel 4 is not responsible for the content of external websites.