An Afghanistan Assessment

The article below is filled with supporting links if you would like more detail and information. 

‘Afghan Insurgency Can Sustain Itself Indefinitely’: Top U.S. Intel Officer

• By Noah Shachtman  
• January 8, 2010  |  
• 10:20 am  |  
• Categories: Af/Pak

The Taliban not only has the “momentum” after the most successful year in its campaign against the United States and the Kabul government. “The Afghan insurgency can sustain itself indefinitely,” according to a briefing from Major General Michael Flynn, the top U.S. intelligence officer in the country. “The Taliban retains [the] required partnerships to sustain support, fuel legitimacy and bolster capacity.”

And if that isn’t enough, Flynn also warns that “time is running out” for the American-led International Security Assistance Force. “Regional instability is rapidly increasing and getting worse,” the report says.

Since General Stanley McChrystal took over as top commander in Afghanistan, there have been a series of dark appraisals about the state of the war. In August, McChrystal warned of an “urgent need for a significant change to our strategy and the way that we think and operate.” A report recently obtained by NBC News said Afghanistan’s security forces won’t be ready to fight the Taliban for years — if ever. Earlier this week, Flynn issued a white paper complaining that “eight years into the war in Afghanistan, the U.S. intelligence community is only marginally relevant to the overall strategy.”

But Flynn’s December 23rd presentation on the “State of the Insurgency: Trends, Intentions and Objectives” may be the gloomiest public assessment of the war yet. The “loosely organized” Taliban is “growing more cohesive” and “increasingly effective.” The insurgents now have their own “governors” installed in 33 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces. And the “strength and ability of [that] shadow governance increasing,” according to the presentation. The Taliban’s “organizational capabilities and operational reach are qualitatively and geographically expanding.”

Improvised bomb “events” have nearly tripled since 2007 — 7228 this year, compared to 2718 two years ago. The bombs have grown bigger — the majority are now 25 pounds or more. “80 to 90 percent” of them are made with homemade fertilizer, rather than military ordnance. That makes it much harder to track and block the distribution of the bomb-making material. Add to that steady supply of cash, thanks to the drug trade and the corrupt Kabul government, and a glut of weapons and ammunition,” and it becomes clear why, in Flynn’s words, “the insurgency is confident…  looking toward post-ISAF Afghanistan.”

The presentation also cast doubt on some of the war’s stated central aims. The Obama administration has repeatedly said that additional troops are necessary to prevent a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan — which would then allow Al Qaeda the re-establigh its safe haven there. According to interviews with detainees, however, the insurgents “view Al Qaeda as a handicap – a view that is increasingly prevalent.” The Taliban feel they have to “manage [the] relationship with AQ to avoid alienating Afghan population, but encourage support from [the] global jihad network.”

Flynn’s presentation also, indirectly, warns that one of the central U.S. tactics in Pakistan — drone strikes against suspected militants — could backfire. “violations of Pakistan sovereignty may contribute to radicalizing the population and diminishes credibility of the GoP [Government of Pakistan].” Such violations “demonstrat[e] an inability of the government; perception they cannot protect their own; exacerbates anti-western sentiment.”

Within military circles, there’s a sense that Flynn may be underplaying recent American successes in Helmand province and elsewhere. And Flynn does note that there’s still hope for the American effort in the region. “We have a key advantage – [the] Taliban is not a popular movement (yet),” the report says. What’s more, there are “persistent fissures among insurgent leadership at local levels” and an “over-reliance on external support.”

Exploiting those fissures — and beating the Taliban — will “requir[e] operating / thinking in a fundamentally new way.”

Read More http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/01/afghan-insurgency-can-sustain-itself-indefinitely-top-us-intel-officer/#ixzz0cFsLxSbt

Comments

[Tyler]

So, if this is what is being said and this information that is put into the graph is legitimate...how can our government not stop this? This article makes the matter seem so cut and dry. The sources are solid and actually make sense. So, why are we still there? We vote these people into positions of authority because we feel that they are compitent enough to make the right decisions, but it seems that they are purposefully choosing the wrong ones.

[JohnEvans]

While the numbers look bleak, I don't think we can justify a full pull out now. After 911 we invaded Afghanistan and did a lot of damage to their infrastructure and completely disband their government. I said this before but we have an obligation to these people. We can't leave these be in squaller. We must rebuild the infrastructure and establish some form of legitimate provisional government. Some people may call us bullies for staying this long, but if we leave now we will become bullies in fact. In Afghanistan (and Iraq) we have achieved are mission and are now their purely to rebuild what we broke and make life better for their citizens.

