Training, partnering & mentoring any indigenous foreign force, especially in Afghanistan, has never been a cakewalk.
This fiendishly delicate & dangerous task is rather an art, than a job and it is much more complicated than snake-charming, as some regular Tommies might guess – that’s why in the US it’s the main mission of the Special Forces, who possess the unique skill set of leadership quality, language proficiency and cultural sensitivity.
Any professional training begins, proceeds and ends with rigorous security, professional and psychological vetting. Skip it once at your own peril – and snake-charming turns into snake rattling.
Show comments (1)
When a run-off seemed inexorable, a tormenting American endeavor to re-elect the pre-selected president for Afghanistan has been abruptly accomplished with a phony Hobson’s choice. General McChrystal has pawned his career off to the White House by buying into ‘classical’ COIN doctrine as a real McCoy to pacify Afghanistan.
The main premise of the counterinsurgency theory stipulates that in a ‘war of ideas’ (that’s what COIN is all about), the legitimacy & credibility of the indigenous government is a prerequisite to win the hackneyed ‘hearts & minds’ of the population and to avoid the stigma of ‘invaders & occupiers’ for the foreign friendly forces.
To declare a pre-selected foreign stooge the Afghan president is a provocative call to renounce COIN modus operandi, to provide a feeding frenzy for the ‘freedom fighters’ psyops and to insult & alienate ‘accidental guerillas’ to the full tilt.
Kudos to AFPAK kibitzer and sorry for US/ISAF Commander!
05 November, 2009, 18:51
I definitely do not agree with the recommendation. That Richard Halbrooke does not know anything else but the Balkanization, everyody is aware off. He is a one trick pony.
But Pashtunistan seems today a step closer to the reality. US may not be in position to do anything else. It seems that I guessed right earlier that Pakistani's military was going to have one and only solution for Pashtunistan mess. And that is allowing Pakistani military to arrange a process of AfPak unification of Pashtunistan accross the Durand line. However, the talk with Chinese leadership is well under way. It is no secret that Chinese interests in Pakistan will have to be taken into account.
The test of this will be in Balochistan, and the fate of anti-Iranian groups in that territory. In the process, Zardari, once the darling of US establishment, may have come to the end of his usefullness. Musharaf deal that gave him the right to participate in political process by removing the criminal charges against him, will have hard time passing in Parliament. Zardari has not submitted it to the Parliament, but is counting on Courts to review it. He is not going to find the Supreme Court sympatethic either.
Karazi --- corrupt or not --- would have won against Abdullah any time. Abdullah Abdullah had zero chance winning. It is absurd to talk about corruption in Afghanistan. Corruption is the life blood of occupations. This is the only way any business is done. Occupying powers do not use some "democratic" means to disburse the funds. It is all corrupt --- and everybody lives of corruption, the form of "give and take". This whole talk of "corruption" does not pass the straight face test.
And how is Halbrooke to be credited with this "victory"? In Pakistan, they are losing their horse, Zardari. They have to talk to the military, something they for sure thought was a thing of the past. Hillary learned many a lesson on her last visit --- none of them predicted and even less managed by Halbrooke.
The huge question remain what happens to the North. By trying to topple Karzai, and having failed to do so, US has pulled the rug from underneath Abullah. The pressure will not be on for Karzai to remove some "difficult" ministers.
But the war is already on. The announcement from Karzai's government that NATO forces are taxing drug producers is a stern warning on the kinds of activities that have been talked about for a long time, but never spelled out.
The Afghanistan may not remain a single state. Here is where Halbrooke and Ms. Clinton are making a big mistake. The parallels with Balkans do not hold for a number of reasons. Mostly, because the world dynamic has changed entirely. China's efforts to establish its own energy corridor in cooperation with Russia and Central Asian Republics, are dependant on these countries remaining stable. Halbrooke plan depends on creating more chaos among the various tribes of the North, to infiltrate and destabilize the region, and undermine Chinese land-bridge to energy.
US depends of China for very clear and obvious reasons to keep its economy afloat. Russia has more leverage in the region then US would like. That does not mean that infuriated Halbrooke and unsucessfull Hillary are not capable of some unpredictable moves. But Obama will have to look at the things from the overall benefit/detriment of US interests. At the moment, all the strategizing has not improved the US position in AfPak area. Just the opposite. It has made it weaker.
