How to be the Biggest Tribe
I thought I'd start a how-to thread on being the biggest tribe. None of this is new, but we seem to keep relearning history's lessons. My area of expertise is in the rural areas and villages. Niel,Schmedlap, and others can comment on how to do it in the urban areas.
Here's some quick notes on the seizure of Zaganiyah. By July 2007, we were one of the first units in Iraq to 1. Clear AQ, 2. Bring Violence down to minimal levels, 3. Start reintegrating displaced families, 4. Start Re-establish governance and services, 5. Start Reconciliation talks. The boys did some great work. The entire process took us 90 days.
1. Initial Entry. First, three weeks of covert/overt reconnaissance and shaping efforts to define the situation immediately followed with a massive deception operation to mask the timing/route of our clearance. Second, one week of squadron (+) clearance of Sadah, Qubbah, and Zaganiyah.
2. Seizing Zaganiyah. I established a patrol base in the middle of town and blockaded all the roads in and out. We instituted curfews and limitations on both mounted and dismounted movement as population control measures. The patrol base was our inner ring. The CPs served as an outer-ring extension to extend our sphere of influence.
3. Patrol Flooding. My boys spent 8 hours/day outside the wire on patrols. We flooded everything. It got so busy that for the first time, I could not go out anymore. My job was Command and Control or being a zombie running off caffeine and nicotine while holding two hand-mikes talking to CAS, AWT, the platoons, and squadron.
4. Killing the enemy/Defeating the IED Network. I would send small teams into hide sites for 48-72 hours. We would kill emplacers. Eventually, the enemy countered by having women and 10 year old children emplace the IEDs. I restricted our fires. We would just watch them. Later, our intelligence collection helped us kill the Bomb-maker and capture two AQ LT's. That ended the IED problem- 1. We took away the expertise. 2. We made it too costly to emplace.
5. Coercive Civil Affairs. Once a week, I would assemble all the elders and show a wad of $5000 to them. I would let them know that there was more where that came from, and I wanted peace. As soon as the violence stopped, we would build the town. The elders refused and would start complaining. I'd kick them out telling them we'd try again next week.
6. Humanitarian Support. We identified that many infants were dying from cholera. We'd conduct patrols to teach the women simple ways of hydration to save their children and provide emergency food drops. Finally, the women got frustrated with the men and started telling us where the IEDs were emplaced, where the caches were hidden, and who the culprits were.
7. Iraqi Army. I fired the first IA company there b/c they were Shia locals fighting a civil war with the Sunnis. They were replaced with MAJ Aziz and his boys from the Udaim. We partnered together, lived together, patrolled together, and became one unit. By July, he was working unilaterally in Zag with me helping with CAS, intelligence collection, and Medevac.
Just some of the things that worked for us. It was COIN not enemy-centric, not pop-centric.
v/r
Mike
This war is not about Afghanistan...
At a tangent, but relevant: Lets not forget what the regional stakes are. Being the "biggest tribe" is not just about Afghanistan. In fact, I would submit its not even primarily about Afghanistan. Why is the US IN Afghanistan? Why should the US care who rules Afghanistan and who is the biggest tribe there? I think NOW THAT ITS THERE, one of the big reasons to stay and win is because it shows regional powers who is the biggest tribe. And IF one buys into the whole superpower deal, then that is much more important than showing some small villages who the biggest tribe is. You can see this dynamic in action in Pakistan right now. The Pakistani army has looked at Obama's good hearted wavering on Afghanistan and reached the (probably correct) conclusion that this particular American tribe is outa here in the not too distant future. Hence the reluctance to accept Kerry-Lugar conditionalities about the role of the army in Pakistan AND about Pakistani efforts to use jihadi proxies against India. On both these counts, GHQ now seems to think they can get America to blink (again, I think they may be right; the first has not historically been an American priority, always loved military dictators in third world countries, and the second is India's headache, not America's). The sticking point right now is the "good taliban" (just my guess, I have no inside info) and GHQ may be calculating that if they hold out long enough, Obama will accept the good taliban at least in Eastern-Southern Afghanistan and a few years later the good taliban can take care of the rest of the country, by which time American troops will be gone and no one will care.
Personally, I am not sure this is a correct assessment and even if it is, the net result is going to be a huge disaster for the region (where an American victory would be painful for some egos, but a net positive for the long suffering people of the region). But the american tribe is fast losing credibility and that means that eventually the coming civil war will be fought between India, Pakistan, Iran, Russia and China and their proxies. Thats bad for the region, but if I was an American officer, my main concern would be "If we are not going to win this tribal war and act all superpowerish, then we shouldnt be sacrificing men just to make it look good for a few years". Go in, or get out.
It is not possible to be realistic without being confused.
Beware of those who are not confused; they're unrealistic dreamers, those who think they have all the answers... :wry:
Sounds kinda definitive...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken White
Beware of those who are not confused; they're unrealistic dreamers, those who think they have all the answers... :wry:
Yet there are a a shocking number of absolutes in nature.
The speed of light or sound, gravity, relativity, etc, etc, etc. Behind all of the chaos and noise of facts of every unique individual situation there is this tremendous base of unyielding natural law that lends order to the chaos. I'm no scientist, but I have always been amazed by this fact.
The same is true for human interactions as well. Sure, we have the ability to think, react, make decsions; but there is nothing new under the sun and beneath all of our tremendous chaos and independence is a foundation of relatively stable "natural law" if you will, that once understood helps to make sense of the tremendous chaos that is in your face. This is what I see as a strategic level of understanding; a pursuit of the natural laws shaping a particular dynamic, and also any unique dynamics that may also shape things in predictable ways.
IMHO, The role of ideology in insurgency fits into this; as does the dynamics between governance and the governed. Are these absolutes? No, but they provide a very solid start point for understanding any particular situation of the same nature.
Absolutes in nature and in science are one thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bob's World
Yet there are a a shocking number of absolutes in nature...Are these absolutes? No, but they provide a very solid start point for understanding any particular situation of the same nature.
Yep -- no doubt about most of that. However, that doesn't address those who become convinced they've got the solution.
Absolutism in people is another thing. Having a great degree of self confidence is desirable; have a great degree of certitude is less so. The guy with self confidence listens to and learns from others improving his and their lot; the certitudinous don't listen because they already have all the answers (or they listen but discard immediately). They're dangerous. See McNamara, R.; Rumsfeld D. for examples. ;)
