It is now the 10th day of what Gen. Petraeus called the ‘initial salvo’ of the mission in the former (can we call it that?) Taliban stronghold in Helmand Province. The fighting has been been fierce, yet sporadic, as reports of American soldier, Afghan army, and civilian deaths slowly roll in (Here’s a video of American marines in action). As the military operation winds down, or more accurately, relative stability and security is established, the goal is to get the Afghan government to take control of the region (not just the election commission President Karzai) and provide effective services to its citizens. This is MUCH MORE easier said (written) than done.

Haji Zahir, the newly appointed mayor of Marja, was brought into the city to begin what will be an incredible challenge. According to Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Zahir spoke in front of about 50 of Marja’s elderly men urging them to view the NATO soldiers as partners, not foreign enemies. Zahir, along with Brig. Gen. Mohayden Ghori, pleaded their case against the rule of the Taliban and discussed building schools, water pumps, etc. The local men appeared to be skeptical to say the least. It has also been reported that before the great offensive began, the Taliban had put on softer gloves in their treatment of the local Marja population, in a likely attempt to win, you guessed it, hearts and minds.

Speaking of hearts and minds, Americans have them to, and they may be starting to shift in favor of our presence in Afghanistan. According to a Angus Reid poll, 54% (up from 49% 2 months ago) of Americans support U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, and a bare majority foresee a favorable outcome to the war. Those who said they opposed the war fell from 42% to 38%. Still not overwhelming favorability numbers, but a welcome sign for the Obama administration. Are these results a sign that Americans see progress in the war overall? I’m not so sure. Are they because of the Marja offensive? Maybe a little bit, but the poll was taken last week, just a couple days into the offensive. In my opinion, the numbers are up because Obama finally laid out a plan and appears to be following it. There are many valid reasons why Americans are weary of our presence in Afghanistan, but I believe that the in favor numbers fell so rapidly during the past summer because of the lack of leadership from the administration. The only time people heard/read about Afghanistan was when something negative was happening and no real plan (to win or get out) seemed in sight. Now many Americans see a strategy that is in progress and I believe more are giving it a chance to succeed. How long this support will last will likely be directly related to results on the ground and leadership in Washington.

The Dutch Christian-Democrat, Christian Union, and Labor Party coalition-led government has collapsed and it seems likely that a national election is in the offing. What does this has to with Afghanistan? Well, one of the major reasons for the collapse of the Parliamentary partnership was the Netherlands troop presence in Afghanistan’s volatile southern Uruzgan province. The Christian Democrats, led by Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, tried to placate a request by NATO for a one year extension of the nearly 2,000 Dutch troops serving in Afghanistan since 2006, but a deal was unable to be arranged as the Labor Party, citing poll numbers showing the unpopularity of the Dutch troop presence, refused to extend the mission beyond August 2010. It seems that many in the Dutch public not only felt that troop’s efforts in Afghanistan were not worth the human and financial costs, but were also deeply bothered by what they felt were a lack of commitment by NATO’s more powerful members, specifically Germany.

The United States and NATO should have some concern that this move may provide a catalyst, or opening, for other European NATO partners, who are facing domestic discontent about this issue, to plan their own escape. This at the same time as the Obama administration is not only sending 30,000 more American soldiers into the fight, but also requesting an adjoining 10,000 from its NATO partners. This number was already going to be difficult to reach, and may now be impossible. This of course highlights the difficulties of holding a wide-ranging alliance like NATO together, as all its members have their own domestic political interests, that as we know, do not always align with the alliances’ best interests.

Julian Lindley-French, professor of defense strategy at the Netherlands Defense Academy, voices her concern about the implications of the Dutch government’s collapse:

“If the Dutch go, which is the implication of all this, that could open the floodgates for other Europeans to say, ‘The Dutch are going, we can go, too.’ The implications are that the U.S. and the British are going to take on more of the load.”

The Obama administration and NATO High Command will have their work cut out for them (as if they didn’t already) to keep this a Dutch affair. Though I don’t foresee any real exodus of European forces from Afghanistan following this event, it sure doesn’t breed confidence in the long term outlook of the commitment of NATO’s European partners. The Dutch have fought in a Taliban stronghold for going on 4 years now and they will be difficult to replace.

Foreign Policy Magazine has produced some memorable photos documenting the Marja offensive:

Check out more here.

