Gordon Brown is attempting to persuade allied nations to provide 5,000 more troops for the fight against the Taliban. The move is part of a push to spread the burden in Afghanistan, where troops from America and Britain make up the bulk of the international force. The British Prime Minister has ordered Bob Ainsworth, the Defence Secretary, and Simon McDonald, the senior foreign policy adviser, to embark on a round of diplomatic lobbying to try to get agreement from at least 10 different nations to supply the extra forces. Mr Brown believes some members of the Nato-led International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) are still not making enough of a contribution to the fighting in Afghanistan. British diplomats also hope it will help President Barack Obama sell to the US public any decision to send more American forces to the country. On Thursday Mr Obama demanded the inclusion of an exit plan in Americas new strategy for Afghanistan to make clear that the military mission was not open-ended. In another development, it was reported that Gen Karl Eikenberry, the US ambassador in Kabul, had written to Mr Obama opposing moves to send more troops to Afghanistan. A Downing Street source said: We accept that Isaf numbers from other countries have doubled in recent times, but there is more that can be done. There is potentially another 5,000 troops that Isaf partners can contribute. It is why we are taking the initiative to try to secure commitments. The Prime Minister is the first world leader to have made commitments on new troops so we feel we can embark on this campaign to get more support. Isaf is made up of 68,000 personnel from 42 different countries including the US, European countries, Australia and New Zealand. Britain and America are the largest contributing nations, with 9,000 and 32,000 servicemen and women respectively. British diplomatic sources said last night that the extra troops would help make life easier for Mr Obama to commit more American personnel. But the leaked memo from Gen Eikenberry heightened the confusion over the White Houses position. The note said any new deployment should be linked to a commitment by Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, to rid his government of corruption. Gen Eikenberrys views appear at odds with senior generals, such as Gen Stanley McChrystal, the head of Nato forces in Afghanistan, who wants a surge of 40,000 more troops. Last night Mr Obamas aides said his long-awaited decision on troop reinforcements would also need to offer a strong suggestion of when and how responsibility for security would be turned over to the Afghans. Mr Obama is expected to opt for at least 20,000 extra troops when he finally makes his announcement on Nov 20. A White House spokesman said: After years of substantial investments by the American people, governance in Afghanistan must improve in a reasonable period of time to ensure a successful transition to our Afghan partner. Increasingly, it seems that both Washington and London are moving towards a twin approach of deepening commitment particularly on training Afghan security forces while increasing pressure on Kabul to assume responsibility in specific locations at the earliest possible opportunity.(The Telegraph)