The whole issue is far more complicated than described by Roper or Annen. Seems to me that especially Roper didn't get the logic and the red herring behind the actual political maneuvers of some German politicians.

So what's the difference between OEF and ISAF? The rather misleading description of both of these military operations in German media typically goes as follows:

1. Operation Enduring Freedom is the official name used by the U.S. government for its military response to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. The mandate for fighting terrorism is the OEF mandate. Germany is actually involved because of the KSK force in Afghanistan (OEF-A) and the marine ships that monitor, inspect, board and stop suspected shipments from entering the Horn of Africa region and areas of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF-HOA). OEF (better: the US) has been criticized from Afghan President Hamid Karzai, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop and German Defense Minister Franz-Josef Jung for causing a high number of civilian casualties and for the general secrecy of the KSK operations (and informally for the fact that it's US-led and Germans have nothing to say). For this, numerous German politicians have called for pulling back on support. The OEF mandate has to be renewed annually by the Bundestag.

2. NATO took command and co-ordination of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in August 2003. ISAF operates in Afghanistan under a UN mandate and will continue to operate according to current and future UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions. Its goal is to help to bring security, stability and foster development in Afghanistan. Until July 2006, Germany provided the lion's share of the ISAF in Afganistan with now 3,000+ troops. Germany is leading Regional Command North from Mazari Sharif. The task of the German ISAF contribution is to assist the Afghan central government at the four northern provinces of Kunduz, Takhar, Baghlan and Badakhshan. Germany, who is actually leading the Provincial Reconstruction Teams at Kunduz and Feyzabad, has been very successful in building up infrastructure, schools and other municipal institutions. Additionally, six Tornado reconnaissance jets were deployed to Mazari Sharif in support of ISAF operations in the entiry country (RECCE). The ISAF mandate and the "Tornado mandate" both have to be renewed annually by the Bundestag.

Actually, a great majority of members of all German parties except the completely irrelevant Linkspartei plan to vote this fall for an extension of the NATO mandate for the ISAF, but not for Germany's continued OEF participation because, as Annen puts it, "[t]he affiliation of ISAF and OEF-troops is becoming increasingly ambiguous, and not only for the Afghan population." Sounds reasonable for Joe Average from Germany - we will continue with the good work and will not get our hands dirty, especially under American command.

Unfortunately, this simple picture is rather misleading. First, Germany's OEF participation is marginal. In the past two years the KSK hase not been called into action. But more important, during the last years, ISAF has expanded to [i]all[/i] provinces of the country, especially the casualty-heavy south, and former OEF troops (17,000 US troops for instance) were transferred to NATO command. So a sharp distinction between "fighting terrorism" (OEF) and "stabilization" (ISAF) is blurred. ISAF forces can encounter Al Qaeda operatives because the ISAF mandate is sufficiently vague to allow these types of operations to be conducted, and ISAF forces already have engaged in offensive operations, like Operation Medusa of August-September 2006 in the south.

In my eyes, the whole debate in Germany about OEF vs. ISAF is a red herring. The relevant question is if the new ISAF mandate will allow the Bundeswehr to take part in the battle against the Taliban insurgency in the south and east of Afghanistan. The actual does this only "in exceptional circumstances". And exactly such a silent expansion is the driving force behind the proposal of Hans-Ulrich Klose (SPD) and and Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg (CDU) or the related idea of Hans-Peter Bartels (SPD) to combine all three German missions under one ISAF mandate, respectively to integrate the KSK under ISAF mandate.

So I guess we'll have a very lively debate that is focused about the KSK and OEF and "international solidarity and isolation" and that perhaps will lead to the decision to withdraw from OEF. And we'll probably have a debate about an increasement of the number of troops and, most likely, the number will be increased because of something like "any reduction in our engagement would be in principle very difficult to explain to our allies". Actually, the number of possible OEF troops according to the OEF mandate isn't exhausted, so this wouldn't be a severe problem. But I rather doubt that we'll hear much debate about the regions where the Bundeswehr will be operating under the new ISAF mandate.