Progress and peril

[Administrator]

The final version of Army FM 3-24, "Counterinsurgency," (MCWP 3-33.5 for the Marine Corps) deserves applause for coming a long way fast. The Sept. 21 draft was a jumble of platitudes and a prescription for continued failure. After key leaders in the Marines and Army realized how badly the doctrine had gone off track, earnest debate and long days spent rewriting and editing the document resulted in a useful manual that begins to come to grips with the actual challenges facing us, instead of simply repeating the failed recommendations of the last century's counterinsurgency (COIN) "experts."

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2007/02/2456854

[ZeusIrae]

I registered especially to react to this article.

I am not a soldier,I am not an expert of warfare or foreign policy.So I am perhaps unqualified to comment it.

I have already read several articles of Ralph Peters on the middle-east and terrorism.His "realism"(some would say cynicism) is refreshing compared to the political correctness and the (perhaps fainted)naivety of more mainstream commentators.

However I disagree with his solutions.On the historical aspect,I agree with him.I know history enough to know that how our ancestors dealt with insurgency.And that's the problem,Mr Peters seems to admire their original solution and call it "resolute".I fail to see anything resolute in using overwhelming military power to slaughter men,women and children when a population caused problems.There's nothing resolute about what we can call today genocide.That was the way of the "wise" encients.They "resolutely" killed everybody who opposed including the women and children.We don't want troubles to reproduce,do we?

And it seems the solution of Mr.Peters to the iraqi insurgency and looming civil war.The US army will have to "resolutely" kill everbody at sight.It won't suprise the locals,they are used to it Mr.Peters.Saddam Hussein who was indeed even by regional standards a monster used the same methods.And Mr.Putin in moscow,a reliable partner in the great war on terrorism,will be glad to know that the USA finally understood how to deal with rebellions.Chechnya is certainly a beacon of hope for those who want peace in Iraq.


Very well,Mr Peters,kill everyone who oppose and make sure to kill their sons too,to put a definite end to the cycle of revenge.But before you take the sword,I ask a small question.What were the united states goals in Iraq?

Wasn't it among other things to bring peace and democracy?And how using the same methods as the enemies of democracy is going to help?

Perhaps trying to bring democracy to Iraq was foolish(I believe so),however it doesn't mean you have to forget the most basic moral principles in order to solve the situation.They're thing that shouldn't be done and "resolute" actions are among them.

That will be all,I apologize for the grammar and the clumsy english.It's not my first language.

[Thinker]

I think the author needs to keep one thing in mind; war is within the realm of politics. It exists solely to achieve a political end. Nobody ever won a war while losing the politics. If a theoretical war could take place in a political vacuum, the safest course of action would be to eliminate all possible current and future enemies. This scenario of course cannot exist, and when your faction goes to war the eyes of the world are upon you. This is something that is especially true in modern times. The ancients perhaps had more freedom in their COIN operations as news travelled very slowly, and could be stopped completely if necessary. "Dead cat's don't mew." as they once said.

In modern times, the Nazi's waged total war against their enemies, as did Saddam Hussein, as did Slobodan Milosovic. After they did so, the wider world outside of their immediate conflict zone rightly recognized the potential danger of these parties gaining more power, and so moved aggressively to contain them. We see in these examples the consequences of ignoring the political consequences of one's actions.

To wage war successfully in the information age, we must accurately identify parties who's interests are irreconcilable with our own, and as far as is possible, 'fight to the death' with them only. This is a difficult call to make, as our nation itself contains a large set of competing interests. However, the closer we can get to an accurate assessment, not only of our enemies interests but also of our own, the more successful we will be in our wars. The age of 'Total War' was over a long time ago, and for very logical reasons as we have seen.

[Kataphraktes]

LTC (Ret.) Peters has given us another of his generally clear-eyed takes on a military doctrine that bears great importance right now and will continue to. I will openly admit that I have yet to read FM 3-24 so my comments / observations are restricted to the article, "Progress and Peril."

I am in agreement with the now Mr. Peters' articles and views a majority of the time, even if he does oversimplify his arguments. But the themes of his articles always come back to a core set of beliefs best stated by N.B. Forrest: "War means fighting, fighting means killing." He conducts his article seeing how the new Army / Marine manual holds up. My take is he would give it an overall C.

My question for Mr. Peters is, of course in war you must know your enemy. COIN is no exception. But as far as your enemies in the article go--the "military intellectuals suffocating our service-college facilities" or the "intellectual Taliban" of retired officers--who are they? While naming names of course probably isn't possible, could he have at least directed the reader? As in, "those guys in West Point Dept A?" Or the "intellectual Taliban, such men (or women) like..." Mr. Peters frequently writes in this manner, mentioning vague rogues but never giving a clue to whom they might be. I don't want to believe they're strawmen, so help me out here. Know your enemy--and help us know "them" by naming them so we can better scrutinize their ideas or ignore them altogether after comparison.

