It has has contested here several times that Afghanistan is not an insurgency. Sounded to me like a great topic for discussion.

It seems if you are describing something inaccurately, then its likely the other qualities you ascribe to it may also be wrong (or that if you got them right for the wrong reasons you still may be bad off). If you decide this "something" is something you have to interact with, or becomes the object of a policy or military objective, then misunderstanding it, and misunderstanding its environment may lead you to the wrong approach.

So what is an insurgency?

Here are three sources and four definitions for insurgency:

JP 1-02: an organized movement aimed at the overthrow of a constituted government through the use of subversion and armed conflict

Merriam-Webster Online dictionary
Pronunciation:
\-jənt\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Latin insurgent-, insurgens, present participle of insurgere to rise up, from in- + surgere to rise — more at surge
Date:
1765

1: a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government ; especially : a rebel not recognized as a belligerent2: one who acts contrary to the policies and decisions of one's own political party

Wikipedia:

An insurgency is a violent internal uprising against a sovereign government that lacks the organization of a revolution. Its definition is similar to that of "resistance," but has different connotations. Usage of the term varies widely, and is highly subjective.

None of those would seem to accurately describe the situation in Afghanistan. You might be able to shoe horn it into the Wikipedia one, but to do so might leave you assuming that either it is the Karzai government (I do not necessarily mean the idea of a centralized authority) that is the principal reason for armed resistance, or that there is some overarching counter political theme or body which has united those who oppose it.

If its not an insurgency, then can the belligerents by typified as insurgents?

If they are not insurgents, then what are they? Could they be a range of things? Does it matter and why?

Does the possibility exist that while possibly not being an insurgency, it could become one? What would it take, and do we think there are those trying to make it one -e.g. is the Taliban attempting to build a political movement in the remote areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan for the purpose of challenging one or both of those governments? How do we know?

If its not an insurgency, then do counter-insurgency principals apply (some or all), and will COIN TTP (some or all) work? If so, which?

What about the situation is like an insurgency, and what is unlike an insurgency? What COIN thinking can be adapted to work, and what cannot?

We may have imposed self constraints on our ability to discuss this by putting qualifiers like global onto so many things, i.e. terror, guerrillas and insurgency. There is a danger in that because we tend to infer like properties on things and group them due to geography, religion, culture & language, association by timing or event, recent experiences, etc. rather then consider them as unique and distinct. Its a natural tendency that should be resisted because it facilitates bias. I'm involved in a couple of other projects where the out of hand COAs were based on assumptions that were only applicable elsewhere. We've got to be careful less we wind up solving exactly the wrong problem(s).

Best, Rob