Page 55 of 56 FirstFirst ... 54553545556 LastLast
Results 1,081 to 1,100 of 1120

Thread: Winning the War in Afghanistan

  1. #1081
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Bill,

    I agree that there is hardly any solution in sight and hanging around will not really give any result in the near future.

    My point is that the withdrawal should be such that it is an honourable one.

    Yet, at the same time, since many lives have been lost in Afghanistan, some presence is left to ensure that none feel that those who came just cut and ran! The terrorists should be kept guessing and left with a Hamlet like situation - To act or not to act!

    There should not be the feeling left with the terrorists and their allies that they defeated two superpowers! I believe that this sentiment is growing amongst their supporters that it is a matter of time that the second superpower will get at mauling at the hands of the soldiers of Islam!

    If that feeling permeates amongst the terrorists, then they will be more embolden and will be encouraged to act in such a manner that 9/11 will only appear as a test run!

    And then it will be back to Square One!

    Catch 22!
    Last edited by Ray; 11-08-2011 at 01:19 PM.

  2. #1082
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    861

    Default

    Indeed, Aslam Beg is already announcing victory.
    In case you ever wondered where GHQ gets its ideas: http://www.brownpundits.com/2011/11/...ns-of-history/

    The problem with this posting is that it is information anyone can find by just asking Aslam Beg or reading his articles. Its not CIA-level stuff. I assume that is why it never seems relevant to most American think-tankers..

  3. #1083
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    861

    Default

    this one is more confused, but may be even more enlightening: http://www.asiantribune.com/news/201...foreign-policy

  4. #1084
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Never fear, Ray ....

    even the "dovish" Obama Administration will not withdraw from Astan anytime soon. From Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Fluornoy, "2014 Is Not a Withdrawal Date; It's an Inflection Point." (video here):

    The plan was laid out at the NATO summit in Lisbon, and what it calls for is the transition process for transferring lead responsibility for security to the Afghans, to be completed by the end of 2014, and we believe we're on track to do that.

    That said, the Afghan forces at that time will be largely infantry battalions, police, and so forth. They are still going to need support from the international community in terms of enablers, such as mobility, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and so forth, so it will take some time before they have all the enablers necessary.

    They're going to need some continued support, and they're also going to need some advising and assisting. And so we, and NATO also, have been negotiating a strategic partnership agreement with the Afghan government that would lay out an enduring strategic partnership far into the future.

    Obviously that will have economic dimensions, diplomatic, other dimensions, but one of the dimensions on the security side is, at the invitation of the Afghan government, we will continue to have a partnership force in place that really provides advising, assisting, continued support to the Afghan National Security Forces for quite some time. So 2014 is not a withdrawal date; it's an inflection point where we put Afghans firmly in the lead and we step back into a consistently supporting role, but with much lower numbers of troops.
    The US has had a strategic partnership agreement with Astan (a presidential executive agreement between Karzai and Bush II; then renewed by Obama). Any number of Republicans (including most of their present presidential candidates) are more "hawkish" about state-building in Astan than Ms Fluornoy.

    My own personal view is that the focus (of both Democratic and Republican state-building) has been primarily one of dealing either militarily and / or diplomatically with the local AQ "affiliate" (the Taliban), rather than that part of the primary problem (AQ leadership) which resides in Astan and Pstan. To that extent, I agree with Bob Jones that we chase after local insurgents too much.

    Both the Democratic and Republican power elites disagree with me since my belief is that the US has more than performed its reasonable obligations under the current strategic partnership agreement - and pulling the plug on state-building is overdue.

    Regards

    Mike

  5. #1085
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    JMM,

    Thanks.

    If disagreeing with you means being elected to the Congress, be it as a Republican or Democrat, then I presume I am elected.

    State building is important. It will never be ideal, but like it or not, the locals do appreciate anything that is done by anyone to improve their life. However, what matters is that it does not impinge on their customs, traditions or religion. That is why the Indians, though initially attacked by the Talibans from Pakistan, were not attacked thereafter and could complete the 215-km long Delaram-Zaranj highway and hand it over to Afghanistan.

    It is the same revulsion as the West feels over the 'burqa' swarming their neighbourhood! It is alien and unacceptable. Likewise, is the feeling when local customs, traditions and religious practices are violated in countries where the West is sincerely wanting to help!
    Last edited by Ray; 11-09-2011 at 07:06 AM.

