“The Afghan Insurgency Can Sustain Itself Indefinitely,” Major General Michael Flynn

by Daniel Russ on January 8, 2010

Obama and General McChrystal

“The Taliban not only has the “momentum” after the most successful year in its campaign against the United States and the Kabul government. “The Afghan insurgency can sustain itself indefinitely,” according to a briefing from Major General Michael Flynn, the top U.S. intelligence officer in the country. “The Taliban retains [the] required partnerships to sustain support, fuel legitimacy and bolster capacity.”

And if that isn’t enough, Flynn also warns that “time is running out” for the American-lead International Security Assistance Force. “Regional instability is rapidly increasing and getting worse,” the report says.

Since General Stanley McChrystal took over as top commander in Afghanistan, there have been a series of dark appraisals about the state of the war… A report recently obtained by NBC News said Afghanistan’s security forces won’t be ready to fight the Taliban for years — if ever. Earlier this week, Flynn issued a white paper complaining that “eight years into the war in Afganistan, the US Intelligence community is only marginally relevant to the overall strategy..”

But Flynn’s December 23rd presentation on the “State of the Insurgency” may be the gloomiest public assessment of the war yet. The “loosely
organized” Taliban is “growing more cohesive” and “increasingly effective.” The insurgents now have their own “governors” installed in 33 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces. And the “strength and ability of [that] shadow governance increasing,” according to the presentation. The Taliban’s “organizational capabilities and operational reach are qualitatively and geographically expanding.”

Improvised bomb “events” have nearly tripled since 2007 — 7228 this year, compared to 2718 two years ago. The bombs have grown bigger — the majority are now 25 pounds or more. “80 to 90 percent” of them are made with homemade fertilizer, rather than military ordnance. That makes it much harder to track and block the distribution of the bomb-making material. Add to that steady supply of cash, thanks to the drug trade and the corrupt Kabul government, and a glut of weapons and ammunition,” and it becomes clear why, in Flynn’s words, “the insurgency is confident…  looking toward post-ISAF Afghanistan.”

The presentation also cast doubt on some of the war’s stated central aims. The Obama administration has repeatedly said that additional troops are necessary to prevent a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan — which would then allow Al Qaeda the re-establigh its safe haven there. According to interviews with detainees, however, the insurgents “view Al Qaeda as a handicap – a view that is increasingly prevalent.” The Taliban feel they have to “manage [the] relationship with AQ to avoid alienating Afghan population, but encourage support from [the] global jihad network.”

Flynn’s presentation also, indirectly, warns that one of the central U.S. tactics in Pakistan — drone strikes against suspected militants — could backfire. “violations of Pakistan sovereignty may contribute to radicalizing the population and diminishes credibility of the GoP [Government of Pakistan].” Such violations “demonstrat[e] an inability of the government; perception they cannot protect their own; exacerbates anti-western sentiment.”

Within military circles, there’s a sense that Flynn may be underplaying recent American successes in Helmand province and elsewhere. And Flynn does note that there’s still hope for the American effort in the region. “We have a key advantage – [the] Taliban is not a popular movement (yet),” the report says. What’s more, there are “persistent fissures among insurgent leadership at local levels” and an “over-reliance on external support.”

Exploiting those fissures — and beating the Taliban — will “require operating / thinking in a fundamentally new way.”


Two Star General Michael Flynn, Center


Source: Wired


Related Posts:

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

Corsair8X January 20, 2010 at 10:07 pm

You have to pull the population away from them. The surge has convinced some elders that maybe they are there to stay which increases their confidence to some extent. Confidence means that they are more likely to share information – especially considering many of the elders resent the intimidation.

The Marine strategy of actually getting out of the damn vehicles will help as well. You can’t use the weight plates to act as triggers which means back to remote detonations. Remote detonations means the likelihood of greater civilian casualties which breeds resentment against the Taliban who weren’t popular to begin with. This is a cold and cynical viewpoint I know, but that is the reality of an insurgent warfare around populations.

The people have to hate them enough to overcome their apathy, their intimidation, and their caution. That’s the only tactic/strategy that is important here. It’s the civilians that will decide how this goes down.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: