Afghanistan: Why we should be there (or not), how to conduct the mission (or not) & when to leave

[MarkOttawa]

Good detective work.  An expanded "civilian" police training mission, but no/no CF (except maybe some MPs seconded to the RCMP)?

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Meanwhile Adrian MacNair, Mr Unambiguously Ambidextrous himself, is there; seeing about detainees in this post:

Embedded In Afghanistan: Day Two
http://unambig.com/embedded-in-afghanistan-day-two/

...

...

Whilst Bruce R. at Flit has...

Today's essential Afghan reading
http://www.snappingturtle.net/flit/archives/2010_10_02.html#006788

...The losers will be the majority of Afghans...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[The Bread Guy]

Several members of Canadian families whose loved ones were killed in Afghanistan are calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to reconsider bringing the troops home next year.

The families were on hand to attend a memorial service Monday at Kandahar Airfield.

Frederick McKay, whose son Pte. Kevin McKay was killed earlier this year, says it's wrong to think that victory is impossible in Afghanistan.

He says Canadian troops are winning small battles, like allowing children to go to school, and those victories will likely come to an end if the troop withdrawal goes ahead as planned next summer.

"Over the course of the years to come, all these small victories will make the sacrifices that are guys are making here in Afghanistan worthwhile," McKay said.

"You can't do that if we bring them home." ....

More from the Canadian Press here.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Not to be taken seriously: What amounts to an Afghan fellow traveller/Good questions from the Toronto Star
http://unambig.com/not-to-be-taken-seriously-what-amounts-to-an-afghan-fellow-traveller/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

“Afghan women doomed if NATO leaves”/Kandaharis wary
http://unambig.com/afghan-women-doomed-if-nato-leaves/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[The Bread Guy]

This from the National Post/Postmedia News:

The U.S. Marine running current operations in southeastern Afghanistan for NATO expressed anger and immense frustration Tuesday at the planned departure of Canadian troops from Kandahar next year.

“It is really is going to hurt us,” said Col. Dave Bellon. “It is a terrible time to lose valorous men and women whom we have come to rely on. That is as straight as I can be. It couldn’t be worse.”

Col. Bellon’s remark followed by a day an appeal to Prime Minister Stephen Harper from the mother of a Canadian who died in Afghanistan to extend Task Force Kandahar’s current mission, which is slated to end on July 1, 2010. Another parent who lost a son warned against quick solutions in Afghanistan and urged his countrymen to be patient.

“From a strictly military point of view, Canada punches above its weight,” Col. Bellon said. “Their soldiers fight. I am not saying that others don’t, but these guys do. When you take a critical piece out, it hurts ...

“I am sure the average soldier, whether he wears this uniform or your uniform, he wants to finish this.”

Col. Bellon’s nearly one-year tour with NATO’s Regional Command South ends in a few weeks. Before coming to Afghanistan he served three tours in Iraq and was in Anbar Province in 2008 when, against many expectations, the Marines turned the war there around.

In explaining why it is so debilitating to the alliance war effort to lose Canadian combat troops next year, the colonel, who is also a lawyer, said: “Task Force Kandahar is holding a piece of the strategic, vital ground. Progress in their area is more advanced because they have been there the whole time when compared, for instance, with (neighbouring) Zhari, which we are reclaiming from the enemy.”

Asked who would replace the Canadians when Ottawa leaves Kandahar, he said: “You are not going to get another nation to step up and go into Panjwaii. If we could not get another country to go into Uruzgan [a much quieter area, which the Dutch left a few months ago], we are not going to get anybody else, which means the U.S. is going to go in there.” ....

Similar comments on Canadian troops from him earlier this year (Google cache)

"On what we and the Taliban both say is the vital strategic ground, Canada is still in charge during this critical time," U.S. Marine Corps Colonel David Bellon said during an interview that debunked repeated claims in the U.S. media that Kandahar is now an-all American show.

Bellon, director of operations for Regional Command South, works for British Maj.-Gen. Nick Carter who is running the division-sized operation, the biggest of NATO's war in Afghanistan.

The Canadians "have the key task for the division. I cannot overstress that enough," Bellon said of a campaign in the increasingly violent Taliban heartland that has already begun slowly with shaping operations and may last into the fall.