  6. #1086
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    State building is important. It will never be ideal, but like it or not, the locals do appreciate anything that is done by anyone to improve their life. However, what matters is that it does not impinge on their customs, traditions or religion. That is why the Indians, though initially attacked by the Talibans from Pakistan, were not attacked thereafter and could complete the 215-km long Delaram-Zaranj highway and hand it over to Afghanistan.
    Road building isn't state building. If you try to install, cultivate, or protect a government in another country, especially one where control of patronage is a major source of individual prosperity and power, you are going to upset people and generate opposition, no matter what you do.
    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”

    H.L. Mencken

  7. #1087
    Council Member Bob's World's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    State building as COIN is a derivative of the inaccurate COIN "old wives tale" of "effectiveness of government cures insurgency." Frankly that is a concept that belongs in the dust bin of other COIN half-right, but widely held beliefs, such as "sanctuary is an ungoverned space" or that a government must "control the populace" or "separate the populace from the insurgent" to win.

    I grow weary listening to those who can rattle off a half dozen of such phrases, yet have no contextual understanding of the nuanced aspects of where and why they ring true, and where and why they can equally lead to very flawed, and counter productive approaches.

    US AID does development, and as an institution they (not surprisingly) tend to see effectiveness and development as paths to stability.

    US State does governance, and not surprisingly, they tend to see democracy and rule of law as paths to stability.

    US Defense does security, and not surprisingly, they tend to see reduction of threats and clearing of secure space as the path to stability.

    "3D" proponents typically say "no, you must do all of these in concert, and they one achieves stability."

    All of this scratches at the obvious symptoms of the problem, and may well create some temporary window of stability, and may even facilitate over long hard effort actual progress to be made in a very indirect, "even a blind squirrel finds a nut" kind of way.

    But at some point the West will need to set the lessons of "how to sustain a colony" aside as the basis for COIN doctrine and look instead to "why colonized people revolt and how to avoid creating, or if created, best repair such conditions."

    The primary source of causation radiates out from government, and the fastest way to ramp up such causation is for a powerful external force to either adopt and prop up some weak regime, or to replace some problematic regime with one that will better answer to their interests in exchange for their support. It does not matter how "ineffective" or "undemocratic" the previous regime was. It also does not matter how pure or justified the powerful external party justifies their actions. Any replacement government provided in such a way will meet some degree or resistance; and no amount of hard effort scratching at the symptoms of such resistance is apt to truly resolve the matter.

    Hopefully the new FM3-24 starts with the goal of taking the "war" out of insurgency, and the colonial context as well. Only then can we get to an effective doctrine. Oh, and they also need to not call it a COIN manual, but rather a FID manual. COIN is done at home, when on the road one does FID.
    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. #1088
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Mod's Note

    Due to the amount of details re India's role I have copied this post to the thread on India's role in Afghanistan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
    Road building isn't state building. If you try to install, cultivate, or protect a government in another country, especially one where control of patronage is a major source of individual prosperity and power, you are going to upset people and generate opposition, no matter what you do.
    I mentioned the Road building project since anyone conversant with Counter Insurgency operations would know that while it is comparatively easy to defend point targets, it is not easy to defend a widely dispersed area target like constructing a highway where the engineering assets and manpower is widely spread without fortifications. Further the construction had to be done against a timed target and so were constructed in various segments and then linked up.

    That the Indian construction team did not have the protection of any Army or air assets since it was not permitted by the US, lest it upset Pakistan and yet could construct with minimal initial casualties because of Pakistani based terrorists, I think would elicit praise being remarkable.

    That the attacks by the terrorist were not mounted thereafter does indicate the goodwill and rapport that the Indian team had built up with the locals.

    In passing the road is not the only thing done by the Indians. And it must be remembered that India had no stake in the invasion of Afghanistan wherein they would be burdened with some obligations to set right things.

    Since it appears that you are not aware India's contribution, if one goes by your posts, I take this opportunity to inform you that India has played a significant role in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Afghanistan.

    The annual assistance is over US$ 100 million and, in addition, has pledged recently an additional assistance of US$ 100 million, thus, making the total amount of our assistance over US $ 750 million. Of this, US$ 400 million have already been disbursed so far.

