Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 293

Thread: Green on Blue: causes and responses (merged thread)

  1. #1
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,055

    Default Green on Blue: causes and responses (merged thread)

    I've looked through the threads here and cannot readily identify a suitable thread on this difficult issue. IIRC the issue of Iraqis attacking Allied forces did crop up elsewhere, although more about betrayals enabling ambushes, not Iraqis killing partners.

    There have numerous deaths due to some ANSF killing their allies and partners. It certainly has happened in Helmand of late, IIRC involving teams embedded with the ANSF and recently an Afghan air force pilot killed American trainers.

    hat tip to the Lowry Institute's mailing. I was not aware that the Australians have suffered:
    There's been another incident overnight in Afghanistan involving Australian soldiers being attacked by an Afghan National Army colleague. This is the third time this year that Australian soldiers have been attacked in this manner, and comes only a week after seven soldiers were seriously wounded and three killed by a 'rogue' Afghan soldier.
    There are three possible explanations for these attacks, but it is certainly too early to conclude what has motivated them. The first explanation is that all three are unrelated, coincidental acts of violence by mentally disturbed Afghan soldiers. This explanation is the hardest to accept — it's bewildering for the public and media that a string of deaths could be, essentially, random.

    The second explanation is that this is a Taliban campaign to erode the will of Australian soldiers and the public back home, and force an early exit of Australian forces from Uruzgan. This possibility cannot be ruled out. The Taliban's propaganda machine somewhat amateurishly claimed a hand in motivating Shafiea Ullah, yet has claimed neither of the two recent attacks.

    The third possibility is that there is something in the particular relationship between Australian mentors and Afghan trainees which is heightening tensions and leading to violent disagreements. Certainly the relationship in certain bases is tense — last week Afghan soldiers in the 6th Kandak were temporarily disarmed — but again there is no proof that the relationship between Afghan and Australian mentors is fundamentally worse than that with other ISAF mentoring teams.
    Link:http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/...lanations.aspx

    That post led to a riposte and I have slightly edited the passages:
    Secondly, it is too simplistic to say that (a) it can't be random or that (b) the Taliban are masterminding this. Morale in the ANA is low. Morale in the Taliban is low. Morale in the ANP is low. No one feels safe, no one feels assured in Afghanistan....Working with the coalition provides some level of comfort and support, but it also presents genuine safety risks.

    I believe the most likely cause of this is related to the inherent nature of Afghan society. For Afghans, when they face stresses and problems of life, drugs and lethal violence are two very popular choices to remedy the situation. ....As an example, when I was in Afghanistan, the local police chief expressed his concerns about the growing use of RPGs during wedding celebrations. This is a society very different to ours...

    ...based on my experience, there is every chance this just depressed Afghans dealing with a problem the only way they know how. Their life is short, they play hard.
    Link:http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/...ghanistan.aspx
    davidbfpo

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,098

    Default

    See also the 12 May 2011 paper, A Crisis of Trust and Cultural Incompatibility: A Red Team Study of Mutual Perceptions of ANSF Personnel and U.S. Soldiers in Understanding and Mitigating the Phenomena of ANSF-Committed Fratricide-Murders
    This N2KL Red Team study has four primary purposes:

    1. Inform key decision-makers that the murders of ISAF members committed by ANSF personnel do not represent “rare and isolated events” as currently being proclaimed.

    2. Explore why this tragic phenomenon is occurring by extensively canvassing ANSF members on their perceptions of U.S. Soldiers and identifying what behaviors, characteristics and/or situations provoke them towards anger and possible violence.

    3. Examine U.S. Soldiers experiences with ANSF personnel and what perceptions they have.

    4. Based on both ANSF members’ and U.S. Soldiers’ perceptions develop recommendations to counter the growing fratricide-murder threat ANSF personnel pose to ISAF soldiers.

