Posted on 10/08/2008 7:55:12 AM PDT by Dawnsblood
Can the war in Afghanistan be won? It depends on whom you ask.
The senior British commander in Afghanistan recently was quoted in The Times of London, "This war cannot be won." A French diplomatic dispatch reports that the British ambassador said the best solution would be to find an "acceptable dictator" to take over the troubled country. But the British soldiers with whom I was recently embedded in Helmand Province had very high morale and felt optimistic about Afghanistan. And British and American officers whose judgment and honesty I trust share that optimism, even acknowledging the difficult challenges they face, andthat this will take a decade (according to Brits) or decades (according to Americans). Do these soldiers know something their leaders don't? Or is it just another Afghan paradox?
This is a land of paradox. The people here are friendly and hospitable, violent and suspicious. The war effort enjoys broad support, yet our alliance is unraveling. The Taliban are widely despised, and yet certain elements of it are integral parts of Afghan society. People want the national government to succeed, yet they have little or no faith in it. In many respects, while the country takes center stage in today's geopolitics, it is stuck in the Middle Ages.
I've driven over a thousand miles up and down Afghan roads during the past few weeks to find that many locals are thankful to the coalition of American, British and other NATO forces that are trying to bring peace and stability to the country. Others say they hate us. It has become clear to me that we're losing this war. But losing doesn't mean lost.
When someone says they know what to do in Afghanistan, it's best to remain skeptical. Some folks are flat-out lying, like recent attempts to deny the existence of a secret report documenting how 10 French soldiers who were killed didn't have enough ammo or working radios. Others are telling us what we want to hear, like it will just take a few more troops and some border incursions into Pakistan to straighten out this mess.
There are a few honest players in Afghanistan, and I'm listening carefully to them. But please understand this much: In a land whose paradoxes can confuse and even crush powerful empires, any solutions - if they even exist - will not be simple or painless.
When I traveled extensively in Iraq, I spent a lot of time with combat units that were consistently winning against the enemy, both in kinetic operations and gaining the support of the people. All the while, we were losing certain aspects of that war, both in Iraq and back on the home front. It wasn't until our tactical superiority was supported by an effective strategy that we started turning things around. Iraq now has the chance to become a peaceful andprosperous country, and a good ally. I sense that the day will come when I will request a visa togo on vacation in Iraq.
Can the same thing happen in Afghanistan? I am less confident - for today, anyway.
Gen. David Petraeus, who recently assumed command of Centcom, responsible for U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq (and many other countries), knows that these two countries present different challenges. The counterinsurgency manual he revised, and his own doctoral dissertation on the effects of Vietnam on the American military and foreign policy, show an intellect that is subtle enough to recognize a paradox and honest enough not to try and hide behind it. One of the paradoxes described in the counterinsurgency manual is: "Tactical success guarantees nothing."
If anyone can unravel Afghanistan, it's Petraeus. But that might be beyond even his talents.
Describing his successful partnership with the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, Petraeus recently said: "There has to be absolute unity of purpose, unity of effort, even if there cannot be and will not be unity of command."
Right now, our enemies have unity of purpose: They want to kick us out of here. Meanwhile, we can't even agree about whether or not this war can be won.
Yon, a former Green Beret, is an independent journalist. He can be found online at www.michaelyon-online.com.
Then the British Ambassador hasn't learned one damn thing from history.
One of the easiest way you can win Afghanistan is to start paying top dollar for their Poppy Crop. After we buy it, we can either use it for medicanl uses or destroy it. The Afghans just want the money.
I'm no military expert, but the situation in Afghanistan is completely different than Iraq, plus it is largely under the control of NATO. Obama keeps bringing up the Afghanistan issue and McCain needs to keep hammering him on this issue (Barack Obama Has Served As Chairman Of The Subcommittee On European Affairs From 2007 – 2008.) Where is the evidence that he's ever done anything.
I heard an interesting phone call to a radio show recently from a serviceman who has done tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He said he believes that Afghanistan is a more winnable situation because the Afghans have a sense of nationalism - - they consider themselves “Afghans” before anything else. On the other hand, Iraqis do not have a strong sense of being “Iraqis” and instead tend to identify more with their individual ethnic tribes.
The serviceman did add, however, that both countries are ultimately winnable.
“Obama: “We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.” (Philip Elliott, “Obama Gets Warning From Friendly Voter,” The Associated Press, 8/14/07) “
What an idiotic thing to say. No matter how many troops are over there, if the Taliban continue to use civilians as shields, civilians are going to die. The military goes out of its way to avoid civilian deaths. And in many cases, the civilians killed are the Taliban.
“He said he believes that Afghanistan is a more winnable situation because the Afghans have a sense of nationalism - - they consider themselves “Afghans” before anything else.”
That was not my observation. The Pashtuns hate the Tajiks, the sunni hate the shia, everyone hates the Hazara and the Kuchi, etc. etc. The ones I worked with could not get along with each other.
Yon always tells the truth, no matter how painful. He is the most accurate, up to date war correspondent, first in Iraq and now Afghanistan. I hope his reports become more positive in the near future. God bless him and our fighting men and women.
But the facts are we are talking about a region of the world that was living in the dark ages (again, literally). Of course progress will be a two steps forward one step back type situation -
Yon's, assessments here are naive (and he knows it). But in order to sell, you have to come with a POV....and selling chaos and dire is always easier.....
There are difficult situations left in Stan (from Poppie fields, internal) to dealing with the border regions including Pak's border regions.......
But the reality is the fighting is (and has been heading) in the outward bound direction in Stan.....We are constantly pushing deeper into our enemies retreat.....Not the other way around.
BTTT!
Bump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.