    India has undertaken projects virtually in all parts of Afghanistan, in a wide range of sectors including hydro-electricity, power transmission lines, road construction, agriculture and industry, telecommunications, information and broadcasting, capacity development, humanitarian assistance, education and health, which have been identified by the Afghan government as priority areas for development.

    All the projects are undertaken in partnership with the Government of Afghanistan (GoA), and in alignment with the Afghanistan National Development Strategy and with focus on local ownership of assets.

    Major projects include: Construction of Transmission Line from Pul-e-Khumri to Kabul and a sub-station at Kabul under the North-East Power System project which will bring power from neighbouring countries to Kabul; humanitarian food assistance of 1 million tons of wheat in the form of high protein biscuits under School Feeding Programme in Afghanistan supplied through World Food Programme; construction of 218 km road from Zaranj to Delaram that will facilitate movement of goods and personnel from Afghanistan to Iranian border; reconstruction and completion of Salma Dam Power Project (42 MW) in Herat province; construction of Afghanistan’s Parliament Building; reconstruction of Indira Gandhi Institute for Child Health in Kabul in various phases including reconstruction of surgical ward/ polyclinic/ diagnostic centre; reconstruction of Habibia School; digging of 26 tube wells in north west Afghanistan; gifting of vehicles (400 buses, 200 mini-buses, 105 municipality and 285 army vehicles); setting up of 5 toilet-cum-sanitation complexes in Kabul; telephone exchanges in 11 provinces to connect them to Kabul; national TV network by providing an uplink from Kabul and downlinks in all 34 provincial capitals; rehabilitation of Amir Ghazi and Quargah Reservoir dams, solar electrification of 100 villages, etc

    Skills development and capacity building has been identified as another key area of priority, expected to become the vanguard in tackling the mammoth challenge of institutional building in Afghanistan. In furtherance of this, the Government of India (GoI) has offered 500 Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR) long-term university scholarships and 500 short-term Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) training programmes for Afghan nationals annually from 2006-07 onwards. 30 Indian civil servants are also being deputed under the GoI/GoA/UNDP Tripartite MoU for Capacity for Afghan Public Administration programme envisaged to build capacity in various Afghan Ministries. Other major skills development projects include CII project for training 3,000 Afghans in the trades of carpentry, plumbing, welding, masonry and tailoring, as well as SEWA project for technical assistance to Women’s Vocational Training Centre in Bagh-e-Zanana. Since 2002, around 2215 Afghans have trained/studied in India under the various GoI sponsored training programme. India is training the Afghan police and the army.

    India is also implementing numerous community-based, small development projects in the fields of agriculture, rural development, education, health, vocational training, water and sanitation etc. These projects, with short gestation periods, have direct and visible impact on community life, and focus on local ownership and management

    On the issue of patronage in Afghanistan, I daresay neither the US nor anyone is there as missionaries who are bringing civilisation to the savages! In other words, it is the first mistake - superimposing western ethics in a hurry, as if it were Instant Coffee being served!

    While I am not condoning corruption, but ‘patronage’ as you see it, is a historical convention, even practised in ancient West. It is bringing gifts to the ruler! It was also prevalent with the British in India, who used to get dolis which they accept with élan. If you are conversant with British Indian history, you will recall the rationale for the impeachment of the Governor General Warren Hasting of India. Education in India over about 300 years of colonial rule inculcated British ethics and hence the custom of Mughal nazrana fell by the way and was taken to be bribes............. but then Afghanistan never had the benefit of English education and customs or ethics since they were never conquered.

    Neither are they aware of the English phrase Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 11-09-2011 at 03:36 PM. Reason: Add mod's note and copy post

  9. #1089
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Bob,

    US AID would be very effective if the 'missionaries bringing civilisation to the savage' attitude is forsaken.

    Just step back into the Cold War days.

    How is it that the USSR could worm their way into most countries of Asia and Africa?

    How is it that the Chinese are more welcome than the US, who shovel in more money than all, in many parts of the world (even though they are now being disliked since they possibly remind that they are adopting the old imperialist ways!)

    The reason is simple.

    The Soviets were peasants, atheists and classless and they had no airs or agenda to change people to their ways or ideology. They had no hang up about race or colour!

    The West had. They only associated with the elite, the chatterati and the cocktail circuit! (Though that is not so now and the last Consul General of the US in Calcutta, a lady, was so loving that she became the toast of even the Marxist Govt of Bengal! Things are changing!)