  3. #3
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,055

    Default Afghan police kill two UK servicemen in Helmand province

    That was the BBC News headline and:
    The men, who were serving as part of an advisory team, were killed on Saturday as they provided security for a meeting with local officials near Patrol Base Attal....near a base in the Lashkar Gah district of Helmand province....
    The London-based Defence Correspondent adds:
    The rise in "green-on-blue" killings, now averaging one a week this year, is having an impact on trust in a relationship which is key for Nato's exit strategy. Nato says the attack on Saturday is the 16th incident this year in which Afghan soldiers or police - or insurgents wearing military uniforms - have turned their weapons on foreign troops, bringing the death toll from such attacks to 22 so far this year. That toll is higher than at the same time last year...
    Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18047242

    Personally I think the impact is growing at home as it challenges the official narrative of a handover to Afghans akin to "people who kill us and you want us to stay longer?"
    davidbfpo

  4. #4
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    The paper Jed cited is excellent. This problem is not going away and as David suggested it may the thing that drives us from Afghanistan sooner rather than later. The paper states that these killings occur mostly because the Afghans murderers are simply angry with the behavior of the ISAF. These are not Taliban agents doing the killing.

    Another thing I read is the figures released by the ISAF severely understate the problem because they only report the deaths (I forget about wounded). They don't report the unsuccessful attempts where the would be killers miss or are killed before they can do the deed.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default A symptom?

    This quote comes to mind:

    "We don't have twelve years experience in Vietnam. We have one year's experience twelve times over." - John Paul Vann

    'Cultural incompatibility'?

    No I don't believe so... more like the ISAF forces are not committed to the theatre long enough to understand the cultural dynamics of the area.

    Because they are there for a short tour there is no incentive for ISAF troops down to troopie level to make the effort to learn and understand the people and their languages.

    This short termism as displayed by cultural arrogance is welcomed by the Taliban, sullenly tolerated by the locals... and understandably met with seething anger by Afghans - police and army - who find themselves on the same side as the ISAF forces who treat them with disrespect and disdain.

    I mentioned it before somewhere that the mentoring is in the wrong direction. On arrival in theatre fresh units should (in the obvious absence of own forces with the prerequisite experience) receive Afghan mentors to not only guide them culturally but to teach them how the Taliban thinks and acts so that the Taliban can effectively be found, fixed and then killed.

    Without the cultural understanding - which includes knowing the enemy - ISAF forces are literally operating in a bubble. Not a smart approach by guys who believe they are smart.

  6. #6
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    I mentioned it before somewhere that the mentoring is in the wrong direction. On arrival in theatre fresh units should (in the obvious absence of own forces with the prerequisite experience) receive Afghan mentors to not only guide them culturally but to teach them how the Taliban thinks and acts so that the Taliban can effectively be found, fixed and then killed.
    That is a very good idea. Select individuals could sort of embed into a unit and stay with them throughout their deployment. When I was in Africa our drivers fulfilled the same kind of role. You listened to the drivers if you knew what was good for you and we would have been completely lost without them.

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Without the cultural understanding - which includes knowing the enemy - ISAF forces are literally operating in a bubble. Not a smart approach by guys who believe they are smart.
    Guys who believe they are smart and don't often doubt that, aren't. Our powers that be never doubt that they are smart.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  7. #7
    Council Member Bob's World's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    That is a very good idea. Select individuals could sort of embed into a unit and stay with them throughout their deployment. When I was in Africa our drivers fulfilled the same kind of role. You listened to the drivers if you knew what was good for you and we would have been completely lost without them.

    Guys who believe they are smart and don't often doubt that, aren't. Our powers that be never doubt that they are smart.
    Our guys are not being attacked by various members of GIROA because they do not understand Afghanistan (though certainly it is true that in general we do not understand much of that place and the people who live there).

    Our guys are being attacked because they represent the forces dedicated to the continued exclusion of the significant populace group that was excluded from full participation in Afghan society when we acted to elevate and sustain the Northern Alliance into power and drive the Taliban into exile.

    These attacks are a metric of the unsustainable nature of our strategic approach to Afghanistan, not a metric of our lack of cultural awareness at the tactical level.

    Consider this current article:
    Arizona Daily Star (Tucson) (azstarnet.com) May 14, 2012

    Exclusive: Moderate Taliban Speaks Of Divisions By Associated Press

    One of the most powerful men on the Taliban council, Agha Jan Motasim, nearly lost his life in a hail of bullets for advocating a negotiated settlement that would bring a broad-based government to his beleaguered homeland of Afghanistan.