It is weaker in Pakistan. US now has to rely on military to do the "regime change" in North-West Fronteer tribal set up, but does Hillary actually know whom is the Pakistani military going to put in charge? This is a FREEBE to Pakistani's military. First, the public is fearfull of extremists, so some amount of support for the Army exists. However, Pakistani public is sqarely blaming Zardari, and US for the violence that befell on Pakistan. Zardari will soon have to pick another place of exile, while US will have to trust Pakistani Army. Once Pashtunistan is united across the borders, US will find it hard to dictate terms without doing it with Pakistani Army and China as a part of the deal.
The botched attempt at Karazi removal is all the buzz. Such slights are not forgiven easily in Afghani culture. This has exposed the US alliances in the North, and these have now nowhere to hide. With very little left to do for Halbrooke in Pakistan, he will turn with his known zeal to the North. But here too, US will find it hard to stay indefinitely with the constant low grade warfare. For the first time in German history, the new Defence Minister has admitted that they are in a war, not "peacekeeping". This will add pressure to withdraw.
Can US continue to put pressure on Iran? The proposed set of "sanctions" would essentially amount to being self-imposed sanctions on the West, rather then have any impact on Iran. The expansion of existing refineries and the plans to build six new by China, would solve the problem of gasoline imports. There will be no new sanctions in UN, and the unilateral sanctions by the West will not affect Iran's neighbors. Can US continue down the same path? It is getting harder, and harder.
Can US continue to reject the calls to stabilize Afganistan's northern provinces? When those calls come from all Afghanistans neighbors, as well as China? Will China and Russia just sit back as the energy transit lands are engulfed in the spillover violence from Afganistan? Halbrooke may think China and Russia are Serbia, and he can intimidate them with the power of his personality and some bombing to make his point.
He is out of his depth. His ego is propelling him forward, leaving a mess in its wake. The whole idea of deligitimizing Karzai, and forcing him to take Abdullah Abdullah as his "Chief Executive", sort of Prime Minister --- was riduculous. Karazi outsmarted him, by acting like he was going to refuse run-off, just to agree to it. And the last ditch effort to save face, Halbrooke was hoping that Afghans would delay the runoff to spring. No support for that one, either. US had no choice but to let the silly idea go. It is focusing on the Pashtunistan, thinking that would be easy!
It will have to come back to deal with the rest, but under more deteriorating circumstances. Afghani Taliban now know what is at stake, and will make US life as hard as possible for a good deal.
What are US friends in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or in the neighborhood? Apart from getting India into self-imposed isolation, there is not one country in the region that would support US goals. While Karazi has now turned into an enemy, Zardari is counting his months before he will be forced to flee. Who would speak now for the democratic values of NATO occupation? With helpless Abdullah off the stage, nobody. He may keep on talking through NATO media. And even school children would laugh.
05 November, 2009, 06:24
Gene,
cannot agree more. We have the best president in our living memory, and what happens? Either things are really that bad, and there are forces we do not understand, or he is being cautious. I have tried every possible explanation for this, and the only one that may hold water looks like a strong passive aggressive strategy. There are a lots of very oppinionated people around him. Starting from Hillary and Halbrooke, and down the line in Pentagon. Add to this the military brass that cannot ever say anyting other then "victory". He just may have to let them run like crazy, cause some chaos and mistakes. He will have his Republican opposition be on record --- loudly --- in support of policy that will not work. And when everybody gets sick and tired, may be he will get going. But there are infinite number of ways neocon can con him, and always the result will be same. Look for more resources, more men, more everything. And then, possibly, drag some other country into the war. The more the merrier, and harder to get out off.
He is risking a whole lot. Without some international agreement, he will not get far. But how to get past his own democrats in Congress that are indistinguishable from the most rabbid right wing?
04 November, 2009, 17:47
Eugene,
I e-mailed the White House today and suggested to Mr. Obama: "This life is not a practice session, it is the only shot we get. Your Presidency, sir is NOT a practice session for a second term. Critics be damned. Come out with guns blazing. I need you, sir, to be the kind of guy who says 'I don't care if I get re-elected, this is my plan and I AM THE PRESIDENT'"
Eugene, this is the best President in my lifetime. I do not want him to run scared of critics.
Gene Hopkins, San Francisco
On August 30, the newly appointed US commander in Afghanistan, General McChrystal, submitted his Afghan strategy review to the US Commander-in-Chief.
