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

Disputes delay Afghan peacekeepers

Blair told MPs the peacekeeping force is vital to the existence of the provisional Afghan government

By CNN's European Political Editor Robin Oakley

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Details are expected on Wednesday of the first contingent to be sent to Kabul as part of the international stabilization force for Afghanistan.

The force will be under the command of British Gen. John McColl, who has been in Kabul negotiating the terms under which it will operate.

Coalition leaders had hoped to have a significant force in place by Saturday, when the interim Afghan government takes power. But deployment has been delayed by disputes over the force's size, composition, tasks and terms of engagement.

Sixteen nations that are prepared to provide troops will meet in London in a contributors' conference Wednesday, and an announcement is expected from the UK Ministry of Defence confirming Britain's lead role.

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

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has been the major enthusiast for the new force, insisting that the allies cannot be content with a military victory against the Taliban and al Qaeda, and that they have a duty to rebuild Afghanistan in a way that will not allow it once again to become a nest of terrorism.

"The peacekeeping or security force in Kabul is vital in allowing the provisional government to exist, to prosper and to start putting Afghanistan back on its feet," Blair told British MPs.

"If the international community walks away from Afghanistan now, it will make exactly the same mistake that the West made 10 or 12 years ago, when it left Afghanistan to become as it did -- a failed state."

But the snags that have held up the deployment of the stabilization force are not all settled.

Gen. Mohammad Fahim, the defence minister in the interim Afghan government, wanted a maximum of 1,000 troops to be sent, while Western leaders wanted a force 5,000-6,000 strong. That problem seems to have been overcome, but some Afghan commanders are refusing to allow the force to conduct street patrols.

Also, nobody can be sure how long the force will be needed. Blair has talked of a mission lasting "several months," but even that has led five former chiefs of the British forces to warn of military overstretch -- a sentiment echoed in Germany by Defence Minister Rudolf Scharping.

The Conservative opposition leader in Britain, Iain Duncan-Smith, has talked of deep misgivings about sending British troops. What worries him and others is that Britain has been involved in the offensive military action against Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, a number of whom might seek to take their revenge on peacekeeping forces.

Effectively the new force will be peacekeeping in a country not yet fully at peace, and where many warring factions have unfinished business. Leaders in many countries supplying troops have been demanding the right for the peacekeepers to be able to use force to defend themselves and protect others if needed.

UK Defence Minister Geoff Hoon has promised that the force will have "robust rules of engagement," and the UK's Minister for Europe, Peter Hain, says: "We're being very careful with our planning to make sure our troops are as safe as possible."

But Downing Street spokesmen for Blair have been unable to supply precise details, and the powers of the new force remain to be spelled out by the U.N. Security Council resolution that will be needed to mandate their operations.