    In an exclusive and rare interview by a member of the so-called Quetta Shura, Motasim told The Associated Press Sunday that a majority of Taliban wants a peace settlement and that there are only "a few" hard-liners in the movement.

    "There are two kinds of Taliban. The one type of Taliban who believes that the foreigners want to solve the problem but there is another group and they don't believe, and they are thinking that the foreigners only want to fight," he said by telephone. "I can tell you, though, that the majority of the Taliban and the Taliban leadership want a broad-based government for all Afghan people and an Islamic system like other Islamic countries."

    But Motasim chastised the West, singling out the United States and Britain, for failing to bolster the moderates within the fundamentalist Islamic movement by refusing to recognize the Taliban as a political identity and backtracking on promises--all of which he said strengthens the hard-liners and weakens moderates like himself.

    He lamented Sunday's assassination in Kabul of Arsala Rahmani, a member of the Afghan government-appointed peace council who was active in trying to set up formal talks with insurgents. Rahmani served as deputy minister of higher education in the former Taliban regime but later reconciled with the current Afghan government.

    "He was a nationalist. We respected him," Motasim said.

    Motasim used his own stature to press for talks nearly three years before the United States began making overtures to the Taliban in late 2010. At the time, he was also chief of the Taliban political committee, a powerful position that he held until he was shot last August. He is still a member of the Taliban leadership council, the Quetta Shura, named after the Pakistani city of the same name.

    His voice softened and he paused often as he reflected on the brutal shooting in the port city of Karachi, Pakistan, where he lived, while moving regularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan in areas that he refused to identify.

    Several bullets shattered his body and he was hospitalized for many weeks. In the first days after the shooting, he wasn't expected to survive.

    The AP spoke to Motasim from Turkey where he had gone for additional treatment. When speaking of his attackers, he referred to them as brothers and colleagues, saying they may have been Taliban hard-liners who opposed his moderate positions.

    "My idea was I wanted a broad-based government, all political parties together and maybe some hard-liners among the Taliban in Afghanistan and in Pakistan didn't like to hear this and so they attacked me," he said. Some of the gunmen may have come from Afghanistan and some may have been from Pakistan's North Waziristan where militant groups have found sanctuary, Motasim said.

    In the early minutes of the telephone conversation, Motasim was reluctant to talk politics, saying he had been told by his friends and colleagues to stay silent.

    "I am not involved in any talks. I am only here for my treatment," he said.

    But he gradually opened up, saying the Taliban have three main demands: They want all Afghan prisoners released from U.S.-run detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay and near Bagram Air Field north of the Afghan capital; the names of all Taliban currently on the United Nations sanctions blacklist removed; and recognition of the Taliban as a political party.

    He said talks in Qatar ended earlier this year after the United States reneged on a promise to release five prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. "But those are just the famous ones," he said. "There are thousands more being held in Bagram and they are being held under the name of Taliban but they are innocent people, farmers and clerics."

    The prisoner exchange issue is rife with sensitivity as the United States has sought to exchange American Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, captured by the Taliban in 2009, for Afghan Taliban held in Guantanamo. It appears the prisoner exchange fell through after the Afghan authorities demanded the five prisoners be repatriated to Afghanistan, according to an Afghan official who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to brief the media. The five prisoners have demanded they be allowed to go to Qatar with their families.

    Motasim said he wasn't told why the prisoners were not released but when they weren't the hard-liners among the Taliban took it as a sign that the United States was disingenuous, said Motasim, who acknowledged that the Taliban have set up an office in Qatar.

    He said the office has no official recognition as a political headquarters of the Taliban, rather it has been veiled in secrecy and the American interlocutors are engaging with them as insurgents not political representatives of at least some Afghans. Motasim said most of the Taliban who were negotiating with the Americans are on the U.N. sanctions list.

    The U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions against the Taliban in November 1999 for refusing to send Osama bin Laden to the United States or a third country for trial on terrorism charges in connection with the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. The sanctions--a travel ban, arms embargo and assets freeze--were later extended to al-Qaida. In July 2005, the council extended the sanctions again to cover affiliates and splinter groups of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

    "They (the U.S.) have to give political independence to the Taliban," he said.

    Looking ahead to next week's NATO summit in Chicago, Motasim said he had a message for participants.

    "The decisions of NATO should be for the good of Afghanistan and should not call for more violence. It should call for an end to the fighting, an end to the raids and killings," he said. "Afghanistan is destroyed, the people are displaced, refugees, poor people are dying in their homes and also foreigners are dying here. It should end."
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 05-14-2012 at 06:04 PM. Reason: Citation in quotes
    Robert C. Jones
    Intellectus Supra Scientia
    (Understanding is more important than Knowledge)

    "The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)

  8. #8
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Bob:

    You are wrong. At least according to the report cited by Jed you are wrong. Besides your contention just doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense that a Tajik or Uzbek or anti-Taliban Pashtun shoots an American soldier because of intellectual dissatisfaction with the current constitution. It makes much more sense that they murder because they are angered by they and theirs being dissed in way after way year after year.

    The article you cited didn't mention ANSF murdering ISAF. Nor did it mention that perhaps the Pak Army/ISI might oppose a settlement that cuts them out, making it dangerous for anybody who sought to do so.
    Last edited by carl; 05-14-2012 at 05:21 PM.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  9. #9
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    It's because Afghans live there and everone else is an outsider. It's the same way people in Mississippi felt about soldiers and administrators from Massachusetts circa 1865.

  10. #10
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    It's because Afghans live there and everone else is an outsider. It's the same way people in Mississippi felt about soldiers and administrators from Massachusetts circa 1865.
    I don't see how that fits ANSF killing ISAF. And this is a problem that seems to be worsening as the years go by, not staying the same.
    Last edited by carl; 05-14-2012 at 05:47 PM.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    That is a very good idea. Select individuals could sort of embed into a unit and stay with them throughout their deployment. When I was in Africa our drivers fulfilled the same kind of role. You listened to the drivers if you knew what was good for you and we would have been completely lost without them.
    Saw some footage on Afghan training by the Brits the other night on TV news (in the wake of the latest killings).

    After all these years in training people from other countries/cultures/races they have forgotten the simple method... and that is to train the trainers.

    Watching some young Brit NCO trying to teach Afghans to shoot through sign language was at the same time hilarious and pathetic. Could not adopt the prone position properly, were not holding the weapon properly in the aim and could see shots striking the ground in front of the target at 25m.

    Can't teach the shooting fundamentals of holding, aiming, breathing, squeezing by sign language. Who is kidding who.

    Anyone listening out there? Train the - Afghan - trainers first.

    Then... been on about this before. Brit troops (and probably the yanks too) should have in theatre 'battle camp' training before deploying operationally. This allows for acclimatisation and should cover 'know your enemy', local culture, locally developed and theatre specific minor tactics, advanced medical training for all, locally specific fieldcraft exercises and the like. Yes by now - ten years on - they should have identified and trained up suitable Afghans to assist with this preparation process and later mentoring on deployment. It is a damning indictment that they have not.

    Clearly very little to be gained by sending a battalion to Kenya to prepare for an Afghan tour under battalion officers and NCOs (who know less about the Afghan situation). If they can be away from home for a month in Kenya then they can rather add that extra month on the front end of their Afghan tour?

    Sadly although the Brits aimed at redeeming themselves in Afghanistan after the Basra debacle all they have really achieved is to slide deeper into the hole. Very sad.
    Last edited by JMA; 05-15-2012 at 07:06 AM.

  12. #12
    Council Member Bob's World's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    There two very different, but very powerful forces of insurgency at work in Afghanistan. The first force is the revolutionary energy between the two broad camps of those who associate with "the Taliban" and those who associate with the "Northern Alliance." All we did was tip the balance of power, not resolve the "all in or all out" nature of Afghan patronage that goes along with being on the team in power. Bonn in 2002 was a well-intended disaster. The Constitution of 2003 likewise. Same with the Election of 2004. At that point it was game on for the revolutionary insurgency to grow as all legal options to compete had been effectively denied by well-intended Western Diplomats and Politicians who could not fully appreciate that the very processes and tools that we see as platforms of democracy in the West, where controlled by the populace, become platforms of oppression when controlled by a small group of men dedicated to sustaining a monopoly of power and influence.