[Brandon]

If these accusations about not being able to fight the Taliban for year are true we need to leave or find a way to beat them quickly. I really do not understand the maps, but it looks like the Taliban is growing and I do not think that is good for anyone. If Gen McChrystal is in Afghanistan and can see whats going on first had someone should listen to him. I've started to realize from watching these films that in the military only the lower people listen to the higher people. It seems that the ones who really know what is going on do not get to make the decisions.

[David Cook]

This article gives me mixed feelings about the situation in Afghanistan. If it is true that despite everything we are doing over there, the Taliban s increasingly growing more cohesive and more interdependent and self sufficient then we may be fighting a losing battle by trying to stay around and see this through to the end. If we do not set up a time table for which we can leave, then our troops may be facing an inevitable devastating backlash if the Taliban once again gains power in the region. The fact that the Taliban might now have 33 shadow governors in 34 of its provinces is what surprises me most. We've been over there for close to a decade now and though we beat them back and slowly drove them into holes and hiding, it seems like all of our efforts have been in vain. Maybe it is time to set a time table for pulling out, and figure out a way to defend our homeland from attacks. After all that we have done overseas, there is not doubt in my mind that terrorist activity wil not only continue but probably increase.

[mgn]

After reading this article I really began to feel that we need to get out of Afghanistan before any more damage can be done. It’s like David said how the Taliban is constantly growing and are far away from ever giving up in what they are fighting for. With things like this happening no good can come out of staying in Afghanistan and trying to defeat an army that will never surrender. This situation really makes me think back to WWII and how the Japanese wouldn’t surrender until we dropped the Atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We just need to leave Afghanistan because the longer we stay will only add more fuel to the fire.

[kmcnutt]

I think most of this information could apply to the article we read earlier about the Russians invading Afghanistan and how long they tried to fight. The Taliban and Afghan people will fight until they have no one left (either side). I also wonder how many have joined the Taliban or AQ since the Americans have invaded. I'm not sure if this is even a correlating thought, but if we are attacking innocent civilians, destroying towns and houses and violating women, I am most positive most of them don't care for us too much.
The fact that they are growing is not good. In no way is that good. We've been over seas for 8 years fighting. We've lost so many lives and good soldiers and killed so many more. I can't see how our upper authorities aren't able to make better decisions or listen to the ones who know what's going on.

[quicktype89]

I agree with katie. I really feel like this is Vietnam II stupidity strikes back. 8 years ago I was only 12 years old and even then felt there was something fishy about attacking the middle east even though our government claimed it was basically for revenge from 9/11. I remember asking family and teachers what we were going to do there and nobody could give me a straight answer. As I got older and began to look further into what was happening I felt more and more like America was acting out the typical school-kid getting his lunch money stolen routine in Iraq. Now looking into the failed and dwindling war in Afghanistan I'm even more frustrated with the situation. To Arabs and Muslims- even those who are American citizens- we are bullies trying to scramble to find something that can't be found. We are lucky to have gained some of the support we once had from Europe back with the previous election, but unless we pull out of the Middle East 8 years ago we won't be able to regain the superpower status we had in the world.

[Morgan]

So they are just now saying that the Afghanistan insurgents can hold their own against US forces? Have they not been doing this for the past 8 years? There is absolutely no way that we can win this war. We are fighting the people. We are fighting terrorists that speacialize in attacks like IEDs. The only way that we even make contact with the enemy is when they make contact with us first. This war is impossible.

[Julie Jackson]

This is all a mess we are in. We are now almost stuck in a war. I feel like it is not that easy to just pull out of a war. Although, if all we have to do is pull out then why are we not doing so? I agree at the fact that the people who know the truth are not being listened to. I call this war a mess because of the fact we are over there attacking people we "think" are terrorists, but how do we know for sure they are? They are dressed and look like normal people. I feel as if this war has just made people scared and not gone anywhere. We have been over there for so long and it seems like nothing has really been done. We are putting our people in a lot of danger.

[Larz]

We really do need to get out of Afghanistan before it gets much worse, even though it is already bad enough. From the charts it looks like the Taliban is growing and will only continue to grow. This is not good at all for America. We are fighting the people, who we are supposed to be 'helping', and they don't want us there. So why are we still there? The time isn't running out, I believe it already has run out. We need to do something now, or get out of this war.

[cdavis17]

I think that we really need to get out of there if the information is true. We obviously aren't doing anyone any good. Why are we still in a place that is not getting any better by us being there? We need to get out of there, and either move somewhere where we can do some good, or just let the troops come home, because what are they risking their lives for anyway??