Afghanistan Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Why Who
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
The Taliban Really Need A Win Here
   Next Article → STRATEGIC WEAPONS: Bulava Brain Drain Blues
April 23, 2010: The U.S. is having problems getting the German government to allow German troops in the north to work with U.S. and Afghan troops to clear the Taliban out of the area. While the Germans have been more aggressive against the Taliban in the last year, most Germans want their troops out of Afghanistan. It's believed that Afghanistan is an American problem and that the Americans can take care of it without German involvement. German troops see it differently, believing that the Taliban have to be confronted and stopped. Most German politicians realize that the NATO alliance only works if the members help each other (thus if Germany leaves the U.S. to deal with Afghanistan by themselves, Americans will be less likely to come to Germany's aid in a future crises.) But German popular opinion is, "not our problem, bring the troops home." This attitude is common throughout Europe. After all, the Americans showed up the last three times Europe needed help (World War I, World War II and the Cold War, plus the reconstruction period after World War II), and many Europeans take it for granted that the Yanks will show up again if needed.

American military commanders want to bring in more electrical generators, and fuel to run them, to temporarily cure the chronic power shortages in Kandahar. But reconstruction officials, mainly officials from the U.S. State Department, oppose this, as the Afghans will be angry when the additional fuel and generators are taken away in less than a year. The military believes that the short term boost in Afghan morale will be worth it, as it will help clear the Taliban out of Kandahar. At the same time, the American and NATO trainers and reconstruction staff are trying to reduce the incidence of corruption and incompetence among Afghan government officials. That is a very difficult job, as there is a long tradition of both in the region.

The Taliban are moving more people into Kandahar, determined to maintain a presence in what they consider their capital. The Taliban and drug gangs are jointly making a last stand. If they cannot keep the drug business going in Kandahar and Helmand, the Taliban are, well, not finished, but greatly diminished. Already, cash shortages have forced the Taliban to pay most of their fighters piecework (by the job). The Taliban use of terror, and the growing number of drug addicts, has made the Islamic radicals even more hated throughout Afghanistan. The Taliban really need a win here.

The Taliban, with the backing of the drug gangs in Kandahar and Helmand, are also still trying to expand their power. Thus the increasing Taliban violence in northern and eastern Afghanistan. But these two provinces have always been the core of Taliban support, and heroin production. While the Taliban originally (in the early 1990s) pitched themselves as a new and improved type of Afghan warlord, they proved to be as bad as the people they sought to replace. Thus their quick fall in late 2001.

Most of Afghanistan has been at peace, or at least what passes for peace in this part of the world, since 2002. But most of the adult male population is armed (the majority of those just for self-defense). The chronically high unemployment makes it easy for warlords (usually ambitious tribal leaders, actually anyone with access to cash and guns) to recruit and to head off looking for power (intimidating other tribes) or loot (stealing whatever they can).

This ancient warrior tradition has been revived big time in the "Pushtun belt" (the Pushtun tribal territories on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistani border) by the establishment of the heroin trade in Helmand province. Most of the poppies are grown here, and processed into opium and heroin, mostly for export. The trade once flourished across the border in Pakistan, but two decades ago the government shut it down, after experiencing a sharp increase in drug addiction throughout Pakistan.

Now the new addicts are Afghan, and most of the country is hostile to heroin and opium production. But the drug lords don't want to move on again, as the next move will take them out of Pushtun territory, and many of the Pushtun drug gangsters won't have an easy time of it operating with "foreigners" (anyone who is not a Pushtun). Before the Taliban were overthrown in 2001, they demonstrated their willingness to tolerate the heroin trade (as long as nearly all of the stuff was exported, because drug addiction was, even then, very unpopular). The Taliban needed the high "taxes" that the drug gangs could pay, and still does. The drug gangs and the Taliban (basically Islamic conservatives with guns and attitude) need each other. The drug lords know they can bribe plenty of government officials to leave them alone, while the Taliban believe they can intimidate the government, and anti-Taliban tribes, to obey.

