NATO is to get more help from Russia in the Afghan war. At a ministerial meeting in Brussels, the sides discussed expanding the vital transit of military cargo to Afghanistan through Russian territory. But on what terms? ­Moscow has provided the alliance with air corridors and railway routes. The link is vital as Pakistan blocked NATO supplies from crossing its territory after an airstrike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers six months ago. Mike Raddie from the London-based anti-war group Democracy Village believes that Russia`s help to the alliance comes with certain strings attached. "I suspect some of these strings will be that the US and Western military will withdraw in 2014," he told RT. "The US, actually, what they are planning, is to have a substantial military presence until 2024, and I think that the Russians and the Chinese don`t favor that at all." Indeed, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov expressed concerns on Thursday over Washington`s plans to keep its military contingent in Afghanistan after the pull-out of international troops in 2014. "We … do not understand such plans to maintain a presence …, we have questions and we would like to get answers," RIA Novosti quoted Lavrov as saying. The minister was speaking at a news conference in Brussels following the meeting of the Russia-NATO Council. According to these plans, 20-30,000 US troops may remain in Afghanistan after 2014 in a backup role, in case it is decided to retain a few military bases in this country. Raddie notes, however, that those would be "conveniently located" along the proposed oil pipeline. And yet, despite certain advantages for Russia, Moscow would still prefer to see Washington out of the region. "I think that the Russians will obviously benefit from that oil pipeline in their own exports but it`s likely that the strings that are attached to the aid that`s forthcoming will ensure that the majority of the US troops, the combat troops, will be out by 2014," he explained. On the other hand, Moscow is clearly worried that the drugs and terrorism situation will deteriorate in Afghanistan after the pull-out of the international contingent. "As long as the Afghan side is unable to provide security in the country, any artificial deadlines for troops` withdrawal do not seem quite correct," Lavrov said. "But when the UN Security Council mandate expires, there will be no reason for a foreign presence in Afghanistan and the region." Mike Raddie suggests that the decision to stay in war zones is based on financial interest. "There is no popular support for this war in the US, nor in the UK, nor in any allied country, to be honest," he said. "But the people who benefit from the war are quite happy to let this run as long as possible. And those who benefit - obviously, the global elites, the bankers, those in the military industrial complex - to them, having a prolonged conflict is just money in the bank, really." As the alliance prepares to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, it finds itself in the midst of a string of scandals involving extreme breaches of discipline by US troops. Among them is another series of photographs showing US soldiers posing with the gory remains of several Afghan suicide bombers. The photos are the latest in a long line of scandals involving US troops in Afghanistan. Washington insists, however, that they show an isolated incident of young people caught up in the moment. "That is definitely not isolated incidents," argues Mike Raddie. "The fact that we don`t hear about them in the West doesn`t mean they don`t happen almost on a daily basis… It seems that the US soldiers are fully aware that there are very few consequences to their actions when it comes to killing civilians."