Article Archive: Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Paramilitary: Cast The Scoundrels Out
   Next Article → KURDISH WAR: Carrot And Stick
February 6, 2011: After nearly a decade of effort, the United States has achieved a major breakthrough in efforts to create an effective national police force in Afghanistan. In short, the Afghans have agreed to fire hundreds of police commanders identified by NATO police trainers and advisors as corrupt or incompetent (often both). The Afghan government long resisted calls for this sort of thing, as senior police jobs were patronage, an easy way to win support out in the countryside. In some cases, politicians in the capital received some of the payoffs and other loot collected by corrupt police chiefs. But now, even senior politicians realize that corrupt cops only drive people to support the Taliban. This change in attitude towards police corruption is a major shift in Afghan thinking.

Afghanistan has long had major problems with police. To begin with, police are something most Afghans regard as a foreign institution. As initially implemented in Afghanistan, the national police were a threat to the people, not a force that "protects and serves." Too many police saw themselves as bandits with a badge. All this goes back to the fact that Afghanistan has never been a country in the modern sense, but rather a tribal confederation dominated by the Pushtuns. Before the 18th century, what is now Afghanistan was part of various empires (Indian, Iranian, Mongol, Greek). But in the 18th century, with the profitable trade routes from China made obsolete by Western ships, the Pushtuns got organized, and sought to establish an empire. After much effort, they failed. By the 19th century, the advancing Russian and British empires had reduced Afghanistan to its present borders. The Pushtuns were still in charge, although they were now a minority. The king was traditionally a Pushtun, and his main job was to deal with outsiders and arbitrate disputes among the tribes. Law and order, such as it was, depended on tribal customs and local militias or warlords. This did not stop tribal feuds, and wars. Even the king knew when to step back and let the tribes settle their own disputes violently. An "Afghan Army" was a feudal levy of tribal militias, which appeared whenever there was an outsider that threatened many of the tribes. There was usually no police at all. Before the 21st century, the only efforts to create police forces were local, usually in cities and major towns. But in the countryside, where most Afghans still live, the tribe provided whatever police functions they could, and it usually wasn't much.

It has taken nearly a decade for Western nations to fully absorb the reality of the Afghan attitudes towards police. NATO and U.S. police trainers have bit the bullet in Afghanistan, and drastically upgraded recruitment standards. From now on, you can't be a cop, unless you are literate. This means the foreigners running the police training operation had to establish a major literacy program. That's because only about 25 percent of Afghans are literate. But it's become clear that illiterate and untrained police are worse than no police at all. That's because cops who can't read and don't know much about proper police procedure tend to be corrupt and a menace to the people they are supposed to be protecting.

Currently, two-thirds of police recruits fail to complete their training, and illiterate recruits have the worst time of it. Despite that, the national police force has been expanded to nearly 80,000. The illiteracy problem has always been recognized as a problem. Currently, only 35 percent of all policemen are literate. While this can be ignored for many of the lower ranking personnel,  police supervisors need to read. Moreover, illiterate recruits take longer to train, and more effort to work with.

The U.S. has provided an intensive literacy course for soldiers, which gets most of them to basic ("functional") literacy within a year. A similar program was implemented for the police. They needed it, and it was noted that it made a big difference. In addition to learning how to read signs and maps, the newly semi-literate police were taught to sign their names, and write out the serial number of their weapon.

Illiterate police selected for promotion to sergeant were given more literacy training. That's because being able to read and write has long been a critical asset for any paramilitary force. The Roman Empire, at its height 1800 years ago, had an army over 100,000 troops, a third of which were literate. But with modern forces, an abundance of technology makes literacy even more necessary. The Afghans can get by without it, but can do a lot better with it.

The police have another problem. Until last year, many police recruits received no training at all. That had a lot to do with the high dropout rate. That has changed, but it will be several years before all police are trained to an acceptable level. But Western nations have never been able to provide a sufficient number of trainers. This makes it difficult to establish some essential procedures, like how to work with Afghan Army units or operate modern police technology (databases, biometric data, crime scene investigation and so on.)

