Counterinsurgency
By Mitch Berg
A few weeks ago, I wrote my own (admittedly amateurish) impressions of the fallout of the surge in Iraq – especially the developments congruent with the observations of Robert Kaplan in Imperial Grunts. As I put it a few weeks ago, the goals are to:
- Keep our troops out among the natives – even in tiny numbers, the act of showing a presence among the civilians makes a huge difference in…
- …Cutting the guerillas off from the people. Make it impossible for the insurgents to get supplies, recruits and support (and, commensurately, to exert control through coercion and terror).
- Co-opt and exploit local institutions to help you with #2 first – and then build new institutions. This drives liberals (and, it must be fairly said, neoconservatives) crazy; surely, they reason, imposing democracy and human rights immediately must be a better thing – right? Like most ideals, it’s not always true, of course. It was a former Ranger – who’d spent a few years training for this exact kind of warfare – who introduced me to the saying “perfect is the enemy of good enough”. In many parts of the world, the only human right that matters right now is the right to not get blown up, beheaded, shot or gang-raped. Once those are taken care of, one can worry about the more finesseful rights of man.
- Build up the local institutions that work. Liberals – and some neoconservatives – grouse about this because it involves “picking and choosing warlords”.
This latest set of dispatches from Michael Yon (Ghosts of Anbar, Parts I, II and III) shows evidence of all of these.
Yon quotes selected passages from the Army’s Counterinsurgency (“COIN”) manual:
From the counterinsurgency manual that every Marine and Soldier should read:
Sometimes, the More You Protect Your Force, the Less Secure You May Be
1-149. Ultimate success in COIN is gained by protecting the populace, not the COIN force. If military forces remain in their compounds, they lose touch with the people, appear to be running scared, and cede the initiative to the insurgents. Aggressive saturation patrolling, ambushes, and listening post operations must be conducted, risk shared with the populace, and contact maintained. . . . These practices ensure access to the intelligence needed to drive operations. Following them reinforces the connections with the populace that help establish real legitimacy.From “Counterinsurgency/FM 3-24/MCWP 3-33.5”
Earlier, at the Falahat station, I counted 24 armed Iraqis at one time, but there may have been as many as twice that. So it was just SSG Lee, me, and dozens of armed Iraqis. Some clearly had been insurgents just months ago. Nobody was denying it. Not us, not them. SSG Lee and I could have been killed or kidnapped at any time, yet I felt not a twinge of danger other than maybe watching for an enemy car bomb or sniper, or starting when someone accidentally fired a burst from an AK, which they occasionally do.
The Marines were constantly outnumbered, yet they were pushing out there with the Iraqis, who are picking up more of the weight in many places.
Back in 2005 many Iraqi Soldiers and Police preferred to hide their identities.Today it seems that most Iraqi Soldiers and Police want their photos taken. Their confidence is growing and their attitude toward the terrorists is increasingly one of being more the hunter than the hunted.
Now I started to understand why the Army officers had been telling me the Marines are more advanced in counterinsurgency. Normal Marines have morphed into doing vintage Special Forces work. Many of our Army units are excellent at this work, but the Marines, at least these particular Marines, did seem to have an edge for it.
They were even studying Arabic in their filthy little compound. Lightweight study, but they were showing the Iraqis they were making the effort. The Iraqis appreciated it. I have yet to see an Army unit undertake such a clear effort to learn Arabic.
They’re moving out of the big Forward Operating Bases, into really small, rough-and-tumble bases big enough for a squad or two of men:
The Marines there live in disgusting conditions. They have two toilets. One is a tube. For more serious business, there are the small plastic baggies called WAG bags. Do your business, seal it up and put it into a garbage can. They don’t complain.
And most importantly, they’re out among the Iraqi troops and people – showing them how to fight…:
Iraqi Soldiers and Police constantly emulate Marines and Soldiers. When he got back from missions, SSG Lee would work out. The Iraqis would watch and start doing their own exercises. This form of mentoring happens naturally because Lee is just being Lee, and the young Iraqis see it and want to be it.
…and how to run a town…:
Iraqis in every province I have traveled all respond to strong leadership. It’s a cultural touchstone. A man like SSG Rakene is not someone they would overlook. Physically, the man is amazingly strong. But what is most amazing is the strength of his moral fiber. Whatever the man talked, he walked. After all of al Qaeda’s false promises, the people here have learned a hard lesson about the true value of character.
…and how to beat an insurgency in an area that was their home turf:
While al Qaeda runs and hides, stuffing its death-cult down the throats of Iraqis in other areas, out in Anbar, once its domain, American Soldiers and Marines are increasingly able to go in small numbers out on patrols with Iraqis. This morning, only two Marines accompanied an Iraqi-led foot patrol several miles through an Iraqi village. It is important to note that at the time of this patrol, Soldiers who had recently been kidnapped elsewhere in combat were still missing. With no backup, our guys are able to perform such patrols in many parts of Iraq.
Read all three parts – Part IV is coming soon.
