PRESIDENT George W. Bush’s announcement that 8,000 US troops are to be pulled out of Iraq evokes mixed feelings. The forces withdrawn from Iraq will be sent to Afghanistan to deal with the growing threat from the Taleban.

A reduction in US troops in Iraq is certainly encouraging, even if only by 8,000 out of the 146,000 forces presently in the country. There is no doubt that the situation on the ground is much better than it was a year and a half ago. That can be seen from the fact that the Americans felt able to formally hand over Anbar province to Iraqi military control a few days ago. Once the most violent province in the country, it has been transformed into a bastion of support for the Americans and the Iraqi government, almost entirely because Sunni tribal leaders turned against Al-Qaeda. Such is the scale of the change that although the province is still a potentially dangerous place, the head of the US Marines, Gen. James Conway, suggested a fortnight ago that he could significantly reduce the 25,000-strong Marine force there. In the event it is reducing only by 1,000.

For the White House, the prime reason for the improved security in Iraq is the military surge ordered by Bush early last year. It has made a difference — but would it have made such a difference in Anbar if the Americans and the Iraqi government had not also changed tack and started cooperating with the Sunnis there through the “Awakening Councils” run by local tribal leaders? Almost certainly not.

This needs to be understood in the context of Afghanistan as well. A US military surge may well work there, although it is a very different conflict both in terms of terrain, local loyalties and power structures. But there is no point in sending thousands of extra Americans troops there if all they are going to do is further alienate and anger the Afghans through still more botched airstrikes and civilian casualties. In the first six months of this year, over a thousand Afghan civilians have died in the fighting. Not all were killed by NATO or Afghan government forces but a significant number were. Last month saw the worst single incident of civilian casualties since US-led forces overthrew the Taleban regime with some 90 reportedly killed in the village of Azizabad in Shindand district which was being bombed by the Americans in an anti-Taleban operation. Just how many died and who was responsible is now the subject of an inquiry but that is not going to counter Afghan bitterness.

The gung-ho US military habit of “shoot first, ask questions later” is seriously undermining support for President Hamid Karzai and is the best possible recruiter for the Taleban. It is no accident that Taleban attacks are up 50 percent this year.

Defeating the Taleban is vital, but massive military power will not be enough. The Soviets had it in Afghanistan and look what happened to them. Anbar in Iraq shows that the most important weapon in fighting the terrorists is the local people and their leaders. Collaborate with them and the terrorists can be beaten; antagonize them and the terrorists will thrive and their attacks multiply. Bush’s “surge” in Afghanistan may work, but if the new troops’ conduct is based purely on might and brute force, it will backfire. What is needed is a political surge.