Afghanistan

[Lemur]

Inspired by a recent post in the Obama thread by Xiahou. Our current President is doubling-down in Afghanistan, replacing the general in charge of the theater with a counterinsurgency expert.

A counterinsurgency expert is thrilled:

Now there is a lot of stuff at work here. First, I heard rumors that McChrystal might replace McKiernan only last Friday, when a senior U.S. policy-maker cornered me and asked me what I thought of McChrystal. That's kinda like asking a rifleman in the French Army what he thinks of Napoleon. Although I indeed served under McChrystal's command in both Iraq and Afghanistan, I do not know him personally and was but one cog in a giant machine at the time.

I do know that many policy-makers and journalists think that McChrystal's work as the head of the super-secret Joint Special Operations Command was the untold success story of the Surge and the greater war on terror campaigns. I also know that McChrystal and David Petraeus forged a close working relationship in Iraq in 2007 and have much respect for one another. (Prior to 2007, the relations between the direct-action special operations task force and the overall command in Iraq were strained at best.)

Second, let's not beat around the bush: Gen. McKiernan was fired -- and fired in a very public manner. Secretary Gates' exact words: "I have asked for the resignation of General David McKiernan."

Damn.

This tells me that President Obama, Secretary Gates, and Gen. Petraeus are as serious as a heart attack about a shift in strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This was ruthless, and they were not about to do the George Casey thing whereby a commander is left in the theater long after he is considered to have grown ineffective.

The sad truth of the matter is that people have been calling for McKiernan's head for some time now. Many of the people with whom I have spoken do not think that McKiernan "gets" the war in Afghanistan -- or counterinsurgency warfare in general. There was very little confidence that -- with McKiernan in charge in Afghanistan -- we the United States had the varsity squad on the field.

That all changed today. I do not know if the war in Afghanistan is winnable. But I do know that Stan McChrystal is an automatic starter in anyone's line-up.
Game on.

Time's Joel Klein throws some cold water:

McKiernan's caution may have been the right impulse. Here is the basic problem: unlike Iraq, where tribal Awakening Councils were stood up to fight the Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) terrorists--who were mostly foreign imports--the local militias in Afghanistan are being asked to fight their own Pashtun brothers, the Taliban. When I was in Afghanistan last month, a Pashtun from Wardak warned Richard Holbrooke and Admiral Mike Mullen that many of the people signing up for the local militia were from the Hazara minority. "It won't work," the man said. "The Pashtun see this as not our government."

In the end, the only possible solution in Wardak and other majority Pashtun provinces is reconciliation with the local Taliban (who are, in truth, a closer equivalent to the Sunni tribes in Anbar who changed sides and became the Awakening Councils). The best possible deal would be acceptance of the Taliban into the Afghan governing structure in return for a pledge--and supporting intelligence--that they will no longer give aid and comfort to Al Qaeda (who are, once again, mostly foreign fighters). This won't be easy to achieve, or enforce, especially not after the last eight years--on the other hand, the Al Qaeda-style religious extremists are compiling an unblemished record of being kicked out of the areas where they've taken control because their brand of Islam is so inhumane and irreligious. If we can't figure out a way to come to terms with the majority of local Taliban, who are religious and Pashtun but not Al Qaeda-style extremists, we will not be successful in Afghanistan.

I'm not sure what to think. Afghanistan may be a much more difficult proposition that Iraq. Many of the people we are fighting are locals; the porous border with Pakistan gives our enemies a safe haven; six years of neglect and mismanagement by the previous administration have given us a lot of ground to make up. Is it winnable? What would "winning" be, exactly?

In many ways Iraq was the graveyard of the Bush administration. It's quite possible that Afghanistan will serve the same function for the Obama administration. I devoutly wish for us to succeed in both theaters, but I fear that success is hazy and shapeless. Thoughts?

[Che Roriniho]

Afghanistan is, like Russia, unconquerable. That's just how it is. Noone has ever successfully secured eithre of thos for themselves.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I'm not sure what to think. Afghanistan may be a much more difficult proposition that Iraq.

Which is somewhat Ironic, at least considering views about the conflicts a few years ago. Good to see Obama's supporting the war Afghanistan.

As for the graveyard - I think it's less likely. He didn't start it, it's on a smaller scale than Iraq. But it is possible; Bush pulled a measure of success from Iraq and it still did huge damage to his political capital.

CR

[KukriKhan]

I'm betting Prezzie O wants both theaters well finished by summer 2012, if not before, with Iraqi and Afghan forces significantly in the lead, and a tiny, if existant at all, US presence in-country.