A good point Peters brings up is the manual's lack of coverage on media effects in war, though I suspect the hyper-reporting and Al-Jazeera effects are events still new to the military, as well as too politically sensitive. News now serves as entertainment, and everyone loves to see bad news (it's reaffirming on a primal level). The effects of media reporting during the 1st Battle of Fallujah really shouldn't be understated, and Mr. Peters correctly calls for more study in this area.

COIN will dominate the conflicts of our time and beyond. With the decline of the nation-state, the proliferation of smaller and weaker states, and the dangerous rise and localization of transnational ideologies full of apocalyptic hatred, the great maneuver and set-piece wars are over for the time being. As Iraq and Afghanistan, Chechnya, Kashmir and a host of other fine tourist areas attest, today's wars are nasty, brutal and conducted in near-primitive fashion: man against man, mind against mind. Mr. Peters acknowledges that the military is about halfway to recognizing the issue at hand.

[A Khokar]

A lot has been said about how the ill planed; a disastrous and unnecessary war in Iraq should be ended. American people rejected the Neocons war policies in Iraq and as a result the conservatives were forced to leave both the houses of government, defeated . Although conservative clout is diminished, still the executive power with all its might and vigour, remains in tact with their President; George W Bush. He is still sticking to Neocons guns to have his go against all the odds and wishes of people.

It is said that 'Democracy' can deliver, what ever is decided and desired by the people; and democratic governments do deliver and honour, people's wish in true colour and sprit. To what avail is then, American democracy; where people are getting the opposite of it and are totally being disregarded and ignored for their say? Except that, we are getting a disappointing rhetoric from the offices of president; escalation of Iraq war and no retreat from Iraq or Afghanistan.

What is this all about? What is at stake and what are the hindrances that even the earnest desire of people is being ignored. The situation demands that we need to strike the right cord to dig down and reach for the truth.

This may require us to explore that…here; it is a big game called Pax Americana in play. Pax Americana has its long term set goals to attain American global dominance by means of 'escalating and maintaining of espionage and covert operations' around the world. It is step by step, acquisition of lucrative lands, rich in world energy resources to full fill the hegemonic and American imperialistic designs. The prime target for the planned American century of Imperialism is to subjugate people and acquire their natural resources of rich lands situated in the Middle East, Iran and Afghanistan, in the Islamic lands of Central Asia, the Baltic region, and the countries under direct influence of Russia i.e. Georgia, Lithuania and Belarus. It is an enormous grand task for the crafty think tanks of United States, to plan and execute it for next many, many years to come. The think tanks like Neocons are busy as ever, carving the divisive policies to spread fallacy and create the webs of deceit to full fill their dream plans.

It started long before conservative came into power and occupied the offices in Washington. It was all going well till the time, Soviet Union was defeated by the US proxies' warriors, Mujahideen in Afghan war and Russian Empire collapsed. Resultant; United States became the sole super power in the world. The proven, proud warriors of Afghan war, Mujahideen were given free hand in Afghanistan to establish their own government with the financial grants from US and to eliminate the remnants of Russian influenced groups like Northern Alliance. They were also expected to carry out further escalations of war and take the fight inside the breakaway Russian states to ensure their further fragmentation. This will make the task for US easy for further exploitation of these fragile states at later stage.

It was an exceptionally smart US plan that they made Mujahideen, a devout Muslim force raised in the name of Jihad and to fight, in the name of Islam to dislodge an atheist occupier; Soviet Union, from an Islamic country- Afghanistan. This covert plan with out committing a single GI of US armed forces on ground, was serving American cause so well, that it can be graded as the most successful and unique covert operation ever conducted by a proxy in the world so successfully. On the other hand, Islamic forces were also very glad that they were using, a super power's resources, her tactics, weaponry and technology which they otherwise could never have the chance to lay their hands on. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the major players to come forward and lay their all possible resources and man power, gathered from all around the Muslim World in the name of Jihad and conduct this supposedly a 'sacred war'. Pakistan calling itself a fortress of Islam held a pillar like position in the entire conduct of Afghan war. It was an atrocious war for Muslim fighters but it progressed in leaps and bounds in terms of gaining advances in return, toward 'Pan Islamic' set goals. Goals to free all the subjugated Islamic Republics of Central Asia from Soviet Union and secure carve a strong Islamic block there. 'The Grand Islamic Block' extending from Western Sahara to Eastern Africa, to Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan; to all the Islamic states of Baltic Region, to Bosnia and Turkey; all located around a major hub of the Middle East. A fascinating dream was about to come true and the formation of an Islamic super block rich in energy and economic was in sight.