Two month later, he’s still in HALO waiting mode for his marching orders and force requirements to be approved and acted upon, while the White House brainstorming has so far produced only sitting-on-the-pants paralysis-thru-analysis.
Thus, the US military’s new Afghan strategy has been rendered obsolete and irrelevant by political sandblasts, even before getting a clean bill of health.
It’s high time for the CENTCOM chief, General Petraeus, to step out from the information shadow, finish off the tug-of-war between his subordinates and superiors, and break the strategic stalemate in Afghanistan.
To jumpstart the Afghan mission, CENTCOM King David ought to outflank AFPAK narco-bulldog and tell it like it is to the Commander-in-Chief: you can’t tackle Afghanistan without Pakistan; to defuse Pakistan, first and foremost, you gotta deal with Pushtunistan.
04 November, 2009, 03:49
Geno,
Evgeni Malkin (from Russia) is one of the two stars of the NHL Champion Pittsburgh Penguins hockey team. He lives in Pittsburgh and loves it. People in Pittsburgh affectionately call him Geno. I'm sure he will be a star on Russia's National team in Vancouver. (The definite favorite to win the Gold Medal)
Eugene (geno) from San Francisco
Born and raised in Pittsburgh
03 November, 2009, 16:20
Fully agree. Until the issue of Durand line is solved --- yet one more of the dying British empire trip-wires --- there will be problems with "Afghanistan". The best solution would be to separate Pashtunistan from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and create a new country under the protection of UN. The country will be a buffer between intervention-prone Pakistan, and the more northern-aliance oriented Afghanistan. Afghanistan can exist in name as a country in today's borders only if everybody leaves them alone to settle their scores in their own way. This is not likely to happen, as the hyper-West just does not get the concept of "leave Afghanistan alone".
Therefore the only solution is to allow Pashtunistan to become a country. Afghanistan, or what is left of it, should be allowed to gravitate to its natural neighborhood. It should join SCO, and over time CSTO, and the economic and security issues would be addressed.
I do not believe that anything will happen by reasoning and based on logic. What will happen is a dragged out warfare, with the growing emphasis on drugs proliferation out to Russia and Central Asian republics to fund subversive forces there. Well known and respected individuals from Pakistan to Afghanistan, with the access to the information, have made public statements on the role of NATO military in ferrying drugs, as well as imposing "taxes" on drugs.
So, it will be the race for time. On one hand, the objective is to spill the war into the Tajikistan-Uzbekistan-Kyrgizstan areas, for starters, to undermine the strategic value of SCO as an economic organization and CSTO as a military alliance. Once the area is subject to instability, all the strategic pipeline projects from Turkmenistan to China would suffer using the Central Asian space, and would set back the prospects for the developement of the region as energy and trade route for generations to come.
On the other hand, the pressing problems created in Pakistan, may distract from the original goal --- the expansion to Central Asia. Wlll Pakistan get out of control? Will the proponents of expanding wars in Washington continue to get any amount of money they want? Will the neglected Palestinian-Israeli problem spin out of control? How long will the feable leadership in Egypt survive, before changing the map of the Middle East? And that is not to even mention Iran.
NATO is now running against the time. What looked like an easy case of "stay-forever", by periodically changing the tune and renaming the enemy --- is now in doubt.
And all of this was put in doubt by trying to tear down Karzai, the very man NATO created. Just like in Vientam's Diem case, US is tearing down its ally. This is potentially a big mistake. An ally, corrupt or not, remains an ally. Unless it is clear that US is loosing the war, so it is time to justify at home the reason for pulling out, or choosing to occupy only larger centers and garrison forces there.
The change of strategy is comming, planned or not.
07 November, 2009, 14:07
I can't believe Eugene that you actually think the US and NATO forces are in Afghanistan are there to fight "Al Qaeda" despite the fact that to this day the US and others actively support Islamic militants/insurgencies around the world especially in Eurasia and that the Taliban itself was a creation of the CIA to get control of large section of Afghanistan in 97 so they could run camps for Chechen and Central Asian terrorist groups and push into Central Asia and the Eurasian sphere.
If they seriously wanted to stop the heroin trade they could stop it immediately by closing down there network based in Kosovo and arresting its KLA kingpins but they have done the exact opposite.
What a huge farce.