It has become something of a well-known refrain when it comes to the NATO mission in Afghanistan: Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer challenges all countries involved in Afghanistan to make more troops available for the unsettled southern part of the country; Germany feels the pressure; Germany insists that it is doing all it can in the relatively quiet north.

The charade was repeated once again on Monday with de Hoop Scheffer telling the Berliner Zeitung that moving troops to the south "would provide an important and necessary signal of solidarity among the allies." Immediately, German Foreign Minister Frank Walter Steinmeier said that it would be foolhardy for Germany to endanger its mission to the north by "mindlessly withdrawing personnel and soldiers from there and relocating them somewhere in the south." Chancellor Angela Merkel also said she thinks "that would be completely wrong."

Still, the violence in southern Afghanistan has continued unabated since springtime and calls have become louder for something to be done. And quickly.

"Five years after the invasion, Afghanistan is anything but a peaceful democratic nation," writes the Financial Times Deutschland on Tuesday. "Warlords are in charge," and "opium cultivation is blooming in every sense of the word," the commentator writes. Despite these problems, the paper believes Merkel's government made the right decision when it refused to expand its military mandate, which would only have "torn open a gap in the north." But this is not enough, the paper says. It wants Germany to seize the occasion of the NATO summit later this month to "fundamentally rethink the dangerous mission" in Afghanistan. "So far, only a few outsiders are demanding a retreat from Afghanistan," the paper writes, adding that "if it is to stay that way, the mission has to be put on solid ground."

Like the majority of Germans, the center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung agrees with the chancellor's arguments against extending the force's mandate: "Merkel has to keep saying no," the commentator writes, adding that anything else would be asking too much of the German public and the army. Although NATO allies "are constantly increasing the pressure on Berlin," the paper believes "there is no reason to give in to the mounting pressure." The paper cites the lack of a clear strategy and coherent arguments as reasons to refuse an expansion of the military mandate in Afghanistan. Furthermore, the paper says the German army is ill-equipped for any further duties: "There may very well be some paratroopers or mountain infantrymen who are currently under-employed; but they lack the necessary equipment." Germany can already boast an international presence of 9,000 troops in 10 different missions, according to the paper. "For a defensive war, this argument should suffice for the time being."

The business daily Handelsblatt apparently takes a more hawkish position: "Offense is the best defense," it writes -- at least as far as politicians are concerned. It describes de Hoop Scheffer's latest attack as "a classic pre-emptive strike." NATO is at a disadvantage in Afghanistan, the paper feels, and "militarily, the war against the Taliban and its now numerous sympathizers can hardly be won." Brussels knows this, the paper writes, which is why it is so desperately looking for support, as evidenced by NATO Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer's call to arms on Monday. "Those who refuse this support," the paper continues, "could easily find themselves in the role of the scapegoat during the NATO summit in Riga at the end of November." For now, though, the paper sees Germany on safe ground, since "in truth, [Defense Minister Franz Josef] Jung has long been helping out with soldiers in the hard-fought south." All that is left for Germany to do at the NATO summit is to "finally show its true colors," the paper writes.