In fact, there are some even more serious problems with the cops, mainly because of a lack of good leadership. That is expected to change as more corrupt commanders are dismissed. Still, Afghanistan has never had a real national police force, and building one isn't easy. The culture of corruption, and tribalism, plus widespread illiteracy, are proving to be formidable obstacles. Those police units that are well led (and there are some of them) and have worked out good relationships with local tribal leaders (difficult, because of the many feuds, and short tempers), do a good job. Having to battle the Taliban and drug gangs puts additional strain on an already weak force, so improving the quality of new cops is a matter of survival for the force.

Next Article → KURDISH WAR: Carrot And Stick
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
blkfoot    How in the world   2/7/2011 1:35:12 PM
Is Afghanistan going to be able to maintaine a 300,000 Militiary and National Police Force after the NATO troops and the US starts to withdraw?
 
Professionalism will deterriate (what little there is), and corruption will take over completely. The only orginizations that will have a long term plan will be the Taliban and the Drug Lords.
 
Without a true sense of National Identity, the scattered Afghan Tribes will eventually fall back into their weak, Warlord/druglord, tribal societies, and will not back the "National Gornement" as we see it in Kabal.
 
I truly hope I am wrong, but just following everything that goes on in that crazy place dashes my hopes for it. 2014, All of Afghanistan is to be under Afghan Security. It's a waiting game and the Taliban know it. They do just enough harrassing to stay relevant, and keep their warriors bloodied and they use them to learn our technics for future harrassments. Then sit back and wait...the Americans will be gone, NATO will be gone, the Afghan Government forces will crumble once a Large "Tet" style offensive begins due to it's bad leaders, corrupt politicians and unprofessional uneducated non allengence fighting force.
 
If the Taliiban is smart they will distance themselves from Al Qaida and it's philosphies, not allowing AQ to set up base camps and training Camps and safe havens..thats where the Taliban went wrong back in the early 2003. Without AQ, the USA will have no supported reason to come back and beat the Taliban again. The World Leaders will not see a justification to get into the mix. So, the Waiting Game.
 
The Taliban and Drug lords have time on their side....we have a few short years to try and instill something into a country that isn't a country but a comglomeration of boundry lines drawn on a map early in the last century. Without a National Idenity...
 
Quote    Reply

blkfoot    To myself   2/8/2011 7:19:01 PM
I was hoping somebody would have replied and countered and disprove everything I had wrote above..something that would give me that shining light that I am seeing the future incorrectly and Afghanistan truly has a bright future.
 
Anyone? Anyone? Bueler? Anyone?
 
Quote    Reply

antares    @blkfoot   2/10/2011 4:57:22 AM
There is no shining light.  Ten years of Western training cannot overcome two thousand years of tribal loyalties.
 
It was, is, and ever will be a mistake to treat Afghanistan as a nation-state.  I would like to think that someone who works the Afghanistan desk at the US State Dept knows this, but I have never seen anything out of Foggy Bottom that approaches competence.
 
Quote    Reply

ker       2/11/2011 10:53:15 AM
Every thing yoou say was once true of Switzerland. Tecnological change dose have political consequences. the war lord culture is not unquestionable permanent. Time lines for change will tend to have inflexion points rather than smooth forms. I do agree that we need to change strategys and use fewer troops in country.
 
Quote    Reply

DavidE    @blkfoot   2/11/2011 11:50:58 PM
Everything you said seems to be true.  Except that listening to what 
Obama said, I thought I heard him leave himself enough wiggle
room that he won't be compelled to leave Afghanistan on the
given schedule, if things don't look good.  If he does, you're right, we're screwed.  

Maybe I'm naive, but I'll bet you that he doesn't keep that
schedule.  Note, btw, that the due date is in his second term,
if there is one.  Whether he's re-elected or not, he can't be punished 
at the polls.  I think all he'll do is make a token gesture at pulling out.
 
Quote    Reply