Nato deaths raise tension over Afghanistan strategy

After a recent series of incidents, opinion in Afghanistan and the west is hardening towards an accelerated withdrawal

US military helicopters fly over a graveyard in Afghanistan. Civilians and Nato soldiers have both been killed in recent weeks. Photograph: Erik De Castro/Reuters

This time of year in Afghanistan is supposed to be the quiet period – when attacks are down and Nato tries to consolidate any gains it has made before the "fighting season" restarts in a few weeks when the weather warms up.

Instead, the coalition has been beset by problems, some of its own making. The deaths of two more British soldiers will raise the same awkward questions.

It adds to mounting concern because the incident appears to have involved a member of the Afghan security forces, or someone posing in an army uniform, opening fire on military colleagues.

This has happened before. There have been more than 45 attacks by local police and army on Nato troops in the past five years. In the worst incident involving British soldiers, five troops were killed by an Afghan policeman in November 2009. Last April an Afghan pilot killed eight US soldiers at Kabul airport.

Every time this happens, it shakes confidence among Nato troops that they can work safely alongside Afghan colleagues, which is the cornerstone of the west's exit strategy from the country.

The fact the attack took place at the British base in Lashkar Gah, the capital of Helmand, where security has improved immeasurably during the past five years, will be particularly dispiriting for the UK contingent. The city has been one of the best examples of Nato's counter-insurgency strategy.

This has seen British troops hand over "lead responsibility" for some security operations to the Afghans, while still accompanying them on patrol and on difficult assignments.

The next stage involves small groups of military specialists properly "embedding themselves in Afghan battalions over the coming months. But British soldiers and their commanders will be understandably reluctant to do so if they feel their safety is compromised. Giving them their own force protection within the Afghan army would hardly send the right message either.

Though every recruit to the Afghan police and army is security-checked and should have been vouched for by a trusted community elder, the Taliban still manage to place people among them. Or turn them once they have been inducted.

Some may not need much encouragement. Though the number of insurgent attacks is down year-on-year, tension has been rising because of a series of incidents in the past few weeks.

They have included the burning of the Qur'an by American soldiers, a video showing US soldiers urinating on dead Afghans, and the murder two weeks ago of 17 Afghan villagers by the US soldier Robert Bales. There have also been the deaths of Nato troops, including six British soldiers killed when their Warrior vehicle was hit by a roadside bomb.

Amid all this, there was even an attempt, albeit a rather disorganised one, to target the US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, when he flew into the main British base in Helmand, Camp Bastion.

Nato is likely to insist the latest incident will not affect its strategy and that rogue gunmen, whether Afghans in uniform or not, must not deflect the coalition from the task in hand.

But sticking to that line is becoming more difficult, with public opinion in the UK, US and Afghanistan hardening to an accelerated Nato withdrawal.