"This conflict is our D-Day," Bellon said of the fight for Kandahar. "This will decide who stays. If we get pushed into the water, it is over." Drawing parallels with the key role that Canadian troops played during the Normandy landings in 1944, he added: "The first guys on the beach here are the Canadians." Ménard, as the leader of Task Force Kandahar, now has command of several thousand U.S. troops in Kandahar City and in districts abutting the provincial capital and an approximately equal number of Canadians in the city and in Panjwaii, to the west.

"Panjwaii is one of the most dangerous areas," said Bellon, who was a battalion commander in Iraq three years ago when the Marines helped turn the war around in the so-called Sunni Triangle. Canada has what the colonel described as "a Tier One force." As this was the kind of force required in Panjwaii, the bulk of Canada's combat forces would likely operate there, he said ....

This on the Aussies earlier this year as well.....

.... Marine Lieutenant-Colonel Dave Bellon: "I love working with them. I think that they are a tier one force in the world right now. Your military is capable. Your officers and your enlisted leadership are fantastic. We enjoy working with them and they get tremendous results." ....

 

[Edward Campbell]

This article, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, got me thinking:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/asia-pacific/canadian-pullout-could-threaten-afghan-mission-senior-nato-officer-says/article1744755/

Canadian pullout could threaten Afghan mission, senior NATO officer says

Kandahar— Globe and Mail Update

Published Wednesday, Oct. 06, 2010

Canada's plan to bring its troops home from Afghanistan next year has the potential to hurt NATO's chances of success in Kandahar, a senior officer with the coalition said Wednesday.

Col. Dave Bellon, who is the chief of operations for NATO soldiers in southern Afghanistan, indicated that the United States would be left picking up the slack after the Canadian withdrawal.

Canadian soldiers are scheduled to begin returning home in July 2011, which Col. Bellon said would be at a critical juncture in the mission.

Coalition and Afghan forces have launched a multi-pronged effort against insurgents in Kandahar in recent months.

Col. Bellon said Task Force Kandahar, which runs the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, is playing an integral role in the ongoing push to bring stability to the volatile province.

“When you take out a capable force like TFK, a very capable and willing force, then you have got to spread the rest of the force thin,” he said.

“Then you get in the danger of not being able to secure the population.”

He later sought to clarify his comments by comparing himself to the coach of a sports team.

“If you tell me I'm going to lose a star player, I'm going to say ‘sure it hurts.’ ”

Canada currently has 2,800 troops based in Afghanistan.

Hindsight is 20/20, but THE ”critical juncture in the mission” probably occurred about four years ago when we, literally, had the Taliban on the ropes in Kandahar, where it really mattered, when Canadian and, indeed, Western public opinion was behind the mission, when hope existed … but in 2006/07 we, the Canadians, were almost alone in Kandahar; we were stretched too thin; NATO, including the USA, left us dangling in the wind – to, inevitably, suffer a resurgence of the Taliban and a loss of public and government support. The Americans came, eventually, but with too little, too late – too many words, too much hectoring, too little of the whatever we had in 2007 when we made a substantial, measurable, almost victorious difference.

It’s not Col Bellon’s ‘fault,’ it’s not the US military’s ‘fault,’ it’s not even George W Bush’s ‘fault.’ The fault lies in us all: politicians, soldiers and, above all, citizens of the West who misunderstood or, most likely never bothered to understand, what we were doing in Afghanistan or, even, why we were doing anything at all in that poor, sad country.

It is, probably, past time to “declare victory and go home.” There might be some sort of a military victory in the future – even without Canadians, but I, personally doubt that a strategic victory is possible – anywhere in the Middle East or West Asia, including Iraq and Iran.

Canada did its bit, and more. Our people do not have the stomach for more and more effort with less and less return. The strategic/political and operational leadership and management of Afghanistan – by all of the West, especially by successive inept, bumbling US administrations and, also especially, by our NATO allies - has been, consistently, poor to dreadful. I feel for Col Bellon; life will be harder for his TF; I just wish someone had thought like that back in 2006/07, when it might have made a difference.

 

[Old Sweat]

I have sat here being quiet about the situation in the south, but increasingly feeling it is the height of hypocrisy for various people in the NATO hierarchy to criticize us for pulling out. Where were they when we were battling the Taliban virtually alone except for small contingents of various Allies from time to time? The friggin' NATO tourists from old Europe were certainly absent when our troops, including many members of the this site, were bleeding and dieing.

