November 3rd, 2009 | Dartsboard | Posted by Karen Walker
Canada’s Chief of the Land Staff, Lt. Gen. Andrew Leslie, said today that counterinsurgency and counterterrorism are both necessary in the war in Afghanistan.
The question of whether a COIN strategy, like the one proposed in Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s assessment, or a counterterrorism strategy, seemingly favored by some of President Obama’s advisers, is better for Afghanistan is being hotly debated in Washington, D.C.
Speaking within a couple of blocks of the White House at the Woodrow Wilson Center, Leslie said it wasn’t a question of one versus the other: Both are necessary.
“I happen to believe that tenets of counterinsurgency apply in Afghanistan, but here’s the rub: Afghanistan is a very complex counterinsurgency fight, but threaded throughout are hardcore elements and so it has counterterrorism elements,” Leslie said.
For those pockets of extreme terrorists with whom there can be no dialogue, there is only one solution, he added.
“Therefore, both points of view are correct.”
Leslie made some very interesting points in his presentation. He is extremely proud of Canada’s contribution to Afghanistan, and rightly so. There are about 3,000 Canadian Armed Forces troops in Afghanistan, the vast majority in Kandahar, one of the toughest provinces, and they’ve fought hard there continuously since 2006, suffering proportionately more fatalities than any other NATO force and, until very recently, it’s been a lone mission. Two U.S. battalions joined them two months ago.
The Canadians have been operating a COIN campaign, the edict being that they “live, sleep, eat and fight” alongside Afghans, who Leslie described as “very good, natural warriors.”
Here’s interesting Point One: Leslie said that the Canadians were “better equipped than any U.S. Army group.” He later explained that comment by saying that Canadian troops have more tanks and armored vehicles per soldier than do the Americans, which use a lot of Humvees. Leslie is a fan of the tank. “Tanks tend to have a calming influence when they turn up. It’s really hard to argue with 70 tons of steel,” he said.
Interesting Point Two: Leslie would not be drawn on the issue of the number of additional troops that should be deployed to Afghanistan and on McChrystal’s assessment that around 40,000 additional Americans are needed. But he did have this to say: “Every soldier wants more, that is a given. There is a certain critical mass that will allow you to do what you need to while minimizing casualties. That allows you to shape the forces because you have quality and mass.”
Without mass, he said, you end up “mowing the lawn,” having to return to land you’ve already passed over.
Interesting Point Three: Canada’s Parliament has declared that Canada shall cease all combat operations in Afghanistan by mid-2011 and withdraw. Leslie’s comment on this? “When we are told to come home, we come home. I may have strong personal view on that, but they are personal.”
Later, in response to a question, he also said that meantime, combat operations would not diminish, pledging to continue “full tilt.”
“We have not cut back a whisker; there is too much to do,” the general said.
Sounds like a soldier who believes in this fight.
Leslie, by the way, is the ultimate diplomat soldier. He holds the Meritorious Service Medal for his actions under fire during fighting for Knin in 1995 in the former Yugoslavia. And he’s the grandson of two World War I veterans: Gen. Andrew McNaughton, former Chief of General Staff and Minister of National Defence; and former Minister of National Defence Brooke Claxton.
Tags: afghanistan, andrew leslie, canada
Read more |