August 31st, 2007 at 6:17 am
Hasn’t Yon been listening to Harry “We Surrender” Reid? Iraq is lost, it’s all over, Bush has failed.
We need to pull out now, so angryclown can sit in his overpriced apartment waiting for some moron to fly a plane into it. He will be fearless, of that I am certain.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:18 am
Or you guys could win the freakin’ war. Angryclown is not sure exactly how abject incompetence is keeping us safe from terrorists. But at least it’s funny to think of Kermit flinching every day when American flight 6969 from Dallas to MSP flies overhead.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:32 am
Or you guys could win the freakin’ war.
Mitch understands that while some of us were studying our history, the Clown was off at Klown Kollege raking in all the babes with the big feet.
But what about what was in the story – or, for that matter, the news lately – isn’t all about winning the “freakin'” war, when the war is a counterinsurgency?
(I’ll await RickDFL’s assertion that this is not a counterinsurgency, in ambush).
Angryclown is not sure exactly how abject incompetence is keeping us safe from terrorists.
What part of the troops’ story in the Yon article is abjectly incompetent?
OK, I won’t sic a strawman on you. Let’s assume for a moment that the Administration bobbled the part of the war between the fall of Tikrit (where Bush, rightly, declared “mission accomplished”, in the conventional-war sense of the term) and the beginning of the surge – which, as I pointed out in my bit a few weeks ago, isn’t an unreasonable assumption.
What part of “changing course and fighting the war the way a counterinsurgency is supposed to be fought, rather than plugging our ears and pretending that the pre-2007 strategy of holing up in our bunkers and hoping the Iraqi government would magically morph into a stable, cohesive nation if we demanded it hard enough was good enough” is “incompetent”?
Since I know you spent some time covering military affairs for the Klown Kounty Kourier, I know you won’t disappoint.
August 31st, 2007 at 9:00 am
Mitch proposed: “Let’s assume for a moment that the Administration bobbled the part of the war between the fall of Tikrit (where Bush, rightly, declared “mission accomplished”, in the conventional-war sense of the term) and the beginning of the surge”
Yes let’s. That’s a little matter of four years of incompetent prosecution of the war. Kind of a long learning curve, don’t you think?
There’s no getting those four years back. As a post-Katrina lame duck, your guy just doesn’t have the political tools he needs to get the job done, even if anyone other than you dead-enders thought it was possible. Bush will do what he can, over the next year and a half, to hold on in Iraq while he’s picking out wallpaper for the pResidential library. Nothing more. I’m more interested in what Hillary will do.
August 31st, 2007 at 9:27 am
Shillary?!
She’s gonna totally abandon the professional Iraqi police force, drive the Iraqi government in bed with Iran, and leave it totally unsafe for visiting U.S. legislators to take their military-led tours of the Green Zone.
What a catastrophe that’ll be!
/jc
August 31st, 2007 at 11:05 am
Oh slash, you silly wingnut! The preferred slur is “Hitlary.”
August 31st, 2007 at 11:31 am
Hillary! will do exactly what Bush is doing: Let the generals do their job. Maybe she’ll really hose the military by bringing back the draft.
August 31st, 2007 at 11:32 am
Godwin’s Law. Again.
August 31st, 2007 at 11:34 am
Hillary? She’ll be doing what she does now: carping from the Senate.
I have more faith in this country than to think that we’d actually elect yet another Clinton the the highest office in the country. Besides, the thought of having a President more socialist than the President of France is practically unthinkable.
August 31st, 2007 at 11:45 am
Kermit prattled: “Hillary! will do exactly what Bush is doing: Let the generals do their job.”
Kinda the way Stalin let his generals to their job. Though Bush hasn’t actually had any shot, I’ll give him that.
August 31st, 2007 at 11:47 am
Terry – Hitler = 0
August 31st, 2007 at 12:08 pm
I agree, AC. Bush hasn’t had a single general executed. What a slacker!
August 31st, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Godwin’s Law, now two times in a row. Apropos of nothing to do with the third reich, WW2, or the post, or any comment. We have here a clown who specializes in dreariness & tedium.
August 31st, 2007 at 12:56 pm
Hitler / Terry = 1
August 31st, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Clown AND Slash?
What, is it a slow day on Fiverchat?
Or is marshamarshamarsha spying on me and tipping y’all off when we discuss trayf topics?
August 31st, 2007 at 1:44 pm
Hillary trayf?
Depends on how Ted Nugent kills her.
/jc
August 31st, 2007 at 6:46 pm
Mitch, remember back in the first year of the war in Afghanistan when our special ops were photographed living with the natives — beards, non-issue headgear and the like? The admin’s response was to order these guys to shave and button up and shine their shoes. That’s when I started to lose all hope that this administration could wage this war effectively.
Glad to see you proffer the acknowledgement that we spent 3-plus years “bobbling the war.” I hope it’s not too late for this administration to begin to get it right, but damned, I am pissed about that “bobbling.” Can’t bring yourself to use a stronger word, eh?
During that time, there were a number of critics who argued for something that looked remarkably like the surge, but they were dimissed by this administration and its enablers.