    So long as one pushed their agenda in a subtle way wherein it is not understood publicly, none cares.

    Impose and tell me that they are savages or they have no idea of reality or life, or act condescending and patronising, you have a riot!

    The live example is the Indians. Great supporters of the USSR and now they cannot stop praising even the fast food chains of the US, let alone other things, even though the US is now warning of the health hazards of fast food!

    I mean no offence to anyone's sensibility, all I want to say is don't superimpose your culture, ethics, customs and you will find you are in a better position to be winning and you will not have to work so hard and waste so much of money to achieve what you want.

    I assure you that living a few years in the Orient alone, does not make one an expert. You can never understand it all unless it is in your system, and better still in your genes!

    Even I, with my public school education and Christian education, cannot claim I am thinking the same way as the rest of India, even if my heart ardently and honestly beats for India!

    As an aside, in general I pass this comment:

    I find it humorous when foreigners to the Orient assume they represent the Oriental mindset because they have touched the shore of the Orient and hobnobbed with the savages for a short while!
    Last edited by Ray; 11-09-2011 at 02:43 PM.

  10. #1090
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Agree with all that...

    This in particular:
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    I assure you that living a few years in the Orient alone, does not make one an expert. You can never understand it all unless it is in your system, and better still in your genes!
    ...
    I find it humorous when foreigners to the Orient assume they represent the Oriental mindset because they have touched the shore of the Orient and hobnobbed with the savages for a short while!
    Having spent time in several Oriental nations, hobnobbing with the great unwashed as opposed to the chatterati and the cocktail crowd and having explored places where most westerners did not go, I realize how little I or any westerner will know or understand. I learned just enough to continually warn others here and elsewhere, with reference to something transpiring in East Asia, South Asia or the Middle East (three quite different places...), they are "thinking in western terms, bad mistake."

    Also learned that in the orient, very little is as it seems.

    Interestingly, much the same can be said of the U.S. We are basically of the European hearth in many respects -- but we are emphatically not Europeans...

    Here too, much is often not what it seems...

  11. #1091
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    How is it that the Chinese are more welcome than the US, who shovel in more money than all, in many parts of the world (even though they are now being disliked since they possibly remind that they are adopting the old imperialist ways!)
    The Chinese are welcomed by leaders because they shovel money directly into the bank accounts of those leaders without hesitation or restriction. The Chinese are rapidly making themselves as hated as westerners in much of the world, largely due to bribery (always hated by those who don't get the bribes) and racism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    The Soviets were peasants, atheists and classless and they had no airs or agenda to change people to their ways or ideology. They had no hang up about race or colour!
    What I hear from the Vietnamese is that the Russians were arrogant, condescending, racist, and epically malodorous. Their help was accepted only because it was needed and there was nowhere else to get it, and relations broke down quickly once the help was no longer required.
    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”

    H.L. Mencken

  12. #1092
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Only in Our Neighborhood

    This is the inverse of - I'm for that type of project, except when it's placed in my neighborhood.

    So, state-building by the US should be logically limited to areas where we (US) have a reasonable opportunity to succeed. An example area would be Latin America. The US has a huge pool (military and civilian) of Spanish speakers familiar with the traditions and cultures of that area. Latin America has a colonialized background and governmental institutions similar to those of the US.

    Regards

    Mike

  13. #1093
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Check this video out on how little things touch the people.

    Bunker Roy: Learning from a barefoot movement

    http://www.ted.com/talks/bunker_roy.html

    Little drops of water,
    little grains of sand,
    make the mighty ocean
    and the beauteous land.
    Last edited by Ray; 11-10-2011 at 03:16 AM.

  14. #1094
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    This is the inverse of - I'm for that type of project, except when it's placed in my neighborhood.

    So, state-building by the US should be logically limited to areas where we (US) have a reasonable opportunity to succeed. An example area would be Latin America. The US has a huge pool (military and civilian) of Spanish speakers familiar with the traditions and cultures of that area. Latin America has a colonialized background and governmental institutions similar to those of the US.

    Regards

    Mike
    I would say the approach should be in the manner of the British, who built a huge Empire that was administered willingly by the very people they conquered.

  15. #1095
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,169

    Default

    Posted by JMM99

    So, state-building by the US should be logically limited to areas where we (US) have a reasonable opportunity to succeed.
    Most have learned from our recent failures, Sec Clinton in her recent article in FP said responding to crisis is not a strategy, and we need to start investing where it reinforce and strengthen U.S. interests, and that isn't in Astan, but it is beyond Latin America.