The relationship between the drug gangs and the Taliban is an imperfect one. There is no unified command, just dozens of local arrangements that follow the same pattern (the drug gangs use bribes and Taliban violence to keep their poppy fields and refining operations safe from government interference).

In terms of casualties, the Taliban are losing. The NATO forces are losing about four men per thousand per year. The Afghan police and army are suffering 2-3 times that casualty rate. The Taliban are losing three or four times as many as the Afghan security forces. But the Afghan war is not so much about casualties as it is about tribal politics. As long as some of the tribes, or tribal factions, support the Taliban, the fighting will continue. This kind of violence has been endemic in Afghanistan for thousands of years. These wars end either through a threat of extermination (the old Mongol approach, which is no longer acceptable), or negotiation. The big difference between the Afghan government, and NATO, is over the importance of negotiation, and what can be given up. Many in the government are willing to tolerate some degree of heroin production and Taliban autonomy, in order to achieve more peace. NATO and the U.S. do not go along with that option.  

A major problem is the fact that Afghanistan has never had an effective national government. Afghanistan is basically a federation of tribes, with a weak, figurehead, "ruler" whose main job is to deal with foreigners, and mediate a tribal dispute occasionally. But the current Afghan government, encouraged by its Western backers, is trying to impose a national government, and Afghans are not sure what to make of it. Since many national government officials are in the pay of the drug gangs, and most officials are pretty corrupt by Western standards, expectations have to be kept low.

April 22, 2010: In Kandahar, Taliban death squads have become more active, killing a government official and a pro-government tribal chief today.

April 20, 2010: Taliban death squads killed the deputy mayor of Kandahar, Azizullah Yarmal, as he prayed in a major city mosque.

April 18, 2010: The government released three Italian medical aid officials, who had been arrested eight days earlier and accused to working with the Taliban to kill a provincial governor. It's unlikely that the Italians actively supported the assassination plot, but they have been cooperating with the Taliban, who have free access to the hospital. This kind of involvement is common in areas where armed groups are active, and NGOs (foreign aid groups) have no perfect solution for it.

 

Next Article → STRATEGIC WEAPONS: Bulava Brain Drain Blues
  
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Nasty German Idiot       4/23/2010 11:17:05 AM

The Taliban Really Need A Win Here

April 23, 2010: The U.S. is having problems getting the German government to allow German troops in the north to work with U.S. and Afghan troops to clear the Taliban out of the area. While the Germans have been more aggressive against the Taliban in the last year, most Germans want their troops out of Afghanistan. It's believed that Afghanistan is an American problem and that the Americans can take care of it without German involvement. German troops see it differently, believing that the Taliban have to be confronted and stopped. Most German politicians realize that the NATO alliance only works if the members help each other (thus if Germany leaves the U.S. to deal with Afghanistan by themselves, Americans will be less likely to come to Germany's aid in a future crises.) But German popular opinion is, "not our problem, bring the troops home." This attitude is common throughout Europe. After all, the Americans showed up the last three times Europe needed help (World War I, World War II and the Cold War, plus the reconstruction period after World War II), and many Europeans take it for granted that the Yanks will show up again if needed.
 
It will happen.  The "partnering-concept" with the ANA and US troops is already proposed, planned and will be carried out according to plan.  Germany is not Spain and will not withdraw before the Job is done. Regardless of what the majority of Germans think on the success of Afghanistan, it has not lead Germans to vote for leftists parties.  The most important vote on Afghanistan has already been carried out last fall, with the 2 parties standing strong behind the mission winning the last general election [(christan democratic union (CDU) and liberal party (FDP)]  and clear majority in the Bundestag.  And even the left parties (Social Democrats, Green Party)  have the serious problem that they were the ones that initially did send Troops to Afghanistan, back when Gerhard Schröder was still chancellor.  They cant run away now with the tail between their legs, because although Germany is indeed a peace-loving country today,  weakness is not even liked by German communists ...  and especially the Social Democrats have historical reasons and fears anyway to not be blamed "Vaterlandslos",  (without fatherland) something that was in my opinion also a main reason to join the War against Serbia 1999. 
 
