Plan B? Let’s Give Plan A Some Time First

[Dr Jack]

From the Sunday talk shows:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-t...l?hpid=topnews

May 6: GOP could seek "Plan B" on Iraq in Sept.

The leader of House Republicans said today that his members would begin to seek another strategy in Iraq in September, should President Bush's troop "surge" strategy clearly not be working by then. But he pledged that his caucus would stand firm against any Democratic timetable or benchmarks that mandate the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

"We don't even have all of the 30,000 additional troops in Iraq yet. And so we're supporting the president. ... By the time we get to September, October, members are going to want to know how well this is working, and if it isn't,what's Plan B," Minority Leader John Boehner (Ohio) said on "Fox News Sunday."

[SWJED]

19 January SWJ post by Dave Kilcullen - Don't confuse the "Surge" with the Strategy.

Much discussion of the new Iraq strategy centers on the “surge” to increase forces in-theater by 21,500 troops. I offer no comment on administration policy here. But as counterinsurgency professionals, it should be clear to us that focusing on the “surge” misses what is actually new in the strategy – its population-centric approach...

[tequila]

In fact, the debate shows only how little the critics of the war understand about military operations. As one of the initial proponents of the surge, I argue that there is no Plan B because there cannot be one. The idea that there can be a single alternative strategy, developed now, just at the beginning of the surge, is antithetical to the dynamic nature of war. At this early stage, there are only possible general responses to various contingencies, which will become more focused as operations move forward.

Excuse me? So I suppose one can never plan alternative options because your original plan will so irredeemably change the situation? Has Mr. Kagan ever planned anything in his entire life?

[Tom Odom]

Has Mr. Kagan ever planned anything in his entire life?

that would be, assumetric planning. You know, the kind that makes an ass of u and me...

Tom

[GPaulus]

19 January SWJ post by Dave Kilcullen - Don't confuse the "Surge" with the Strategy.

The new Iraq strategy centers on the “surge” to increase forces in-theater by 21,500 troops and some would argue that the “surge” misses what is actually new in the strategy – its population-centric approach. Unfortunately, I contend that the Surge continues to focus on an enemy- centric approach (searching out and destroying the enemy) but that strategy never works-- as such it will show little hope of success. History has shown insurgencies cannot be defeated by force alone because they inherently have local ties, promote a local distrust of outsider motives, and carry a level of popular support that is nearly impossible to completely win over.

A government and population-centric approach is necessary to establish peace. In July, I have been asked to present a strategy to "Create a Sustainable Iraq" to an international conference at the University of Massachusetts. In my strategy, is a plan to Create a Cause to Live For that is greater than the Insurgents' preceived Cause to Die For. This paper provides key steps necessary to establish peace and create a sustainable Iraq. It is based on the belief that human behavior is motivated by self-interest; that democracy cannot take root unless the basic human needs are provided; and that nations from around the world will openly participate to stop the violence and social decline. Working through the government of Iraq, the plan offers a strategy to increase employment, revitalize the economy, reduce the insurgency, and to provide regional stability.

The intent is to energize the working economy in Iraq and in doing so restore peace to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which freedom and democracy can take hold. This plan is based on the simple and workable concept — put people to work rebuilding their own neighborhoods, cities and country; provide them an opportunity to support their families; rally them toward a vision for a better future and you will divert energy away from self-destructive behaviors. In essence, the plan provides the people of Iraq with “A Cause to Live For”.

It is clear that we need only look to history for examples of how government work programs and reconstruction encampments mitigated social decline. After WWII, Germany hired millions of men to rebuild their nation on loans from other countries. In United States history, when economic engines had stalled during the great depression, President Roosevelt created the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and the Worker Progress Administration (WPA). The philosophy is to put the unemployed back to work in jobs that would serve the public good and improve the skills and the self-esteem of workers. Simply stated, we must borrow these chapters in history to create the conditions for peace in Iraq.

The plan is based on meeting basic needs for food, water, shelter, security, and income: jobs first and quality of life second, followed by self-confidence, esteem, freedom, and justice on the path to democracy. Aristotle said, “Poverty is the father of Crime, Revolution and Corruption” and it is clear that the cities in Iraq are no stranger to poverty. “The most striking thing in Iraq is the extreme poverty. I’ve been to the Philippines and saw poverty. But at least they could eat. Here there is sewage and trash on the ground. Shepherds take their sheep to eat from the trash.”

It must be financed, implemented and managed by Iraqis for Iraqis. The new government in Iraq must take the leading role and they must articulate and deliver an Iraqi Initiative for peace, economic recovery and hope. Government legitimacy comes with the first payday paid to the Iraqi workers--population-centric--winning the hearts and minds while organizing society toward a unifying, tangible vision based on government action and not rhetoric. Within this plan are powerful principles of government leadership, economic self-help, ethnic and regional cooperation, technical training, education and jobs which are all fundamental to rebuilding Iraq today.

The result of this plan will be a revitalization of Iraqi agriculture, utilities, energy infrastructure, roads, governance, communities and industrial capability. In the end, thousands of development projects will take place to help create jobs, stimulate economic growth...rebuild infrastructure…promote trade...restore peace and create a sustainable Iraq.