So: emphasis on quickly training-up local forces (a task best suited to Spec Ops types; it's their original charter), with the Diplo's working the loyalty to national gov't angle (a really tough row to hoe; probably gonna take a bunch of money to accomplish that).

[Banquo's Ghost]

Is it winnable? What would "winning" be, exactly?

I think that is the key to the campaign. It's very difficult to describe exactly what winning looks like for the US. Changing generals is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic without that clarity.

More to the point, the real challenge is that there is no effective border for the Taleban (amongst many factions) between Afghanistan and Pakistan, whereas there most certainly is for the coalition forces. Pakistan has always been the problem first and foremost. It's also a nuclear power that has Islamicist militant sympathisers right next to the button.

Then you have the economics of trying to develop a country whose main crop is heroin using a hierarchy of corrupt officials and warlords.

In other words, time to leave. Bin Laden was chased into caves and his network severely compromised. To me, that was the mission in Afghanistan - the rest is imperial, and doomed to the usual graveyard of imperial ambition in that benighted country.

[Fixiwee]

In other words, time to leave. Bin Laden was chased into caves and his network severely compromised. To me, that was the mission in Afghanistan - the rest is imperial, and doomed to the usual graveyard of imperial ambition in that benighted country.

First of all I want to say I'm by no means an expert on this matter. My view on this topic is pretty much of what I gather from the media.
Having said that, the situation in Afghanistan seems to me like quagmire. There is no definition about what "winning" is and the US has absolutley no clue in which direction they want to be heading. In a sense of the military I guess pulling out is an option, but let's face it, that would be admitting that the Afghanistan conflict is lost.
And I'm not too sure that Obama wants to be the guy to do it. Can't blame him though.

[Marshal Murat]

I think Afghanistan is a coin-flip. We could either keep in place the "Westmoreland-esque" general of conventional conflicts or we could replace him with a man who knows what he's doing. Gates is giving the new General (who sounds so American, it's like one parent owns McDonalds, the other a Car company) the resources, more troops, and more support to finally stamp out the Taliban, ensure good accounting, and stabilizing the entire region, hopefully by ensuring something approximating a sustainable economy.

[rant]It's this post Vietnam funk that we're in, afraid of a "quagmire" when we've pulled through in the Philippines, Haiti, Dominican Republic, and Nicaragua. [rant]

[CountArach]

If we leave now then it doesn't matter who is in charge. Just a suggestion.

[Fragony]

If we leave now then it doesn't matter who is in charge. Just a suggestion.

Do you live in some sort of parellel pink universe with bulletproof rainbows where the Taliban isn't a threat?

[Louis VI the Fat]

What would "winning" be, exactly?

Winning in Afghanistan means preserving the highly endangered snow leopard as well as happened before the invasion.

Afghanistan's snow leopard under threat from big game hunters

Rare snow leopards and mountain sheep are at risk from American and European big game hunters willing to pay $40,000 (£21,000) for the chance to shoot in one of the remotest corners of Afghanistan.

Under the Taleban, the snow leopard and other equally highly endagered species were very well protected. This ended immediately after the West moved in.

Frustrated warnings have been issued by environmental groups since 2004:
"Now the threat is from badly managed tourism and trophy hunting as roads and communications improve and more foreigners start coming to Afghanistan. American hunting companies are going to be prepared to spend a lot of money to start this business. There is going to be a lot of pressure on Kabul."

Like the large scale looting of Iraq's cultural and historical treasures (they were beyond comparison in 2003, are beyond repair and recovery now) so too did Afghanistan's phenomenal natural treasures become an object of Western looting, private plunder, and abject phillistinery.

[rory_20_uk]

Like the large scale looting of Iraq's cultural and historical treasures (they were beyond comparison in 2003, are beyond repair and recovery now) so too did Afghanistan's phenomenal natural treasures become an object of Western looting, private plunder, and abject phillistinery.

Of course, except the ones the Taliban blew up with dynomite or otherwise destroyed...
Looting and plunder at least means they're valued. During the Chinese Rrevolution the stuff the West stole is in one piece. Lots that was left was destroyed as evidence of progress. I'm more concerned with the abject phillistinery from either the West or the locals. The stuff should either be removed en masse for protection or the sites protected and experts brought in.

[Adrian II]

Like the large scale looting of Iraq's cultural and historical treasures (they were beyond comparison in 2003, are beyond repair and recovery now) so too did Afghanistan's phenomenal natural treasures become an object of Western looting, private plunder, and abject phillistinery.

