I note that the author does not explicitly make the case that Miles was tied to his supply tail while the Indians were not. But this is a different argument.
Posted on 11/25/2006 3:52:09 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
For the next few months, Afghan and NATO troops will be out in the snow and bad weather, raiding villages where Taliban are hunkered down for the Winter. For U.S. troops, this is a 19th century tactic, pioneered by American General George Crook, to defeat the hostile tribes on the Great Plains. For the last four years, many American commanders have been trying to emulate Crook in other ways as well.
During the height of the Indian Wars in the American west, one of the most successful American commanders was General George Crook. He was an original thinker who used a combination of imagination and diplomacy to bring the wars to an end with a minimum of bloodshed. Crook's job was to pacify the tribes that still raided (as a form of sport or retribution for slights real or imagined) Indians and non-Indians alike. Crook also had to move tribes to reservations, or force them back there. But the main task of General Crook's troops was to keep the peace on a still turbulent frontier. Faced with the possibility of operating in Afghanistan, a rugged area populated by less well equipped, but more rugged and robust locals, it's a good idea to look back at how General Crook handled a similar situation.
First, General Crook saw diplomacy as his primary weapon. The Indians knew he had a more powerful military force, but they also knew Crook could be trusted. Crook used this trust, and his negotiating skills, to carry out American policies that he often didn't agree with. But Crook was also eager to avoid violence as much as possible. He was not a bloody minded soldier, and he realized that a reputation for senseless violence would make many of the tribes resist more stoutly and refuse to negotiate. Crook would recognize a similar situation in Afghanistan today. There is more to lose and little to gain by using a lot of fire power. You have to convince the Afghans that you do have the firepower, and can use it, but will only do so when there really is no other choice.
Using Indians to fight Indians was another technique Crook used a lot. First, he hired a lot of Indians as scouts. This made a lot of sense, as many of his troops were from back east and didn't know the local terrain, languages and customs. Crook saw to it that the scouts were treated well, for the scouts were usually recruited from weaker tribes that had a beef with the stronger tribes. The smaller tribes were usually easier to negotiate deals with. The larger tribes would often fight and Crook needed the scouts, and Indian allies (who sometimes fought for him). Same situation in Afghanistan.
Many of the Afghan tribes and ethnic groups (Pushtuns versus everyone else) don't like each other very much. The government has gotten a number of tribes to become friendly, and some of those that now support the Taliban do it either because of existing disagreements with the government, or other tribes, or because the Taliban are successful in using terror.
Crook also showed a lot of innovation on the battlefield. While "asymmetric" warfare is a hot item today, it was a common tool for General Crook. Asymmetric means using weapons and techniques that the enemy cannot easily deal with. For the Afghans, this means knowing the terrain better and being more capable of moving across the hills and mountains. Crook had the same problem, in that the tribes knew their backyard better and their grass fed ponies could move faster than his cavalry (which depended on supplies of grain to feed his larger horses.) But Crook also realized that in the winter the Indians had to settle in to survive the bad weather, and their ponies were forced to survive as best they could (and many didn't). Crook could move around in the Winter, by using many horses to carry supplies. While Crook's force was small and tied to their supplies, the Indians could hardly move at all, and usually succumbed to Crook's offer of bullets or bread. Protecting their families was always a top priority for the Indians and Crook would also, during Summer campaigns, strive to capture the women and children of a rebellious tribe. This improved his negotiating position immensely.
One can only speculate what General Crook would do in Afghanistan today, but he would likely cut deals with Afghans willing to deal. And there are always some Afghans willing to deal. Crook would look at the forces available to him and try to use his advantages (reconnaissance and air transport.) To succeed in Afghanistan, think like Crook.
One might recall that in 1968, the Wise Men, a group of Democratic policymakers that included Dean Acheson, Clark Clifford, and Mac Bundy and which shaped our Cold War policy under Truman, lost their nerve over the Vietnam War, into which they had done so much to get the US involved. In March of that year, right after our troops had won a major victory in turning back the North Vietnamese Winter-Spring Offensive, and with the public still supporting the war effort, these Wise Men told President Johnson that the war could not be won.
The points, however, are valid---use natives when possible (an old British trick) and don't get carried away with the "destroy-the-village-to-save-it" approach.
The heroism of thousands in the Iraqi and Afghan militaries is testimony to the fact that they are willing to fight and die for democratic principles and peace.
Good point on the Moros. Don't forget, however, that he used a "guns and butter" approach, and while he was crushing the enemy forces, Americans poured into the Philippines to build hospitals, streets, schools, and so on. Those "behind the scenes" troops and civilians had a powerful impact on the outcome of the Filipino Insurrection/Moro Wars.
The Arizona campaign was a whole 'nother story, a story of unremarkable men doing rather remarkable things with the clouds and fog of war hanging low and dense. Crook, by himself, probably would have notched up another failure had it not been for other equally interesting characters. John Clum at San Carlos, Al Sieber, Chief of Scouts, the Indian scouts themselves, tenacious and (usually) loyal. The dynamic that these men created ended the Apache Wars. Could it have been done faster and better? Probably. But this is the way it was done.
The horse issue was not critical to Arizona. The Apache could dogtrot up to 60 miles a day WITH women and children, up and down mountain ranges, in and out of ravines. The few horses they had were used until they were useless, eaten, and more stolen. Crook, himself, rode a mule.
You forgot: and do not let them open Casinos
We need a modern-day George Crook to work on the Taliban and convince them to give up the fight. I doubt that anyone can convince most of the Al-Qaeda fanatics to lay down their arms, but a number of the Taliban might be willing to listen.
I note that the author does not explicitly make the case that Miles was tied to his supply tail while the Indians were not. But this is a different argument.
They're right.
But that doesn't mean we who DO deserve victory need to share their diminished expectations. Sadly, they are more than willing to export their low self-image. More sadly, there are others willing to accept delivery.
Witness the recent elections ...
All war ultimately comes down to logistics and will. Seizing the oil fields will shut off their supplies. Right now they have nothing else to do except fight us because we give them everything that they need. Ultimately they will lose their will to fight, simply through attrition.
Any nation that declares war on the US either through words or actions should lose their resources.
In contrast, when they arrived at the South Pole, they found many of Amundsen's tracks: both men and many dogs....dogs from Greenland which apparently survived and accomplished the mission at a much higher rate than the Russian dogs Scott had chosen. They may have been Huskies?
I think Malamutes are Alaskan...
They may not be eliminated, but we can place them in the same position as we have the American Indian -- isolated, broken, dysfunctional, without means of support, and harmless.
Are you indifferent to the plain fact that this thread is about George Crook, not Nelson Miles?
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.