ANSF performance 2015 onwards

[davidbfpo]

Not a shock, but one wonders how long can the ANSF sustain itself:

Afghan security forces are suffering record casualties in their first battles against the Taliban since the U.S. combat mission in Afghanistan ended in December after more than 13 years. The number of killed and wounded so far this year is about 70 percent higher than during the same period last year, said Colonel Brian Tribus, director of public affairs for NATO’s Afghanistan mission.

Link:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...s-with-taliban

Interesting to note the ALP get a mention:

Ulumi said that local police have borne the brunt of the fresh Taliban offensive, which has targeted the northern provinces of Kunduz and Badakhshan.

[Bob's World]

Bill,

Of course it was phase three of the insurgency that consolidated Vietnam. North and South "states" were a Western fiction created in the midst of an ongoing movement to liberate the whole of Vietnam from Western control.

I think it is you who are too infatuated with the official US perspective on our history, and that my model that exposes deep flaws in the thinking behind that perspective makes you uncomfortable. We need to get uncomfortable if we hope to get better. Thinking is like PT - if it doesn't make you uncomfortable, you are probably wasting your time.

The armies we have created to protect the governments we have created have all, without exception, folded like lawn chairs when pressed by a more legitimate force. Period. We can't even admit those challengers were more legitimate, yet alone that our political and security strategy failed.

[max161]

• Dau Tranh--Vietnamese Model
• 2 Elements--political and armed
• Opponent loses unless he wins both
• Organization is goal of Vietnamese variant
• Victory to side with strongest and most resilient organization
• New definition of Absolute War
• No such thing as a non-combatant
• People are an instrument of war
• Time is a critical element to ensure victory
• Importance of International support for Revolution

Douglas Pike, in his seminal work on the Vietnam War details the Vietnamese strategy of Dau Tranh (the “Struggle”) emphasizing that the strategy was beyond a purely military strategy but one which mobilized the entire population – a political struggle with the three now famous action programs (or “vans”): action among the enemy; action among the people, and action among the military. This was a comprehensive political-military strategy that had as a key element the psychological influence of its own people, its military, and that of the enemy. But the focus was not just on the enemy’s military force; it struck right at the heart of the enemy: the will of the enemy government leadership and its population.
Douglas Pike, PAVN: People’s Army of Vietnam, (New York: Da Capo Press, 1991), p. 216.

[slapout9]

• Dau Tranh--Vietnamese Model
• 2 Elements--political and armed
• Opponent loses unless he wins both
• Organization is goal of Vietnamese variant
• Victory to side with strongest and most resilient organization
• New definition of Absolute War
• No such thing as a non-combatant
• People are an instrument of war
• Time is a critical element to ensure victory
• Importance of International support for Revolution

Douglas Pike, in his seminal work on the Vietnam War details the Vietnamese strategy of Dau Tranh (the “Struggle”) emphasizing that the strategy was beyond a purely military strategy but one which mobilized the entire population – a political struggle with the three now famous action programs (or “vans”): action among the enemy; action among the people, and action among the military. This was a comprehensive political-military strategy that had as a key element the psychological influence of its own people, its military, and that of the enemy. But the focus was not just on the enemy’s military force; it struck right at the heart of the enemy: the will of the enemy government leadership and its population.
Douglas Pike, PAVN: People’s Army of Vietnam, (New York: Da Capo Press, 1991), p. 216.

Excellent post with great insights! To some extent these same principles were used in the Civil Rights movement. Communist were and are very adaptable depending on the local situation, while always keeping the larger goal in mind.

[max161]

In case you cannot download the attachment here is the text.

Political Struggle:

Dan Van - Action among your people - total mobilization of propaganda, motivational & organizational measures to manipulate internal masses and fighting units

Binh Van - Action among enemy military - subversion, proselytizing, propaganda to encourage desertion, defection and lowered morale among enemy troops.

Dich Van - Action among enemy's people - total propaganda effort to sow discontent, defeatism, dissent, and disloyalty among enemy's population.

Military Struggle:

Phase 1: Organizations and Preparation - building cells, recruiting members, infiltrating organizations, creating front groups, spreading propaganda, stockpiling weapons.

Phase 2: Terrorism - Guerrilla Warfare - kidnappings, terrorist attacks, sabotage, guerrilla raids, ambushes, setting of parallel governments in insurgent areas.

Phase 3: Conventional Warfare - regular formations and maneuver to capture key geographical and political objectives.


Obviously this is nothing new and pretty basic and has been (and continues to be) executed in various forms by various groups around the world.

[slapout9]

In case you cannot download the attachment here is the text.

Political Struggle:

Dan Van - Action among your people - total mobilization of propaganda, motivational & organizational measures to manipulate internal masses and fighting units

Binh Van - Action among enemy military - subversion, proselytizing, propaganda to encourage desertion, defection and lowered morale among enemy troops.

Dich Van - Action among enemy's people - total propaganda effort to sow discontent, defeatism, dissent, and disloyalty among enemy's population.

Military Struggle:

Phase 1: Organizations and Preparation - building cells, recruiting members, infiltrating organizations, creating front groups, spreading propaganda, stockpiling weapons.

Phase 2: Terrorism - Guerrilla Warfare - kidnappings, terrorist attacks, sabotage, guerrilla raids, ambushes, setting of parallel governments in insurgent areas.

Phase 3: Conventional Warfare - regular formations and maneuver to capture key geographical and political objectives.


Obviously this is nothing new and pretty basic and has been (and continues to be) executed in various forms by various groups around the world.

max161 thanks for posting this. Brings up points I have beeen saying for awhile about how the old school stuff still has a lot merit and all this new stuff ain't that new. Instead of struggling what to call this type of warfare call it what it used to be called. PEOPLES REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE.

It is behind the Marine Corps Gazette subscription paywall but there is an excellent article with good graphics you may like. The title is A Marine For All Seasons Maneuver Warfare vs. low-Intensity Conflict by LTC. H.T.Hayden September 1989 edition.

Thanks again!

[Bob's World]

Internal revolution, illegal politics, to coerce change upon or to force out some existing domestic system of governance, is indeed timeless. The specific approaches developed by Mao in China, and refined and applied in Vietnam by Giap, Ho, and friends, are but two of countless variations on how leaders have cleverly leveraged the energy that resides within a population perceiving itself as oppressed and with no legal ways available to address the intolerable problems in the relationship between those who govern, and those who are governed. It is a product of their times, situations, culture, geography and vision as leaders.

While often non-violent and low-key; these types of conflict can also bring the very worse forms of violence. Very much like domestic disputes within a family, which is a variation of this same type of internal conflict. War theory, as developed so well by theorists such as Clausewitz does not apply directly, but does lend a helpful context. The "American way of war" is very Clausewtzian in nature, and as we classify revolution as war (wrongly, IMO) it leads us to seeking victory over some threat, rather than resolution of the core problems. Our focus on seeking what we believe best for us also blinds our perspective.

Revolution manifests differently in every case, but does have common characteristics rooted in the commonalities of human nature that bind us as a species. In culture one finds the keys to tactical understanding; but it is in nature that one finds the keys to strategic understanding. Both are required for the design and application of effective COIN. The US approach in foreign lands tends to be overly lacking in both - as we are so blinded by our belief that what we bring is good, and that we are helping the people affected by our actions get to a better place, that we cannot see that we are denying them the self-determination that is the essential first step to a legitimate solution.