AP: General calls for more Afghanistan troops

[marct]

really bothers me about the discussion is that it is focused on "strategy" and not grand strategy. While I can easily live with the ends ways means version of strategy, this is missing the key element which is the overall vision of purpose. And, after going through the assessment, I am left feeling somewhat frustrated with the buck passing that is going on. As I rather snarkily noted

If you read the assessment carefully, and not only between the lines, there is a quality of “put up or shut up” to it regarding the political ends. Someone from the political side has to stand up and act as the lead on this, and I really cannot see either President Karzai or President Obama doing so effectively.

So, a) what is the grand strategic objective and b) who is the lead on it? This, BTW, gets to the part behind the "means".

[Steve the Planner]

We are always planning. It is just that so much of it can be disjointed and counter-productive.

Having spent enough time with military planning to understand the exigencies of driving such a big ship through narrow channels, I am always left with the feeling that we are using the wrong tool---the hammer in search of a solution.

Civilian planning starts with Jane Jacobs, an open ended approach to interactive self-actualizing systems grounded in local connections and choices. Doesn't matter what community it is, engaging them, and helping them to frame a positive future---and the means and ends to get there---is the root.

What are some critical branches? Meaningful public participation, open government, goal focused plans, plan-based budgeting, forums for address and redress, reasonable checks and balances against excesses/corruption, feedback loops, ongoing refinements.

President Obama starts as a community activist, so he knows the basics (and limitations) of what has to be done on the civilian side to by-pass, and ultimately, change a disfunctional community and governance structure.

I am afraid that, upon entry to office, he was a bit too bewildered by all the stars, bars, jargon, and bureaucracy, to look at Afghanistan through a traditional community-based and people-focused lens.

But time flies, the political/economic/social crisis is at hand, and the limits of US civilian/military bureaucracy are pretty self-evident. So what CHANGE does he bring?

The current assessment really underscores the problem: The military can not plan around the current civilian policy/implementation gap. Somebody needs to set a new civilian strategy for the military to conform to, and he is the somebody.

Steve