2 very recent ! Articles in english from the German (leftist) Spiegel magazine on topic:
 
Partnering Concept:
XXXttp://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,690526,00.html

Overlook on the debate (today !) in the Bundestag and comment by German newspapers:
 XXXttp://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,690826,00.html
 
 
Quote    Reply

Dave_in_Pa       4/23/2010 12:34:06 PM
"...many Europeans take it for granted that the Yanks will show up again if needed."  Immature, irresponsible, lazy, selfish, ungrateful bastards.
 
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       4/23/2010 1:00:20 PM
Realistically,  the only reason and main cause that German troops do fight every day in Afghanistan is that the US defended Germany during the Cold War and helped Germany on its Way to one stable democratic nation. 
As for the World Wars, I guess we at least can be excluded for beeing thankful for bombardment and destruction of our cities ?  ^^
 


 
Quote    Reply

Nomad32    Great Links NGI   4/23/2010 5:27:09 PM
The der spiegel articles are pretty interesting - especially coming from a leftist paper. Spent a bit of time looking around beyond the two links you provided. One of them basically stated that afghanistan was a war, it was probably worth fighting, and that germans should basically have a frank debate on the subject. A red herring?
 
On an aside. What is the diff btwn the red and green berets - inf and abn? Love the feldgrau dress tunics. Weren't they a dark green at one point?
 
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       4/24/2010 9:23:17 AM
Today ...
 
Air strike kills 13 militants in N. Afghanistan

Thirteen Taliban militants including their commander were killed as they came under air attacks in Afghanistan's northern Kunduz province Friday night, an official said Saturday.

An official with the Afghan National Security Directorate (NSD) who declined to be identified told Xinhua that the air raids took place in Dasht-e-Archi district Friday night after intelligence reports indicated militants' activities and airpower was called in which left over a dozen insurgents dead.

"The aircraft of NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) dropped bombs and killed 13 militants including their commander Hamza Khan," the official asserted.

However, the outfit, who have been attempting to infiltrate from their traditional hotbed southern Afghanistan to relatively peaceful northern province especially Kunduz and neighboring Baghlan province, have yet to make comments.

Kunduz and Baghlan, considered peaceful provinces until early 2009, have been the scene of increasing Taliban-led insurgency in the post-Taliban central Asian state over the past several months.

Source: Xinhua
 
Also important, especially concerning the original article on strategypage.
 
XXXttp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3aede3a795-0593-4918-809e-2e6e6ce752fa
 
"US troops reinforcing the Bundeswehr in northern Afghanistan will be commanded by a German general. After meeting Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), in Berlin yesterday, German Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg said the United States accepted and recognized German command of ISAF's Regional Command North. The command is currently headed by a German brigadier general but in future by a major-general to take into account the presence of US troops in northern Afghanistan."

I can hardly see any great struggles or differences between the German and US approach to Afghanistan, otherwise the US would surely not put their additional troops under the command of a German General. ( This makes sense anyway because it is the sector of Isaf-North, (and after recent friendly fire cases) in my opinion its much better to have a central commander coordinating all operations in an Area, instead of having several groups running around under differend mandates and sometimes not well coordinated enough to know of each others presence ! )
 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       4/24/2010 4:13:54 PM

Realistically,  the only reason and main cause that German troops do fight every day in Afghanistan is that the US defended Germany during the Cold War and helped Germany on its Way to one stable democratic nation. 


Aren't you Germans afraid that someday mujahedeen types could show up on the streets of your home town  ? There are many strangers with permanent residence or, even, a citizenship in Germany. Some of them are already creating problems. If they come, they will be trained, organized and supported from places like Afghanistan.
 
