| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Afghanistan | ||
| General Plans Changes in Afghan Strategy | ||
| 2003-12-21 | ||
| In a significant switch in strategy, U.S. troops plan to set up bases to provide reconstruction aid in provinces plagued by Taliban attacks, the new U.S. commander in Afghanistan said Saturday in his first interview since taking charge. Lt. Gen. David Barno told The Associated Press that the move will make the troubled south and east safer for aid workers and open the way for landmark Afghan elections in mid-2004. He also predicted a sharp reaction from insurgents. They’re ``going to realize that’s the death knell to terrorist organizations in that part of the country,’’ said Barno. ``We’ll be prepared for that.’’ "Want some? Come and git it. We’re ready." A wave of violence this year has belied U.S. claims to have brought security to Afghanistan, two years after an American-led assault drove the Taliban from power for harboring al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden. We didn’t say the place was secure, we said the Taliban were out of power. Attacks have forced the United Nations and other aid groups to withdraw from some regions, undermining aid delivery and confidence in the reconstruction efforts of the U.S.-backed government ahead of elections slated for June. The United Nations has even accused the U.S. military of playing into the hands of Taliban agitators in its hunt for terror suspects, with two botched raids that killed 15 Afghan children earlier this month. The U.N. being masters of everything of course, In a bid to deliver more aid to impoverished civilians, the United States and allies including Britain and New Zealand have set up nine joint civilian-military units charged with creating islands of stability across the country. So far, most of the so-called Provincial Reconstruction Teams are in relatively secure regions. Now, the U.S. military is deploying teams across a broad swath of the country dominated by Pashtuns, Afghanistan’s largest ethnic group from which the hardline Islamic Taliban draw their main support. The Pashtuns thus get a chance to decide on the 21st century or the 7th.
That’s about to change. The military teams will help distribute reconstruction aid bolstered by an extra $1.2 billion recently released by the U.S. Congress. That aid, combined with the opening of the south and east by a string of new military operations, will cause ``a dramatic change in the amount of involvement of the people in that area in support of the central government and the future of Afghanistan,’’ Barno said. Aid groups worry that their attempts to remain independent in the eyes of Afghans, including Taliban sympathizers, has been compromised by U.S. involvement in delivering assistance.
Think that message will get through the thick skulls of European U.N. staffers? I didn’t either. | ||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #6 Riverdog, wasn't the policy called "Strategic Village" or something like that? The name was strategic hamlets. It worked pretty well at denying space and recruits to the enemy, but at some cost in US casualties. (The concept came from the successful British-led campaign against ethnic Chinese Communist insurgents in Malaya - now Malaysia and Singapore). |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-12-21 10:59:10 PM |
| #5 Riverdog, wasn't the policy called "Strategic Village" or something like that? This will be an interesting test on whether the concept can be worked in some cases. I speculate that it will depend on the density of the population as well as the vegitation and cover. In Somalia the insurgents that were setting up road blocks were not out in the bush where we initially looked for them. They were in the villages at night and came out each day to set up their little lemonade stands to shakedown whomever they could. If the villages in Afghanistan are isolated enough, the only options for the Taliban sympathisers will be to travel overland and exposed to attack another village or sneak out at night and attack theirown village. I don't think attacking your own village will be popular. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2003-12-21 11:09:22 AM |
| #4 Another body check to the UN and the multilateralist NGOs. We gave them a chance, they seriously blew it & frittered away several years with little to show for it. I hope this means that the US is not going to allow the Talibani to regain power or the warlords to reconsolidate significantly - even if we have to offend the delicate feelings of the NGO world. It's time for Afghans to see us keeping our explicit and implict promises to help. At the same time, I don't want Bush to let the rest of the world, including the NGOs and the UN, off the hook for helping in Afghanistan and elsewhere. There is a serious amount of dismantling and rebuilding needed all throughout the Moslem world and I won't be happy if the Euros get to be free-riders ... they will benefit from the increased stability and the growth of functioning economies there. They need to contribute to making that happen. |
| Posted by: rkb 2003-12-21 8:18:29 AM |
| #3 Riverdog - big differences. No triple canopy for them to fade into. Thermals are remarkably effective if you prepare the surrounding areas before setting up camp. Fater air and arty response, and more effective weaponry. As well as a better led and trained fighting force (Not so many restricitons and not nearly the ticket punching and micromanagement of Vietnam). All volunteers, all professionals - especailly when you consider the units involved. These are not Spec Ops - those guys stay highly mobile. These are light infantry Army troops from the 10th Mountain, 101st, and 82nd. They are mobile but need a base to work from. A lot different from the stuff you are envisioning. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2003-12-21 1:53:11 AM |
| #2 "Islands of Stability"? Hmmmm, don't want to rain on the Army's parade there, but this sounds suspiciously like the fortified villages we built in 'Nam, which didn't work well. While they were bases for Spec Ops forces, they also were mortar and B40 magnets, and were never as "pacified" as we made them out to be. Spec Ops works best as a mobile concept, not a fortified one. Go out and find, engage and kill the opposition, not wait for them to come to you. |
| Posted by: Rivrdog 2003-12-21 1:46:11 AM |
| #1 Aid groups worry that their attempts to remain independent in the eyes of Afghans, including Taliban sympathizers, has been compromised by U.S. involvement in delivering assistance. They ought to worry instead about: 1. Losing their credibility by fleeing at the first whiff of gunpowder. 2. Hanging around and getting killed because they don't want to "compromise" their neutrality, which isn't going to happen because they'll split first (see #1). 3. Work with people who believe in democracy and human rights and are willing to put their lives on the line for that. |
| Posted by: RMcLeod 2003-12-21 1:42:52 AM |