    The second source our insurgent power in Afghanistan is that of Resistance. It is human nature to resist when one feels that some inappropriate ("illegitimate") influence is shaping ones life though the shaping of the governance over them. Legitimate government can grow illegitimate over time as a populace evolves and a government grows static (consider the US experience and the growth of discontent with British governance), or this can happen all at once following an invasion when the invader stays and begins to shape government to what it sees as appropriate. Sending in more and more security forces (and development forces, etc, etc) can kill/buy ones way to a temporary suppression of the problem at great cost, but drives the roots of the problem deeper into the soil of the affected society at the same time.

    As the strength of the political revolution grew following our manipulations of Afghan governance, our response was to send in ever increasing effort to stem the same; thereby feeding an expanding resistance across the largely apolitical populaces of Afghanistan forced into contact with ISAF and Northern Alliance security forces.

    Who knows how many of the ANSF have deep-seated grievances, of family members and friends killed by ISAF, homes destroyed, fortunes and influence lost through shifts of patronage caused by our actions, or just patriotic deep-felt resentment over having such a massive, overt external presence dominating their country for so long??

    Revolution and Resistance. Its that simple and that complex all at once. We dedicate ourselves to control an outcome that is not ours to control, and throughout the history of mankind this is the inevitable result. Good intentions may ease the conscience on the home front, but does little to mitigate the effect on the other end among the populaces affected by this situation.
    Robert C. Jones
    Intellectus Supra Scientia
    (Understanding is more important than Knowledge)

    "The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)

  13. #13
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
    Who knows how many of the ANSF have deep-seated grievances, of family members and friends killed by ISAF, homes destroyed, fortunes and influence lost through shifts of patronage caused by our actions, or just patriotic deep-felt resentment over having such a massive, overt external presence dominating their country for so long??
    This suggests to me that you may not have read the report. It was done in an attempt to understand why ANSF, who are probably inclined at least a little to be anti-Taliban, are murdering ISAF. The finding is that the murders are probably motivated by the personal and not the political. Have you read the report?
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  14. #14
    Council Member Bob's World's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    This suggests to me that you may not have read the report. It was done in an attempt to understand why ANSF, who are probably inclined at least a little to be anti-Taliban, are murdering ISAF. The finding is that the murders are probably motivated by the personal and not the political. Have you read the report?
    Did you read my response? Half the causation I listed is "personal."

    I find most "reports" are highly biased, and that typically are written by people with little understanding of the fundamental nature of insurgency. I offer you a rationale based in a broad understanding of insurgency and my own personal experience, education and training. The facts of each of these attacks are unique. Some may well have been a deeply personal attack to avenge some real or perceived matter of honor; most appear to be against symbols of ISAF in general.

    In reading the report in post #2 above, I find the report to actually be quite consistent with my understanding of the situation and consistent with my posts above as well. A mix of resistance insurgency and personal honor, much as I suspected.
    Last edited by Bob's World; 05-15-2012 at 02:59 PM.
    Robert C. Jones
    Intellectus Supra Scientia
    (Understanding is more important than Knowledge)

    "The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)

  15. #15
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,055

    Default

    Whilst the this thread's topic is "green on blue" as one observer remarked I do wonder how many ANSF on ANSF deaths or violent incidents there have been?
    Given the multi-ethnic composition of the ANSF, surely some of the causation we have all remarked upon applies within too.

    I have checked two of my books on the Imperial era on the North-West Frontier, for the experience of the British officered 'Scouts' and found a 1985 review by the late General William Jackson of 'The Frontier Scouts' (my standard text on the Scouts).