After the collapse of Soviet Union; America and its allies were celebrating their historic big achievement. It was a respite, a pause in war torn Afghanistan too. All the parties got a time to evaluate their positions. There was a requirement to form a government in Afghanistan and Taliban came forward to take over. US and its allies had continued - up till now to fund the Mujahideen and Taliban operations. On the new orders from Washington, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan agreed to further fund and support Taliban to do the subsequent jobs; to defeat the remnants of Russian-backed Northern Alliance with in Afghanistan and consolidate control over Afghanistan. From there move to destabilize the former Soviet Central Asian Republics on its borders and do the needful to facilitate the future exploitation by United States.

But the Taliban failed. It did not defeat the Russian-backed Northern Alliance. Instead of subverting Central Asia in businesslike fashion, it had indulged in blowing up statues of Buddha and terrorizing people who deviate from the Taliban's super-repressive interpretation of Islam. In fact, they had given a second thought to their indulgence, to act as US proxy for her future plans. Their achievement of a final victory as per their internal plan; to form a greater Muslim Block was close at hand and the combined forces drawn from all over the Muslim countries were also readily available in Afghanistan. They wanted now to go…their own way.

At the same time, Russia was also seen moving in the 'wrong' direction, from Washington's perspective. The completely controllable Yeltsin was replaced with President Putin, who seen resisting the U.S advances. Further more China and Russia signed a mutual defence pact. And despite immense European/U.S. pressure, Russian President Putin refused to be kicked around. This is the time that former Mujahideen commanders like Mullah Omer and Osama bin Laden emerged as self styled leaders at the international scene to resist US influence in the Muslim World… and Al Qaeda took a birth.

Just like the well laid out plans of mice, (of Tom and Jerry character); Neocons plans as of mice had gone awry. This made the Neocons desperate …and that is why the US decided to start moving fiercely … to attack its monstrous creation—Taliban. Muslim extremism in form of jihad was utilised by US earlier in Afghan war and why not; it could be used again… as future policy weapon.

The think tanks of Neocons were able to bring forth again a new divisive plan build around the known potential intensions of Al Qaeda; to resist all US activities in Muslim world in and around the Middle East. Very skilfully US incited Al Qaeda to move in and fell into 'well laid trap'. Al Qaeda fell in and carried out some dread full acts of terror against innocent civilian and got them selves labelled as 'terrorist' at global level. (Earlier Soviet Union was very successfully trapped in by US covert actions and was encouraged to invaded Afghanistan and got itself plunged in a war to get defeated and …met a death of its own Empire.) US had now planned to conduct their all future covert operations…riding on the wings of terror of Al Qaeda. The short sighted self styled Muslim mavericks, like Osama bin Laden and others had fallen prey to this new web of deceit and hence after, all the pre-emptive and covert operations around the world are being conducted (very conveniently) in the name of 'Global war on terror'.This war is widely being carried out against invisible, imaginary and fearsome extremist Muslim factions like; Al Qaeda.

It's a pity that Neocons were unable to sell such a bright covert plans to American public and are being negated. After the tragic incident of 9/11, the 'Global war on terror' was fiercely escalated. All the allies and others were given a ruling guide line; 'either you are with us or with the terrorist'. All along; may it be the invasion of Iraq, toppling of Saddam's regime, the despicable conduct of consolidation plan in Iraq or tackling the hurdle of Iran; the reoccupation of Afghanistan or the NATO operations being carried out to wipe out Taliban; the going for US is very, very tough. But the operation is being conducted, well to the 'letter and spirit' of the grand plan of the super power.

US has taken a fresh start from square one. Starting from invision of Iraq; it's supposed to be a well laid plan. This time, it must not go awry (like the last one). The current perilous situation in Iraq and hope to achieve a victory, seemingly against all the odds is must; (although it is being secured with great difficulty which was supposed to be a cake walk.) But the victory in Iraq is just a stepping stone and an important foot hold toward the major goals; to continue marching on the road through Iran, to Afghanistan, trekking around Turkmenistan and reaching the ultimate destination; Belarus (Russia). May it be Conservatives or Democrats in the house of power in Washington; this precious foot hold in Iraq ought not to be lost at any cost.

--------------------------------

Love for all, Hatred for none

[SYED]

Mr.Khokhar i would like to appreciate your detailed analysis and posting a true picture of the situataion. LIC Low Intensity Conflict or COIN is the future of warfare and all out or toatl wars are out I believe.