Abu Muqawama retains its autonomy and the views and beliefs expressed within the blog do not reflect those of CNAS.
Someone in Holbrooke's team has been speaking to the chief diplomatic correspondent of the New York Times, and the result is a news article that pretty much hits on most of the key points on the war in Afghanistan: the war is going badly in the east and south; we do not have enough troops; the Haqqani Network and the Quetta Shura Taliban are on the rise; what the Karzai government is doing and is not doing are having huge effects on our efforts; and we've got a limited amount of time to turn this thing around.
Just painting an accurate portrait of what is taking place on the ground in Afghanistan, though, is only the first of two things that need to happen. The second is to develop and explain a strategy for dealing with those realities and challenges. Congressional leaders are 100% right to demand this on behalf of their constituents. The task of explaining our strategy to the Amercian people will fall to Gens. McChrystal and Petraeus. The task of explaining why this war is worth fighting in the first place must fall to the president. Both tasks need to be taken care of sooner rather than later.
[MG Curtis Scaparrotti of the 82nd Airborne Division obviously made an impression on whoever he briefed in Holbrooke's team, and it is not hard to see why. Over the course of two two-hour meetings, he struck me, personally, as a really keen officer with two very smart deputies -- including BG Kurt Fuller, who has really elevated the whole "I'm-just-a-simple-country-boy-but-am-also-smarter-than-everyone-in-the-room" thing to high art. (Being from East Tennessee, I get really suspicious whenever anyone says, "Now, I'm just a simple man, but...") I was really impressed with the entire team working under MG Scaparrotti in RC-East, and for a veteran of the 10th Mountain Division and 1st Ranger Battalion to say kind words about the 82nd Airborne, well...]
*Before some Afghanistan specialist like Foust jumps all over me, let me state the obvious, which is that the war in Afghanistan is -- like the country itself -- too complex to explain in 1,000 words. But I thought this article was a good start for the average Joe reading the paper on a commuter train on his way to do something smart like make money -- rather than run a blog on counterinsurgency.
Hey! I thought that article was good too!
Hah! Good luck with that -- he and I both have an unfortunate tendency to ramble. Also, we name-check you at the end.
No wonder you bonded with BG Fuller - Kurt hails from the 1st Ranger BN, too. We were both suffering thru the S4 shop during the invasion of Panama a million years ago. Kurt was the S4 (awaiting Company Command) and I was the SPL (after giving up your old PLT, 3rd PLT, B 1/75).
Kurt was always the smartest guy in the room - dip cup, southern twang - I think that he liked being underestimated....
A commenter (? David Gregory)... was kvetching about "Disrupt and Defeat" ...which is it?
I can understand both, and I actually think the Military Team and Holbrooke's team, and frankly "Triage" make a good case. I think POTUS needs to polish up and boil down to one strong page why we need to get that place under control - emphasis on it will be a even more dangerous launching pad (aircraft carrier) for attacks against the west and good ol USA, explain maybe that taliban defeat (which includes coming in ala Holbrooke and reconcilable enemies coming in) and make a good, strong, simple and non rambling case. KEEP IT SHORT.
Then let team Pope and team Holbrooke sell the military and broader civil front strategies.
And may I suggest -- US soldiers doing 3 cups of tea/schools/Chocolates (no nylons please) always looks good.
I can put it in less than 1,000 words.
7 will suffice.
"Taking Out" invaders. That's what they do.
Commentary: Afghanistan - A Culture Attuned To 'Taking Out' Foreign Invaders... That's What They 'Do'
Also see: So We're Losing... But What Are We Winning If We Won? The 'Endgame' In Afghanistan
Travus T. Hipp Morning News & Commentary (Cabale News Service)
"All The News You Never Knew You Needed To Know ...Until Now."
Some things I have trouble understanding:
1. What the hell is the Quetta shura? If the US knows that taliban HQ is operating in Quetta, what is stopping them from doing something about it? If they dont think the shura is in quetta, then why keep up this charade?
2. Many of my (leftwing) friends from Pakistan suspect that the US is actually trying to get the ISI to help them get out of Afghanistan without it being a PR disaster and is basically waiting for the ISI to make some sort of livable deal with the Taliban. And my Indian friends suspect that in return ISI gets to keep the kashmir jihad going. Is this conspiracy mongering or could it be true? If its not true, I suggest that the widespread existence of these theories is a sign that the US is not able to communicate effectively. If its true, then a lot of people are being killed for PR purposes, which seems immoral.
3. Whats the plan?
I think that the US is not winning in Afghanistan, not because the war is so "complex". Its because at one level its really simple. As Bin Laden said: people will bet on the stronger horse. In this case, far too many people are betting that the taliban will win. Unless there is a decisive change in that assessment, its a self-fulfilling prophecy. It may be that in war nobody will tell you their whole plan, but its also true that in this case not seeing a plan keeps a lot of fence-sitters on the fence. I look forward to being enlightened.
Hmmm... didn't I read somewhere a while back that the 82nd was an elite unit, and sending them was an indication that certain aspects of our Afghanistan mission were being taken seriously? ;)
Meanwhile, a brief quote from another NYT reporter (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/world/asia/23marines.html)
[Commanders said] "they do not have nearly enough forces to provide the kinds of services throughout the region that would make a meaningful difference in Afghans' lives, which, in any case, is a job American commanders would rather leave for the Afghan government."