In what will surely go down as one of the most important moves made possible by the American troop surge and shift to Gen. McChrystal’s COIN/Special Operations strategy, thousands of American, British soldiers, partnered with thousands more Afghan troops, are as we speak attempting to dislodge the Taliban from one of their strongest home bases in Helmand Province, Marja. Though the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and Registan have been following the offensive extensively since it started on Saturday, it is still unclear how successful it is going so far. Of course, clarity is not something that the Afghan war is known for.

According to ISAF and American military leaders, the Taliban are in deep retreat and it is only a matter of time before the Afghan government can take over control. The former after all is the goal of this offensive and McChrystal’s strategy as a whole. The thousands of troops are supposed to create the breathing room for a huge Afghan civilian administration body to move in and start to produce real results for the civilians of Marja and beyond. It has been reported that after clearing Marja from major Taliban elements, an entire Afghan civil administration is to be imported, along with nearly 2,000 Afghan policemen within a day or so.

Of course, the clearing of the Taliban is easier said than done. Though most reports of Taliban resistance have been marginal, it is unknown how many insurgents are still hiding within Marja’s population or how many of them are safely biding their time across the Pakistani border. This is the challenge of fighting a counterinsurgency with the home field advantage.

The incident involving the death of at least 9 civilians showcases another of the trials associated with following McChrystal’s COIN strategy. Though the US spends a tremendous amount of time and effort, at times causing it to put as one soldier stated ‘two hands behind our backs’, trying to minimize civilian casualties and disruptions, it is impossible to eliminate them all in an operation this large in an environment so dangerous. After this incident occurred, Gen. McChrystal immediately put out a statement of regret and ordered the halt to the use of the missile system responsible for the civilian loses. Though Afghan President Karzai was said to be lukewarm about Operation Moshtarak, his Defense Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak seems to be on the same page with McChrystal:

“Our main goal in this joint operation is not to kill insurgents. In fact, our primary goal is to expand the government’s influence and protect the civilian population.”

Though much has happened in the Helmand Province since Saturday morning, this is truly the beginning of what will be a long and telling string of events.

A couple days ago, I gave my latest views of the US use of drone assassination attacks, especially their substantial increase of usage by the Obama administration, in Pakistan. I am overall very pro-Drone use, but believe we can overuse them as a strategic tool. Here is a video of some members of the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board discussing the issue. They unsurprising are very supportive of their use:

But not everyone agrees. In fact, there are those from both the political left and right who think the Obama administration may be over relying on an imperfect war on terror tool. Marc Thiessen, who worked for the Bush administration and has been very critical of the Obama administration’s counterterrorism policies, asserts that the current administration is missing out on valuable intelligence gathering by simply killing off members of Al Qaeda and other extremist groups. Taking a different, more legalistic angle, is the ACLU. Here is a short video expressing some of their concerns about the Drone strikes:

Where do you stand? What are your concerns about the tactic? Is it overall positive or negative?

Some good stuff to stuff your brains with!

• Troops, Troops, and Less Troops - To supplement the 30,000 American soldiers headed to Afghanistan this year in President Obama’s Afghan plan, it was expected approximately 10,000 other NATO troops would also follow suit. Unsurprisingly, this is turning out to be difficult to accomplish. Germany has ponied up around 850 more, but France is not budging from the number 80 as the grand total is now stuck at 9,000 pledged. On the bright side, Georgia is sending 750 more warm bodies on top of the 350 already in the ISAF. Envoy Richard Holbrooke will be visiting the Eastern European country soon to help organize their deployment. And if Jonesing for some more Holbrooke, here’s the transcript from his last press conference on Af-Pak.
• CATO’s Take - I wanted to go over this a while back, but our bloated government kept me from reaching my potential and finishing the job (happy libertarian-loving CATO members?!). Naw, I was just lazy. CATO takes a ‘let’s take care of our own problems instead of finding intractable one’s far far away’ approach and therefore favor a much smaller military and political commitment in Afghanistan. Here is their full report on the topic, ‘Graveyard of Empires‘ and a shorter piece by one of their members. I actually watched a CATO event on CSPAN this weekend that featured Peter Galbraith, the former UN envoy in Afghanistan. Though I disagree with CATO on this and many other issues, they make a compelling argument for a lighter footprint.
• FPA’s Pakistan and India Blogs - Make sure to read what these excellent sources have to say about how Afghanistan impacts their countries of interest. Needless to say, Pakistan and India will have a lot of say in the future of Afghanistan. In fact, both South Asian states believe the other has too much influence!
• Lt. Gen. David Rodriquez Interview - He’s the man running a lot of McChrystal’s COIN/Special Ops strategy in Afghanistan and was interviewed by Stars and Stripes. Check it out! While were at, Thomas Ricks sums up the latest writings on Afghanistan by Mr. COIN, David Kilcullen, on his blog. Take a look!
• A Sport’s a Sport - And a ball’s a ball, even if it’s a goat carcass. Here is a fantastic pictorial of Afghanistan’s most popular sport, Buzkashi. 2 puns here: A. I wonder who’s the GOAT (Greatest of All Time) in the sport? B. ‘Hamid Ghani was the team’s best player, but his crucial mistake at the end of the game turned him into a goat.’