  16. #1096
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    I would say the approach should be in the manner of the British, who built a huge Empire that was administered willingly by the very people they conquered.
    Wasn't that the same empire that dissolved when the conquered folks who were doing the administering decided that they'd rather administer it themselves, and got less willing? Not likely anyone's going to fool them again. Besides, why on earth would the US want to conquer anyone or build a huge empire? Seems pointless, anachronistic, and horribly expensive...
    “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”

    H.L. Mencken

  17. #1097
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Ray,

    The US has been a lousy imperial conqueror outside CONUS. It administered Cuba and the PI with no intent to hold them as permanent colonies. It annexed Hawaii, Guam and PR. Beyond them, it has had a few military occupations - some that have worked out fairly well; others that haven't. The British model is a part of our history; but only in the sense that we rebelled against it.

    Bill:

    This is a decent basic concept: "...we need to start investing where it will reinforce and strengthen U.S. interests ...." One question is what sort of bounds should be placed on the concept if the investment is to be public.

    Regards

    Mike

  18. #1098
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
    Wasn't that the same empire that dissolved when the conquered folks who were doing the administering decided that they'd rather administer it themselves, and got less willing? Not likely anyone's going to fool them again. Besides, why on earth would the US want to conquer anyone or build a huge empire? Seems pointless, anachronistic, and horribly expensive...
    I think you are reading issues much more than what is stated.

    No one is saying that the US is out to conquer anyone. In the contemporary world, it would be laughable and totally ridiculous to believe Empires could be created.

    It requires another thread and some other time to understand why the British quit the Empire, but that is not the aim of this thread nor was it the aim of my post. I fail to understand why you have brought that up, unless you wish to make it a debating point, though I find no connection.

    The aim of my post to which you have replied was to indicate to put it, hopefully, easier for comprehension and briefly is:

    1. Even though the British initially had no idea of the culture of the people they conquered, nevertheless could control and administer the locals, whose population was much greater than the British in each colony. Does speaks volumes for the British colonial philosophy .

    2. It speaks volumes for the manner in which they learnt the culture etc of the country and set to rest any misgivings of the locals.

    Therefore, others could learn their ways and adjust it to the modern contemporary situation!

    Indeed, the locals wanted to administer themselves. The reason is not that hard to find - they had got education and the world had changed! Democracy, universal suffrage, revolutions etc were taking place and there was a greater interaction between peoples of the world taking place. People, thus, realised their rights!

    Yet, give it to the British what is their due - there was no revolution against the British that forced them to leave their colonies; and they had a whole lot of them! Not one revolution!!!!!

    They left with honour and what is more the erstwhile British colonies have no bad blood with what was called the 'Mother Country' and that is why we still have the Commonwealth and still have our ties with Britain. It was but a few days ago, the last Commonwealth Head of Govt Meeting (CHOGM) concluded in Australia!!

    The Queen of UK remains the head of the Commonwealth.

    http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/conte...1/s3351123.htm

    Much to learn from the British, if one wants to rule the waves!!

  19. #1099
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calcutta, India
    Posts
    1,124

    Default

    JMM.

    The US was never an imperialist power.

    In fact, the US supported Indian Independence Movement and showcased it to the extent feasible!

    This is known to all Indians, including the rural illiterates!

    That is why we feel sorry that there was a man called John Foster Dulles, who soured our admiration for the US.

    Thank God, it is history and we are back to admiring the US! We share the agony every time the US falters.

    Quit Afghanistan, if you can do nothing about it.

    But quit with Honour.

    No second Vietnam.

    No second superpower defeated by the soldiers of Islam!
    Last edited by Ray; 11-10-2011 at 03:20 PM.

  20. #1100
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default A PM topic - JFD

    Very curious why John Foster Dulles ruffled Indian feathers - or at least yours. Definitely off topic to this thread. Please send me a PM.

    As to Astan, I'm afraid the "hangers on" will cause a chopper on the embassy roof situation.

    Withdrawal is a tricky thing. Since it's the USMC's birthday today, consider the Marines' "retrograde assault" in Eastern North Korea and the Army's running of the gauntlet in Western North Korea at the same time in 1950.

    Regards

    Mike

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
  •