Slightly more info than simply saying "they did not have enough troops to do their job" - but still more questions raised than answered.
What's the origin of the phrase "provide the kinds of services throughout the region that would make a meaningful difference in Afghans' lives"? I don't remember that in the White Paper, and I'm betting it ain't Commander's Intent.
Omar: "If its true, then a lot of people are being killed for PR purposes, which seems immoral."
Omar, one way to look at it is from a manufacturing economics perspective... the only major manufacturing capacity the US has left is our multi-billion dollar weapons industry. It may be the only economic power in the US currently that keeps the US financial infrastructure from collapsing entirely.
In order to sell those weapons systems, they need to be battle-tested.
It might be noted you DON'T have to win the battle... Proving the equipment performs to spec is enough (for example) to sell missile systems to Georgia for use against South Ossetia .
...or for that matter, UAVs to the North Carolina law enforcement community...
"North Carolina county is using a UAV equipped with low-light and infrared cameras to keep watch on its citizens. The aircraft has been dispatched to monitor gatherings of motorcycle riders at the Gaston County fairgrounds from just a few hundred feet in the air--close enough to identify faces--and many more uses, such as the aerial detection of marijuana fields, are planned." Source
One other economic thought... It might also be noted that the US Pharmaceutical-Industrial Complex is a US-GDP moneymaker too:
They're involvement in the Georgia-South Ossetia dust-up is beginning to show:
"Kirill Benediktov, in his online book (PDF linked here, in Russian)) on the invasion, reports that these (Georgian soldiers were equipped--so subsequent searches of bodies and prisoners of war disclosed--not only with NATO-supplied food packages but with sachets of methamphetamine and combat stress pills based on MDMA, aka the active ingredient of Ecstasy.
The meth amps up soldiers to kill without mercy, and the MDMA derivative frees them of subsequent debilitating flashbacks and recurring nightmares. Official use of methamphetamine and official testing of MDMA in the US armed forces have been discussed in news stories." (source)
Georgian soldiers are being used as "Guinea pigs" for the Pentagon's Psychological Kevlar plan to drug US soldiers... Highly unpalatable to American citizens and stalled in congress for a few years with hardly a mention in the US media (despite the statement in quotes).
But HEY! May as well sell the concept and product to 'motivated killers'!
Eisenhower was right about what he said in his farewell address (text & video), and it IS immoral, whether or not they 'plug' it with their PR. He DID say they "very structure of our society".
Morality and ethics ARE part of that structure... But today, most business related ethics have become 'situational' and our culture's morality is being ... for want of a better word "perverted" by it.
Sound cynical? Abso-Effin-Lutely.
Er, no, that isn't true at all. American manufacturing has never been more productive (i.e. abolute output is higher than ever), the difference is that the ratio of labour to capital in manufacturing has never been more unfavourable to labour.
vimothy, flesh that out with some details.
WHAT are we producing, and HOW are we measuring 'productivity'?
Here's how it's currently measured:
Every time a forest gets cut down, the GDP goes up.
Every time a cancer patient is diagnosed...
There's a movie by a woman economist (natch!) that PROVES the last voyage of the EXXON Valdez was the most financially lucrative oil tanker delivery ever. It's called Who's Counting by Marilyn Waring
YouTube available with excerpts. Here's part 1
See my point?
We seem to be producing 'wonks', administrative assistants, and 'financial middlemen'.
Meanwhile, the Feds prosecute a fellow who steals Goldman Sachs market rigging software (that description according to the federal government, not me), and ignores (at least for now) , along with the NY Times who reported it, the fact that Goldman possess software like that at all.
The deck is stacked... not only against labor, but against the production of anything socially useful to Americans, or the rest of the world, to everyone's disadvantage... Except a few, who have NO qualms about the way things are currently arranged.
That arrangement, and the extractive resources required, cause what could only be described as unethical, immoral behaviour, and mass murder in the guise of war , typically un-benownst to the soldiers fighting those wars who are, like most people, focused on their family and friends short-term (their lifetime) 'well-being' [quotes intentional)
There ARE people (and NOT just in the US) who would use that innocence for personal gain, and they don't care WHO dies.
But enough waxings philosophical
Well, if we're talking about manufacturing, then manufacturing is what you (the US) are producing. More productive manufacturing means that total manufacturing output is increasing (more planes, trains and widgets are being built). The problem with manufacturing, and the Chinese are running into this at the moment, is that it is increasingly capital intensive. Manufacturing requires lots of capital goods, but only a few highly skilled people to operate them. So although US manufacturing is at its most productive, it employs less and less people. In China, spending flows to the investment side of GDP, meaning productivity is raised, labour's share in the return is reduced, and consumption is weak. Because consumption is weak, internal demand for the output of manufacturing is lacking, and China has to look to its export markets to sell its goods. Similarly, one should want a strong services sector in the US, precisely because it is not dominated by capital intensive (and so labour weak) processes.
vimothy
Add your comment