This is why Louis is indispensable on this forum.

Ok, here's the short of it. 'We' are in Afghanistan to stop the Taliban from taking over the entire region and getting their hands on Pakistan's nuclear arms.

And to save the Afghan flying squirrel of course. Squeep squeep!

[Samurai Waki]

Success really hinges on what Pakistan decides, or can do. If they eradicate the Taliban in Pakistan, than they really have nowhere else to hide (save Iran) which is having fits about Afghan refugees crossing their border.

[Adrian II]

Success really hinges on what Pakistan decides, or can do. If they eradicate the Taliban in Pakistan, than they really have nowhere else to hide (save Iran) which is having fits about Afghan refugees crossing their border.

And if they don't eradicate the Taliban in Pakistan, Nato will have to do it for them. In which case a certain substance will hit a certain fan, a case for which Mr Obama seems to be preparing quite adequately. I like his style.

[Major Robert Dump]

The guy Obama canned wasn't doing a bad job at all. It's more of a cosmetic makeover, the new general is more like the old one than not.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

And if they don't eradicate the Taliban in Pakistan, Nato will have to do it for them. In which case a certain substance will hit a certain fan, a case for which Mr Obama seems to be preparing quite adequately. I like his style.

You advocate invading Pakistan?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Ok, here's the short of it. 'We' are in Afghanistan to stop the Taliban from taking over the entire region and getting their hands on Pakistan's nuclear arms.

And to save the Afghan flying squirrel of course. Squeep squeep!

In fifty years, in a thousand years, in fifty thousand years, the enlistment or not of Taliban as policemen means nothing.

The extinction of entire species means everything.


What is clear, is that the fortune of threatened species perfectly follows the ebb and flow of stable governments. This should be cause of grave concern for the powers that have assumed responsibility in Afghanistan:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Rare Kashmir deer 'makes comeback'



It's hoped that the hangul has been saved from extinction after its numbers reached dangerously low levels


By Altaf Hussain
BBC News, Srinagar


The hangul - a sub-species of red deer found only in Indian-administered Kashmir - appears to have made an extraordinary comeback.
The latest census, conducted in March, puts the raw count of the endangered animal at 175. The increase in numbers may be nominal but wildlife authorities say it's a sign of hope. The hangul population started growing before the outbreak of armed conflict in the state two decades ago.

Last monarch
People living in neighbourhoods outside the park say the hangul then was so commonplace that it even used to visit their mustard fields and vegetable gardens, damaging crops as it did so.

Militancy in the Kashmir valley has reduced in recent years


Mohammad Qasim Wani, now aged about 90 and a retired wildlife official, says there were at least 3,000 hangul in the Kashmir area during the reign of the last monarch more than 60 years ago. "The hangul was widely distributed. I saw it in Lolab, Kupwara, Gurez, Teetwal, Uri, Kulgam, Pahalgam and other places," he said. "I saw herds of hangul as large as 200 and at times even 500. Today, when I think of the hangul, I cry."

Mr Qasim says the hangul became vulnerable after the fall of the monarchy in 1947. "Bureaucrats indulged in wanton killing of the hangul for sport."

Plummeted
Besides poaching, the hangul faced a threat to its existence from human encroachments on forestry which led to the fragmentation of its habitat.

It's hoped that other animals in danger can be saved too

In the early 1970s the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources conducted the first ever census of the hangul population. It discovered that its population had plummeted to a mere 170 animals. Various measures by the government, including the enactment of Wildlife Act and the establishment of a fully-fledged department of wildlife, saved the animal from extinction. Its population grew four-fold.

But the outbreak of armed conflict in the late 1980s threatened the hangul again.

There were a lot of disturbances in its habitat, particularly in the upper reaches of Dachigam where it breeds in summer. Wildlife officials dared not move into these areas.

Taking advantage of the situation, nomadic shepherds known as bakarwals brought their sheep into the areas where the hangul used to graze. The return of near normalcy in the Kashmir Valley in the past few years has afforded yet another chance to the hangul. .

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8080079.stm

[KukriKhan]

Is it winnable? What would "winning" be, exactly?

The capture of Osama bin Laden. The original purpose of going to Afghanistan. Then we're done.

All else is (expensive) fluff. Including Iraq, and nation-building, and surges, etc.

[rory_20_uk]

So, turning Bin Laden from a figurehead to a martyr is going to cause A-Q to implode??!?

[Vladimir]

The martyrdom fear is an excuse for inaction. The same can be said about a number of leaders with a fanatical following.