COMPLETE COVERAGE | FRONT LINES | AMERICA AT HOME | INTERACTIVES »

UK denies split with U.S. over troops

Lack of UK troop deployment has raised questions of a split between Bush and Blair over war strategy

By CNN European Political Editor Robin Oakley

LONDON, England (CNN) -- For a week now, some 6,000 UK troops have been on emergency alert, ready to travel to Afghanistan at 48 hours notice.

Last week Britain's development minister said they needed to travel within days to help protect aid agencies.

But still they have not gone, prompting stories of a London-Washington rift on strategy -- stories which government ministers deny.

"There hasn't been a hold-up. Just because you put troops on a 48-hour standby, it shows you're ready if you're asked. We weren't asked. There was no request," says Foreign Office minister Ben Bradshaw.

"The troops are still on standby and if the Afghans and the U.N. ask for help, I am sure it will be forthcoming. As for the Americans, the troops that are there are under American command."

But some observers see it differently.

CNN.COM SPECIAL REPORT  CNN NewsPass Video  Agencies reportedly got hijack tips in 1998  MORE STORIES Intelligence intercept led to Buffalo suspects Report cites warnings before 9/11  EXTRA INFORMATION Timeline: Who Knew What and When? Interactive: Terror Investigation Terror Warnings System Most wanted terrorists What looks suspicious? In-Depth: America Remembers In-Depth: Terror on Tape In-Depth: How prepared is your city?  RESOURCES On the Scene: Barbara Starr: Al Qaeda hunt expands? On the Scene: Peter Bergen: Getting al Qaeda to talk

"What I know is that last week there were some pretty gung-ho noises about large numbers of troops going to Afghanistan and they were coming out of the mouths of officials particularly close to Downing Street rather than the Ministry of Defence. It was also said, though, that this had to wait for closer contacts with the allies," says Don McIntyre, columnist for the British daily The Independent.

"Well, I think that in this context only one ally really matters, and that's the Americans."

When U.S. President George W. Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair get together these days, there's no doubt they see eye to eye on much.

But they aren't both equally keen, it seems, on creating a new world order.

"Tony Blair has been really vigorous and vociferous in saying from the outset of this engagement that the West owed a duty to the Afghans to not do what the West, and particularly the Americans, had done before and abandon it once their aims were achieved," says McIntyre.

But his allies have noted how Bush, at least before September 11, used to scoff at the notion of "nation building."

There is no split between Bush and Blair on immediate war aims. They are close allies and will remain so.

Questioned on the matter in the UK parliament on Wednesday, Blair said Britain and the United States were in "complete agreement" over the military, humanitarian, political and diplomatic objectives in Afghanistan.

He said any decision to send more British troops into Afghanistan would be made with full consultation with the U.S. government.

But differences are emerging over the post-battle phase.

Blair has promised that the allies will stay and help rebuild Afghanistan. But the British are becoming less certain about U.S. willingness to keep its forces involved in clearing up the mess once al Queda has been eliminated.