As for point number 3 up there, the neocon Koolaid was all about getting the Iraqis to vote as soon as possible. Didn’t turn out as well as they thought, and right now, it’s tempting to consider that whole effort as misguided. One hopes that we’ll at least have learned from the experience, but it was an expensive lesson.
August 31st, 2007 at 6:52 pm
What the hay. Tried posting a comment. Moderation in effect? Here it is again.
Mitch, remember back in the first year of the war in Afghanistan when our special ops were photographed living with the natives — beards, non-issue headgear and the like? The admin’s response was to order these guys to shave and button up and shine their shoes. That’s when I started to lose all hope that this administration could wage this war effectively.
Glad to see you proffer the acknowledgement that we spent 3-plus years “bobbling the war.” I hope it’s not too late for this administration to begin to get it right, but damned, I am pissed about that “bobbling.” Can’t bring yourself to use a stronger word, eh?
During that time, there were a number of critics who argued for something that looked remarkably like the surge, but they were dimissed by this administration and its enablers.
As for point number 3 up there, the neocon Koolaid was all about getting the Iraqis to vote as soon as possible. Didn’t turn out as well as they thought, and right now, it’s tempting to consider that whole effort as misguided. One hopes that we’ll at least have learned from the experience, but it was an expensive lesson.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:24 pm
Just a test, as my earlier comment seems not to have gone through.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:25 pm
(Apologies in advance if this is posted multiple times.)
Mitch, remember back in the first year of the war in Afghanistan when our special ops were photographed living with the natives — beards, non-issue headgear and the like? The admin’s response was to order these guys to shave and button up and shine their shoes. That’s when I started to lose all hope that this administration could wage this war effectively.
Glad to see you proffer the acknowledgement that we spent 3-plus years “bobbling the war.” I hope it’s not too late for this administration to begin to get it right, but damned, I am pissed about that “bobbling.” Can’t bring yourself to use a stronger word, eh?
During that time, there were a number of critics who argued for something that looked remarkably like the surge, but they were dimissed by this administration and its enablers.
As for point number 3 up there, the neocon Koolaid was all about getting the Iraqis to vote as soon as possible. Didn’t turn out as well as they thought, and right now, it’s tempting to consider that whole effort as misguided. One hopes that we’ll at least have learned from the experience, but it was an expensive lesson.
August 31st, 2007 at 8:25 pm
There, now it’s up 3 times. Sorry folks.
September 3rd, 2007 at 12:37 am
“The admin’s response was to order these guys to shave and button up and shine their shoes.”
Think you could provide a link to this? Who in the administration do you suspect of doing this? Seems kind of micro-management to me.
September 3rd, 2007 at 9:06 am
I don’t have a direct link – but that was a very common refrain in Imperial Grunts, coming from USSF and Marines doing counterinsurgency; too many generals, too much focus on “Force Protection” as opposed to sound counterinsurgency operations, too many rear area troops back in the Green Zone and not enough infantry in the field.
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:21 am
A Google search turned up quite a few links. I suppose that you could argue that none of these links say anything about shining shoes or buttoning buttons, but that was my way of saying they were ordered to start wearing regular uniforms.
But really, Buzz, you didn’t know anything about this?
First a milblogger. These look like in depth, first-hand details. Read the whole thing, but here’s a snippet.
“All US soldiers are expected to be clean-shaven, according to AR 670-1, the army regulation covering uniforms and appearance. That created a bit of a problem, since working with the Pashtuns while clean-shaven was a lot like being an undercover cop trying to infiltrate a biker gang while wearing a pink tutu and a lacy top.”
http://sfalphageek.blogspot.com/2005/03/either-beard-goes-or-i-do.html
Just in case all that was made up, this next link points to something written by an Associate Professor of Defense Analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School, with the caveat that “the views expressed here are his own and do not reflect the position of the Naval Postgraduate School, Navy Department, or Department of Defense.” He talks about Mitch’s point: the shifting of emphasis to force protection.
“Two reports from Afghanistan within the week indicate more clearly than ever that things are going wrong there. First came the report that the Army had ordered its Special Forces soldiers to shave their beards and to wear regular Army uniforms. Then the press reported that the Army was deploying artillery to Afghanistan.”
http://www.ashbrook.org/publicat/oped/tucker/02/beardless.html
Finally, a citation from the MSM, which is just offered up because I couldn’t find anything Hugh Hewitt wrote on the topic:
“DISPLAYING ABSTRACT – Pentagon officials, shocked by news photos of scruffy looking Special Operations Forces in Afghanistan, order men to be clean shaven and in proper uniform; impact is that American patrols now stand out sharply against Afghan landscape; Western aid workers are happy with decision because it is easier to tell who’s who, but some soldiers say they have lost niche with Afghans, where beards are sign of maturity and wisdom.”
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0814FC38550C718DDDA00894DA404482&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/U/United%20States%20Armament%20and%20Defense
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:31 am
.
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:07 pm
What Peter said.
This was a common refrain throughout Imperial Grunts.