First, the president will explain how he intends to, as he said last week, "finish the job" in Afghanistan, where the number of Taliban supporters continues to swell even though U.S. and NATO troops have been there for years. The focus of the new strategy, sources say, will be going after al Qaeda and affiliated extremists, with less of an emphasis on nation-building.
Second, the president will also explain to the American people his exit strategy. Part of the president's challenge is explaining that while he's sending more than 30,000 new U.S. troops to Afghanistan -- bringing the total to around 100,000 -- he is just as keenly focused on bringing them home. The president is expected to frame the troop increase as part of the overall exit strategy and stress that he is focused on the end game and getting troops out of Afghanistan, even as he puts more in.
Third, the president will convey to the international community that this is not just a U.S. mission or one country's problem, nor is it an issue affecting just that one region of the world. This must be an international effort, the president will say.
Finally, the president will convey to the Afghan government that it needs to get its act together and improve governance and combat corruption, a push he will make by saying the U.S. will insist on very strict benchmarks.
Very quickly after the speech, sources tell ABC News, U.S. troops will be sent out for deployment in southern and eastern Afghanistan, especially Kandahar and Helmand provinces.
While Democratic lawmakers are increasingly opposed to a possible troop increase, Republican lawmakers say the move is necessary and that the president needs to convey that in his speech tomorrow.
"What the world needs to hear is that he's going to commit the number of troops necessary and he's going to accomplish the task, accomplish the mission of keeping the American people safe. That's the most important thing," Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., who recently returned from Afghanistan, said on CNN Monday.
"If the president is very resolute, if he's very specific about what he believes the mission is and what can be accomplished, then I think we'll be fine. If, however, he hedges his bets and plays to his political base, then there are real problems to be had, because then the Taliban and others who are interested in making certain that we don't accomplish our mission, those folks then just wait us out," Price said.
But Democrats say more pressure needs to be placed on Pakistan and Afghanistan's leaders to keep their end of the bargain.
"The problem is that you can have the best policy in the world, but if you don't have the tools to implement it, it isn't worth a beanbag," House Appropriations Committee chairman Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "And I don't think we have the tools in the Pakistani government and I don't think we have the tools in the Afghan government. And until we do, I think much of what we do is a fool's errand."
Obey has introduced legislation to impose a war surtax beginning in 2011.
This weekend, British Prime Minister Brown assailed Pakistan for failing to find Osama bin Laden, a charge that the country's leadership disputes.