Update on ROE Changes for Afghanistan
BY Herschel Smith15 years, 6 months ago
From the BBC:
Speaking during a visit to a new US marine base in southern Helmand province, Gen McChrystal said that US and Nato troops must make a “cultural shift” from conventional warfare to protecting Afghan civilians.
“Traditionally American forces are designed for conventional, high-intensity combat. In my mind what we’ve really got to do is make a cultural shift,” he said
“When you do anything that harms the people you just have a huge chance of alienating the population. And so even with the best of intentions, if our operation causes them to lose property or loved ones, there is almost no way somebody cannot be impacted in how they view the government and us, the coalition forces.”
“If you are in a situation where you are under fire from the enemy… if there is any chance of creating civilian casualties or if you don’t know whether you will create civilian casualties, if you can withdraw from that situation without firing, then you must do so,” he told the BBC.
This address was probably delivered at Camp Leatherneck:
Where the U.S. Marines are preparing to take on an insurgency as well-entrenched as it was in the Anbar Province. This information is valuable as a followup to our previous analysis of the new ROE. Four more points are in order.
First, General McChrystal has essentially laid out the new insurgent strategy in Afghanistan. This strategy is even more sure than it was in Iraq where staying among noncombatants yielded little succor, especially against the Marines in the Anbar Province (we’ll also remind you at this point that al Qaeda and the indigenous insurgency lost in Anbar – the Anbaris and the Marines won).
Second, it is bizarre in the extreme for General McChrystal, having spent his time in raids, high value target killings and other dark operations, to be telling the Marines (who not only did that, but spent time among the people too) what will and won’t win a counterinsurgency. As the saying goes, he is trying to teach his granny to suck eggs.
Third, there is no possible way for Soldiers or Marines to know with certainty if noncombatants are in any particular location or domicile. General McChrystal’s words were “if there is any chance.” Without comprehensive knowledge of the situation, there is always a chance. Thus the decision-making is biased in favor of disengagement.
Finally, protecting Afghan civilians involves killing Taliban. One won’t be possible without the other. Young Marines in Camps Lejeune and Pendleton preparing to deploy to Afghanistan must be wondering “just what kind of mess are they preparing for us? I think I’d rather go on a float where I can shoot back.” At Camp Leatherneck there must be young Marines staring in disbelief at their COs. In the halls of the Pentagon the Marine Corps Commandant surely must be preparing an exit strategy for Afghanistan.
On June 26, 2009 at 7:50 am, davod said:
How many senior officers will resign over this?
On June 26, 2009 at 7:57 am, davod said:
Of course we may be underestimating the general. Maybe he wants the Afghans to once again feel the whips and swords of the Taliban, so they will beg the US to come back and do anything to get rid of them.
On June 26, 2009 at 10:43 am, Warbucks said:
United States Institute of Peace (USIP) Presentation: Smart Tools for Smart Power: Simulations and Serious Games for Peacebuilding: http://smarttools.eventbrite.com/
On June 26, 2009 at 12:23 pm, TSAlfabet said:
Bravo, Davod! That must be it!
It’s a clever jiu-jitsu move by the General to fake out the Taliban… make them feel all comfy and cozy among the civilian population… yeah, a real feeling of invincibility. Then WHAM!! We run the other direction which will draw those T-bans out in swarms of over-confidence to chase us and when they do… we will win them over with eloquent speeches about global brotherhood and shared values and give them tours of our FOB’s and they will be so envious that they will surrender straightaway.
On June 30, 2009 at 11:44 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Thanks for the comments (related to the post – which was specific to ROE). This has been followed up with:
http://www.captainsjournal.com/2009/06/29/concluding-thoughts-on-afghanistan-roe-modifications/