I am sorry, I might be different than other people, maybe paranoid, but those things are very simple for me. The threat is as clear as it could be. I don't quite understand that kind of mindset.
 
It is not just about Germany, of course. Elsewhere is no different.

DG

 
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       4/25/2010 4:06:36 AM
In fact at the moment stories pop up of alledged "Germans"  (which are in almost every case Turks, Libanese, Syrians or whatever nationality that have gotten the German passport)  travelling to Afghanistan to fight for Al-Qaida or the Taliban.  Also the attackers from 9-11 lived and radicalized themself partly in Germany,  in one of the very hidden "Islam-study-courses"  that nobody back than had on the agenda or saw as a serious threat to the society, much more as an expression of religious freedom. 
That has of course massively changed. Today the German security organs watch very closely what is happening behind the closed doors of islamist organisations.  I dont think that Germans in general feel "threatened" by Islam to the extent of other countries, which may be connected to the fact that the by far largest Group of "migrants" in Germany are Turks, which are not known as hardcore-fundamentalists anyway.  To the contrary,  they very much understand that a secular state is a must in Europe, and Turkey is strongly secular after all, even with the current "Islamic" Government.   Only 3% of the German Population are Muslim by the way, and only 2,4 % still have a Turkish passport.  They just are not noumerous enough to be seen as a real threat, and a dialouge between the German state and muslim-organisations was started some years ago that has lead to a more open attitude of dealing with Muslims in Germany, which is in my opinion a promising step towards "self-control" of a religious group. Integration is a main topic in Germany since 9-11 and the consequences of it , which had been totally neglected in the years before and since reunification.  There were simply other, more important topics for Germans back than.
 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       4/25/2010 11:11:22 AM
NGI, you need much less than 3% or 1% of anything to have something like Beslan siege. My point is that nations should send soldiers to places like Afghanistan to protect their own citizens and way of life. Not because they feel friendly towards Americans.
 
The alternative is to turn your own country into police state, track every citizen, collect data on everybody, introduce strict rules, because everyone could be a terrorist.
 
GW Bush and his associates came with that, fundamentally correct, concept of GWOT. It says:
 
Don't wait for them to come here, let's go there where they live. Let them have war and destruction, not us.
 
DG
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nasty German Idiot       4/26/2010 2:43:18 PM
first of all, an "economist" article on the German debate:
 
XXXttp://www.economist.com/world/europe/displayStory.cfm?story_id=15954464
 
To your comment:   I only tried to explain what the majority of Germans feels, that is not necessarily my opinion !
(actually im a member of the free-democrats (described as "business-friendly" in the economist, while 80% of Germans will call us bloody capitalists eating babies ^^)  
 
I personally have stated before that I dont have a problem with either of:
a) responding to 9-11 by taking out Al-Qaida as an organisation whereever possible, including killing or torturing their leaders
b) Germany actively fighting persons planning terrorist acts against Germany or our allies.
 
As for Germany as a target for terror,  there has been a quite famous attempt by Islamists that was foiled by the German Police in 2007.
[ XXXttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6979295.stm ]
It is at this point an avoided theme within politics and the society to adress interior terrorism against Germany. It is more seen as an attempt by conservatives to install more controlling measures than a real efford to help increasing the security of the country. That will change drastically if a serious act of terrorism would take place inside Germany, but at this point People simply dont feel threatened by Al-Qaida. Part of that is also that Germans have a very high confidence into the security organs, who for example managed to successfully crushed the Communist RAF after a long and bloody struggle.  And they were not crushed by handing them flowers and discussion, but by jailing them for life or putting bullets through their terrorist skulls.  It took until 1998 by the Way until the RAF declared surrender, the guy underneath (Wolfgang Grams) was taken out by the GSG9 in 1993:
 
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/7/7714/7714_2.jpg" /> 
 
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       4/26/2010 10:05:55 PM
Great posts all around, but where NGI and Trenchsol disagree here I agree with Trenchsol on all counts.
 
Quote    Reply