    Mutual respect and trust...They were all poachers turned gamekeepers: Pathans recruited to keep the peace amongst Pathans....the Pathan's loyalty transcended his tribal affiliations. But loyalty between different races and creeds rests upon the knife edge of suspicion... (there were) so few defections and mutinies occurred in the ruthless atmosphere of the frontier.
    davidbfpo

  16. #16
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Bob:

    Yes I did read your response. The acknowledgment of personal reasons for the murders was half of a sentence in the fourth paragraph after two long paragraphs and one short one explicating the broad political situation in Afghanistan as you see it, followed by a fifth paragraph continuing the explication of the big picture. So it was hard to tell if you gave the personal reasons much importance.

    True enough that reports are biased, but the so are opinions of the reports. i got a different take out of it than you did. These are personal beefs, with the individual behavior or perceived group offenses against cultural norms and against things like errant air strikes. There isn't much politics behind the murders at least in the sense that you seem to mean. ANSF guys get mad because of the way the ISAF and people in the ISAF act, not because the ISAF is there or because they are dissatisfied that Mullah Omar isn't leading a block of representatives in the government. That makes more sense to me in that murders that aren't committed in the course of other crimes are generally done because the killers has been personally offended by something and big picture politics aren't generally one of those somethings, or so I've read.

    I guess you did read the report.
    Last edited by carl; 05-15-2012 at 04:09 PM.
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  17. #17
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,055

    Default In 2012 1 in 4 UK deaths from Afghan allies

    A slightly different lethal report:
    Three British soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan by a local policeman following an argument...The soldiers were serving in an Afghan Police Advisory Team and had been to the check point to conduct a shura (meeting). On leaving, they were engaged by small arms fire by a man wearing an Afghan Police uniform.
    What I noted was that the policeman was:
    a member of the Afghan Civil Order Police, whose members have a reputation for having better training and greater discipline than the notorious national police.
    Now for the fact the politicians will not like, with my emphasis:
    the deaths mean that a quarter of all British fatalities this year have been caused by Afghans soldiers with seven murdered at the hands of allies.
    Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-argument.html

    From the BBC report:
    More than 20 foreign personnel have been killed in so-called rogue shootings in Afghanistan this year.
    I don't recall this incident, maybe as it shows an ISAF on ANSF incident:
    The shooting of 16 Afghans by a US soldier in March has also created resentment.
    Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18670175
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 07-02-2012 at 10:04 AM.
    davidbfpo

  18. #18
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,055

    Default Drip, drip

    This week in Helmand more 'green on blue':
    Three US Marines were killed by an Afghan policeman early on Friday morning after inviting them to a Ramadan breakfast to discuss security. A few hours later, a further three US Marines were later shot dead by an Afghan civilian employee at a Nato base in Garmsir.

    There have been 26 “Green on Blue” attacks on foreign troops by members of the Afghan security forces since January in which 34 people have been killed. Last year, there were 21 attacks in which 35 people were killed.
    Within an article on other matters:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-in-weeks.html
    davidbfpo

  19. #19
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default Green-on Blue - Is our cultural ignorance killing us ... literally

    Don't know if this has been covered before, but on a long plane ride back from Europe I was thinking about green-on-blue attacks and how many of these attacks appear to be personal retribution. A recent quote from a Marine (those guys are pretty clever) says it best.

    Terry Walker, a former Marine trainer in Helmand Province, told Fox News that most of these incidents are due to personal and cultural conflicts. He said Afghans simply have a different way of dealing with their problems.

    "You have a strong influence that's tribal," Walker said. "Afghans can't be insulted and they have no conflict resolution capability. The smallest thing can set them off."
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz23uK9VjYd

    This reminded me of the problems we had in Iraq understanding why their supply systems did not work the way we expected them to. It was because their tribal culture, built on respect for those above them, did not allow underlings to make decisions on their own and that everything had to be cleared.

    Curious if our lack of understanding of the intricacies of tribal culture, particularly their need to maintain face in front of the other members of their tribe and their "inferiors" is killing us? If so, what are we doing about it?

    Was looking for others thoughts on the matter. I apologize if the topic has already been covered.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  20. #20
    Council Member ganulv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Berkshire County, Mass.
    Posts
    896

    Default

    You might be interested in reading this one.
    If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •