The British general set to take charge of UK and other Nato forces in southern Afghanistan warned today that time for tackling the Taliban was running out.
Major General Nick Carter, who will take charge of 45,000 troops six weeks from now, said there was an opportunity to "make a difference" in the next year but added that forces needed to show "positive trends" as soon as possible.
"I absolutely acknowledge that time is not on our side ... we've got to show positive trends as quickly as we possibly can," Carter told the BBC.
He said he was determined to seize the initiative from the Taliban by separating insurgents from the civilian population both physically and mentally, adding that civilians needed to be persuaded that coalition forces, rather than insurgents, deserved support.
"I think that it will happen slowly, but ... there'll be a tipping point when the population will suddenly realise that it's worth being with its government institutions rather than with the insurgent," he said.
He admitted roadside bombs were causing significant difficulties for Nato and said he hoped Afghan citizens would increasingly want to reveal where improvised explosive devices were hidden.
His comments came after the new head of the army, General Sir David Richards, said Britain's armed forces needed to be equipped with smarter weapons and rely less on traditional ones such as tanks, fast jets and surface ships in order to cope with emerging threats.
"The character of warfare is fundamentally changing," Richards said in his first major speech since taking up his post last month.
Describing Afghanistan as a "signpost to the future", he added: "Globalisation is increasing the likelihood of conflict with non-state and failed state actors, and reducing the likelihood of state on state warfare."
In a speech to the Chatham House thinktank yesterday, he warned: "Those focused on hi-tech but traditional inter-state conflict often confuse their case by asserting the need to be seen, for power projection reasons, to possess impressive amounts of traditional combat power."
He said they failed "to appreciate that an intelligent opponent will not be impressed by capabilities which can readily be made irrelevant through the adoption of asymmetric tactics or technology".
There is serious debate among defence chiefs about the future of traditional weapons systems, but they insist the future of Britain's nuclear deterrent is a "political" matter.
Richards suggested several weapons systems were becoming redundant, at least in comparison with the numbers procured in the past.
He warned: "We cannot go back to operating as we might have done even 10 years ago when it was still tanks, fast jets, and fleet escorts that dominated the doctrine of our three services.
"The lexicon of today is non-kinetic effects teams, counter-IED [improvised explosive devices, the favoured Taliban weapon], information dominance, counter-piracy, and cyber attack and defence."
Richards said even large states such as China and Russia would probably adopt unconventional tactics, adding: "Attacks are likely to be delivered semi-anonymously through cyberspace or the use of guerrillas."
He said "armed forces and other national security instruments across government must get better at tackling the challenges of this new security environment".
This, he explained, meant "ensuring our armed forces are relevant to emerging security challenges and the increasingly sophisticated adversaries we will face".
The general, who commanded Nato-led forces in Afghanistan during the first big surge of troops in 2006, said the conflict there would have "a profound effect on future conflict and geopolitics" and described Afghanistan as a "truly grand strategic issue" for Britain.
He said the Taliban ranged from hardline militant Islamists to drug barons and alienated tribal chiefs, but represented a tiny part of the Afghan population "with their supporters, around 5% at most".
A perceived defeat of the US and Nato "the most powerful alliance in the history of the world" would have a "hugely intoxicating impact on extremists worldwide".
He also warned that the correct formula for Afghanistan had not yet been found.
After referring to a recent statement by Bob Gates, the US defence secretary, that America could not afford not to succeed in Afghanistan, the general added: "We should be part of that process, preserving our relationship with the US in the process but, more importantly, seeing through this thing we started courageously and meeting the expectations of the vast majority of Afghans who, despite their frustrations with the speed of progress, remain doggedly supportive of our effort and universally opposed to the hopeless future offered by the Taliban."
He also called for more effective cooperation across government, between the military and civil agencies. Defence chiefs have been impatient with the slow pace at which civil agencies have provided non-military assistance to Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, the British commander tasked with promoting engagement with Taliban "moderates" and convincing them to switch sides said he believed many in the enemy ranks had "done nothing wrong".
Lieutenant-General Sir Graeme Lamb told the Independent many of the Taliban's fighters carry a sense of "anger and grievances which have not been addressed".
"We need to take a good look at the people we consider to be our enemies," he said.
"A lot of young men fighting us have not done anything wrong. They have anger and grievances which have not been addressed.
"The better life they expected has not materialised these are the people we must talk to, but we must make sure we have something to offer them."