It became a normal practice in RCS to detach Canadian guns to support Allied operations, and I believe this was also done with tanks and our sappers. Certainly I recall reading in the last few months an account in which a British officer explained that they felt no need to send their own tanks to Afghanistan as they could always get Canadian armour when they needed it. Our forces have pulled their own weight and then some.

In the meantime, the enemy were able to recover and the US surge, welcome as it is, may well be too late. I do fear that we may be made the scapegoat for failure in Afghanistan to deflect criticism from the shortcomings of the rest of the Alliance.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Meanwhile, if you believe in such things, CBC.ca has a poll:

Should Canada stick with its plan to withdraw troops from Kandahar in 2011? Why or why not?
Should Canada stick with its plan to withdraw troops from Kandahar in 2011?
Yes
No
I'm not sure

(This survey is not scientific. It is based on readers' responses.)

It'll be.... interesting to see how the comments unfold. :

 

[MarkOttawa]

Did my bit.  Not going to put it up at UA or SDA since most Conservatives seem to follow the "troops out" party line.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[bdave]

:It'll be.... interesting to see how the comments unfold. :

TADA!

Canada should never gotten involved in the first place!
Why should we lower our standards to that of Americans??

 

[MarkOttawa]

Just grokked that the question actually is "Should Canada stick with its plan to withdraw troops from Kandahar [emphasis added] in 2011?".

Ground combat units yes.  But CF out of Afstan completely?  That's the Conservative government's, er, "plan", not "Canada's". 

And why has keeping even the Air Wing at Kandahar been abandoned as a possibility?  Yikes, the Toronto Star editorialized in August 2009:
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/681563

...
Subject to Parliament's approval, Canadian troops and police might still play a useful role mentoring their Afghan counterparts, with a view to working themselves out of a job. We can protect aid projects. And perhaps provide transport aircraft and helicopters, as well as surveillance drones, to assist our allies [emphasis added]...

This government is simply craven.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

From Damian Brooks (founder of now-defunct The Torch) at The Propagandist:

Fighting And Dying In Afghanistan. For What?
http://propagandistmag.com/2010/10/07/fighting-and-dying-afghanistan-what

A few months ago, a good soldier and better friend to me posed this question: “Should Canadian soldiers continue to bleed and die in Afghanistan on a mission that not one of our political parties is willing to fight – let alone lose – an election over?”..

In fact, the Afghan mission should have represented the perfect opportunity to meld the compassionate idealism of the political left with the hard-nosed practicality of the security-conscious political right and stand firm in our commitment – to our own national interests, and to the people of Afghanistan. This should have been the one mission we could all agree upon. That support for such a potentially bi-partisan effort has been allowed to slowly decompose to such embarrassingly meagre levels is an indictment of Canadian leadership across the political spectrum.

With this in mind, perhaps my friend’s question should be rephrased one more time: “If Canadian soldiers are going to continue to bleed and die in the dust of Afghanistan for the betterment of both countries, shouldn’t Canadian politicians be willing to invest a fraction of the commitment that our soldiers so willingly give?”

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Excerpts from Adrian MacNair's first post upon his return:

My Overall Impressions Of Afghanistan
http://unambig.com/my-overall-impressions-of-afghanistan/

...

For now, my foggy impression of Afghanistan is that it’s a country we’ll have to spend a generation and tens of billions of dollars [if not hundreds] to keep from becoming a failed state again.

On the military side it would be inaccurate to say we are winning. Not that NATO was ever losing any war against the nebulous, shadowy insurgency that continues to wreak havoc against the people of Afghanistan...

Young and confident Afghans in Kabul make up a demographic of modernized, literate, and progressive men and women like these two journalists working at Tolo TV [more here and esp. here in the New Yorker
http://www.tolo.tv/
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/07/05/100705fa_fact_auletta ]. Oct.5, 2010.

Flying over the craggy brown mountains of southern Afghanistan’s sand heading for Kabul, the sporadic oases of greenery can be seen in the valleys of the inhospitable landscape below. One can’t help but think that the Taliban will never be extricated from the thousands of tiny nooks and crannies in a land that seems impenetrable to change.

Yet one is also left with the metaphorical impression that the lush valleys snaking through the mountains are symbolic of the resilience of an ancient people. The hardships of the past 30 years are but a footnote in the history of a people who still bear the genetic mark of Alexander the Great. Though Afghanistan is referred to as the graveyard of empires, it is a mistake to think that it has repelled all outside influences.