The plan provides an opportunity for the Iraqi people to volunteer for a one-year commitment, with compensation, to be enrolled and to live on employment camps within their tribal area. An incentive of two months wages will be paid to individuals, upon enrollment on the camp. Living on the camp is a key counterinsurgency strategy to take enrollees out of their usual surroundings, and negative distractions, provide income producing jobs, develop trust in government, offer on-camp academic and skills training, and push cash into the local economy via the "velocity of money." The camps will be expanded or contracted in size depending on the reconstruction work in the local area. Camps clusters will be established on an "Ink" Blot basis. Each camp will serve a highly localized area, in other words, workers will perform work near their own communities, usually within 10 km of the camp. Enrollees will perform many different jobs, from the most basic to skilled duties, and tasks; and at the same time will receive pay, training and education. On-camp education and training will be used to prepare men for future jobs. This group of Iraq citizens will enter this government employment program on a purely voluntary basis and they will rebuild local communities in Iraq brick by brick, and block by block. The world will see the Broken Window Theory at work.

The camps will provide Iraqi men billeting, food and water, work uniforms, training, and localized reconstruction projects while providing the communities hope. It is a core goal of the program to assist these young men, so that by the end of their commitment, they are prepared and have found private sector employment.

The military role "surge" and Iraq security forces will continue to be security, stability and overwatch for the communities, the camps and the workers. U.S. and Iraqi military and security forces must continue to focus on establishing a safe and secure environment under the rule of law, stability and area security for the Iraqi people. They must continue to attack and destroy insurgents and they must provide a stable security platform for democracy to take hold. Furthermore, it must be clear that insurgents, political parties, or other groups whose aim is to perpetuate human misery in order to profit politically or otherwise will encounter violent and decisive actions from coalition military forces.

Iraq will pay for the program with foreign exchange credits of oil nondeliverable today but sold as oil futures in the ground to all participating countries. The creation of jobs is a government to the people program implemented and financed by Iraqis for Iraqis. It cannot be over emphasized that the program cannot be American run or contractor run or private sector managed, or it will not work. This plan is about building trust, confidence and legitmacy in the new government of Iraq.

[SWJED]

I contend that the "surge" is but one tool (tactic) in a new population-centric strategy. Unfortunately, the new strategy was introduced late in the game and after several years of either living in denial that an insurgency even existed and, once acknowledged, adopting the enemy-centric approach to COIN. Also in the minus column is the time factor – our domestic political situation is pointing to a September “blow-up” that may seal the fate of the surge tactic. Still, in order for a population-centric approach to COIN to succeed there has to be at least a semblance of security for the population and other non-military actors. Using the old maxim that COIN is 80% political and 20% military – the surge is part of the 20% that is intended to enable the 80% to begin in earnest.

Initiatives such as the one you posit – and there are many good and well-meaning proposals out there – do not even have a fighting chance until there is some degree of normalcy and security in Iraq. Moreover, successful execution of any COIN strategy will take years, not months. The surge is but the pointy-end beginning and should not be scrapped simply because it is misinterpreted as a long-term strategy.

Moreover, any strategy that is dependant on the Iraqi government for success has a long and difficult road ahead. The national government seems to be “broke” and this may force us into a bottom-up approach to transforming Iraq into a stable and responsible state. I have always been a proponent of a bottom-up approach but that is not how our elements of national power seem to like to do business. The early tactics of the surge will most likely serve as the first step in that bottom-up approach. Please see Bing West’s latest SWJ trip report and blog articles at Westhawk and The Belmont Club for more on this.

[SWJED]

15 May Washington Post commentary - Running Out of Time in Iraq by David Ignatius.

... With a September deadline looming for U.S. commanders to report on the progress of the surge of U.S. troops into Baghdad, the core issue remains the need for a political reconciliation between the country's warring sects. The difficulty of achieving that goal was on display here last weekend during a visit by Adm. William Fallon, who, as head of U.S. Central Command, has overall responsibility for the war.

The top Shiite and Sunni leaders each insisted that the other side is to blame for the violence that torments the country. Each demanded that the other side make the first concessions. Each voiced support for the surge of American troops while at the same time complaining that his own neighborhoods aren't much safer...

[SWJED]

27 May Washington Post - White House Considers Next Steps in Iraq by Michael Abramowitz and Peter Baker.

President Bush and his top aides have signaled in recent days that they are beginning to look more closely at a "post-surge" strategy that would involve a smaller U.S. troop presence in Iraq and a mission focused on fighting al-Qaeda and training the Iraqi army.

Even as the final installment of the nearly 30,000 additional U.S. troops has yet to arrive in Iraq, the officials are talking publicly and privately about how U.S. strategy might change if the additional forces are able to stem sectarian violence in Baghdad.

"I would like to see us in a different configuration at some point in time in Iraq," Bush said at a news conference Thursday. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Peter Pace offered similar comments that day, telling reporters that military leaders would be reviewing a new approach as they await a September report by Gen. David H. Petraeus on the progress made by the additional troops...