In his report to the President this summer, Gen. McChrystal stated that he thought the war in Afghanistan was winnable, but if things did not change quickly, it would be lost. McChrystal has now been handed nearly 100,000 American troops, along with thousands more NATO and Afghan partners, and given about a year to show that his counterinsurgency/kill-capture strategy is bringing stability and progress to the conflict. McChrystal is a sober man, but he is optimistic of our chances to turn things around. Here is a money quote from the General:

“The biggest thing is in convincing the Afghan people. This is all a war of perceptions. This is not a physical war in terms of how many people you kill or how much ground you capture, how many bridges you blow up. This is all in the minds of the participants.”

He certainly isn’t your grandfather’s General!

Follow me on twitter at gtpowerpolitics

My original plan for today’s post was to be on how the US may be over-relying on drone attacks against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but then I read this Michael Phillips’ piece. But first the drones.

The drone attacks have indeed proved effective in eliminating several high level Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders. These men, with the latest possibly being Pakistani Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud, are dangerous, irreconcilable enemies who we all are left better on without. The Obama administration is obviously a big supporter of use of the drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It has been widely reported that the Obama administration has probably at least doubled (getting accurate numbers on what is a ’secret’ process is difficult) the number of unmanned drone attacks since 2008. One report states that there have been around 30 drone missile attacks killing over 200 people since last September. The Obama administration’s just released budget contains a 75% increase in drone funding, which JCS Chairman Mike Mullen asserts will nearly double the number of Reaper and Predator orbits.  Obama himself bragged about their increasing use, compared to 2008 (hint, I use them of more than Bush did).

As much as I’ve been a supporter of this method, I’m starting to be a bit concerned that the US may be becoming too reliant on what is despite its technologically impressive nature, a blunt instrument of war. Just the other day, it is believed 4 separate, but obviously connected drone strikes occurred in North Waziristan, reportedly killing 29 people. While I hope and am fairly certain, most of these victims were Al Qaeda or Taliban insurgent leaders, this one attack had to have had some costs as well. It is likely that some of those killed were civilians, which of course breeds anger and resentment from the local population. News of a large scale attack like this also is likely to pour even more fire in a country that is already growing tired of American interference. Lastly, even me, one who believes that the Taliban and Al Qaeda can’t just keep replacing dead/captured leaders, is starting to grow a bit skeptical on exactly how far back these assassinations are negatively impacting our adversaries in Central Asia. Hakimullah Mehsud just recently took the place of Baitullah Mehsud, and even if Hakimullah is infact a ‘goner’, how much will this set back the Taliban’s ability to create chaos in Pakistan and hold control over vast parts of Afghanistan? This question is extremely difficult to answer, but very important.

I also couldn’t help but connect Obama’s drone attack emphasis with his administration’s interrogation and Gitmo policies. To be blunt, it started to appear to me that this administration would rather just kill these perpetrators than have to deal with the mess of capturing, interrogating, prosecuting, and finally confining them. Back to the Phillips’ piece now….finally!

This amazing work of journalism showcases a much more nuanced, yet aggressive tactical strategy against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Phillips was embedded with a group of Special Forces, accompanied with Afghan Army personnel, in Afghanistan’s Zabul Province. He provides in-depth detail on how the US troops and Afghan army members attempt to find specific insurgent leaders by both getting close to local population (Barghantu village in this case) and aggressively combating the enemy with force if necessary. The piece ends with American medics desperately fighting to keep a professed Taliban fighter alive (using donated blood from US soldiers) just hours after their countrymen put the bullets in him. Though it wasn’t exactly said in the article (besides the usual COIN/protect the population lines from Petraeus and McChrystal early on), it was known that this special ops team wanted to learn more about the enemy, not just ‘kill’em off’. Combine this with the announced assault on Marjah in Helmand Province by top US/NATO military brass and one cannot just label the Obama administration’s Afghan strategy as too one-sided or parochial.

I hoped this made at least a little bit of sense.

(Photo Source: CNN)