Defense Secretary Robert Gates watching a mine-resistant troop carrier in motion. Analysts say vehicles like these and surveillance equipment are increasing the cost of troops in Afghanistan. (Pool photo by Alex Brandon)

In all the talk of CT (counterterrorism), CT-plus, COIN (counterinsurgency), and COIN-light, the key numbers on the cost of occupation — that also feature prominently, perhaps decisively, in U.S. President Obama’s eagerly awaited Af/Pak decision — have not received much attention.

A recent New York Times article remedies this inattention:

• It costs $1 million per year to keep an American soldier in Afghanistan, compared to the $390,000 that congressional researchers estimated in 2006 (an average increase of 37% per year).

• So, the cost of adding 40,000 American troops (and sharply expanding the Afghan security forces; as McChrystal wants) is officially estimated at $40-54 billion per year.
• Sending 30,000 more troops would cost $25 billion to $30 billion a year while limiting how widely American forces could range; deploying 20,000 troops, about $21 billion annually, but would expand mainly the training of Afghans, say the officials.
• Thus, even sending lesser troops will (i) wipe out the $ 26 billion projected to be saved in FY 2010 from withdrawing troops from Iraq; and (ii) the overall military budget could rise to as much as $734 billion, or 10 percent more than the peak of $667 billion under the Bush administration.
• Some administration estimates suggest it could also cost up to $50 billion over five years to more than double the size of the Afghan army and police force, to a total of 400,000. That includes recruiting, training and equipment.
• The administration has projected that spending on Iraq would drop by $25.8 billion in fiscal 2010, to $60.8 billion, as most of the troops withdraw. It also expected spending on the Afghanistan war to increase by $18.5 billion in fiscal 2010, to $65.4 billion, for a net savings on the two wars of $7.3 billion, if no more troops were added.

Read more: High Costs Weigh on Troop Debate for Afghan War