There is sincerity both in the work ethic of the soldiers who believe in a mission they are willing to die for, as well as the anecdotes of Afghans who seem to have more patience and optimism than the Canadian public. The latter, after all, have a much larger stake in this struggle than we do."..

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Good2Golf]

It will be the Afghan 20-somethings who will form a large part of Afghanistan's future success.  As well, development reaching beyond the major population centers is a necessary condition for improvement.  Maybe not a hundred years, but at least a 15-20 year period to become sustainable with minimal outside assistance/intervention, I think.

regards
G2G

 

[MarkOttawa]

More from Mr MacNair, an excerpt:

The Military Strategy In Kandahar
http://unambig.com/the-military-strategy-in-kandahar/

...
President Barack Obama concluded a 92-day review of the Afghan war last year, culminating in his December 2009 announcement of the surge under the McChrystal strategy. But a surge does not happen overnight. Increases in troop levels in April, July, and September were all phases that have been leading up to the current full-strength operations being delivered on the ground.

But Operation Moshtarak in Helmand, particularly the bloody recapturing of Marjah, was a lesson for NATO forces. President Hamid Karzai came down to Kandahar in April to assure the local government that such an Apocalyptic siege would not take place in Kandahar.

Nor should it. Kandahar was never as lawless as Helmand province, and has maintained good local governance in the time the Canadians have patrolled there. Preparation for clearing Kandahar City was slated for January of 2011, in fact, but have moved up the current time frame in order to deal with political pressures back home.

Canadian loss of command over the province has not, however, had a negative effect on the mission. The full strength of our battle group can now be focused on three districts [instead of an entire province] in Dand, Daman, and Panjwaii. According to British Lieutanant-Colonel David Nield, the clearing of Panjwaii, Zhari, Kandahar City and Arghandab is seen as a vital component of NATOs immediate military strategy in the province. Insurgents in Panjwaii have murdered regional leaders to make it more difficult for NATO to set up local Afghan governance there.

Zhari used to be one large district to the west of Kandahar City, but thanks to the American surge it has been partitioned into two: the Americans are pushing from the northeast south toward Panjwaii, while the Canadians clear east from Daman, which is relatively stable now. There are two ANA brigades in complement.

There are only an estimated 500-600 Taliban fighters in these two districts targeted for immediate clearing. As Canadian and American forces begin to push into the lawless territory, there are expectations that casualties will rise on both sides. That’s all part of the plan, explains Colonel McClay.

As security increases, violence follows in tandem until one presumably hits a “security fulcrum” point; a threshold where local government can begin to deliver the kind of services that breed confidence among the locals. But that does not necessarily take into account the “power brokers”, or as they used to be called, warlords.

Using the current political strategy to identify warlords by understanding the political landscape, NATO says it isn’t in Afghanistan to deal with power brokers. Not unless they’re standing directly in the way of a democratic Afghanistan. The key is to understand the informal power structures of Afghanistan by attending Shuras. If NATO can monitor and measure the influence of power brokers, they can properly buttress and support the formal power structures needed to set up responsive government.

But can NATO remove all power brokers? Perhaps that shouldn’t be our job. Unless a person is standing in the way of legitimizing the government, he can even be a form of stabilizing patronage. Sometimes that’s the best you can hope for, explains Colonel McClay, particularly given an impatient public back home.

“This is Afghanistan. You’ve got to understand what you’ve got.”

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Could the US actually be starting to win in Afstan?
http://unambig.com/could-the-us-actually-be-starting-to-win-in-afstan/

From Paul at Celestial Junk, the fellow has a way with words:

"Last Marshmallow Roast"...

Plus similar stuff from Matthew Fisher of Postmedia News, who has rather different perspective from most of our journallists.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Big Red]

If this is "winning", I'd hate to see what losing looks like.

 

[KevinB]

If this is "winning", I'd hate to see what losing looks like.

Ditto

 

[MarkOttawa]

Afstan: Gen. Petraeus’ COIN strategy in operation
http://unambig.com/afstan-gen-petraeus-coin-strategy-in-operation/

Excerpts from an important post at Tom Ricks' The Best Defense blog

"Ignatius, Kaplan, and Klein just don’t get it: Petraeus is changing the Afghan war’s intensity, not its overall strategy

...

Mark
Ottawa