Sandra Erwin, RCD: Afghanistan Strategy a Defining Moment for Mattis
The Afghanistan war strategy that President Trump announced Monday night was remarkable in that it was not a string of angry tweets but the product of a meticulous policy review.
“The process was rigorous,” said Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.
The strategy does not dramatically depart from the status quo. It essentially calls for a continued — but not open-ended — U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. Notably, the president leaves it to the discretion of the Pentagon to set troop numbers and decide what targets to pursue in the battlefield.
The president, in a prime-time speech at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, in Arlington, Va., credited Mattis for changing his views on the war.
Shortly after his inauguration, Trump directed Mattis to undertake a comprehensive review of all strategic options in Afghanistan and South Asia. But up until a few weeks ago, it appeared the Afghanistan policy was very much in limbo, stalled by internal White House rivalries that pitted the generals against the isolationists.
“My original instinct was to pull out, and historically I like following my instincts, but all of my life I heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office,” Trump said. “After many meetings, over many months, we held our final meeting last Friday at Camp David, with my Cabinet and generals, to complete our strategy.”
Mattis — who as a general in the Marine Corps was nicknamed “warrior monk” for his blunt talk and disciplined approach — was instrumental in assembling the team that put together a strategy that Trump could live with. The coalition included the State and Treasury Departments, the attorney general, the director of homeland security. Even the director of the Office of Management and Budget was involved so he could weigh in on the cost implications.
Read more ....
WNU editor: My uncle was a senior officer who fought for the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s. I asked him years ago if the Soviet Union ever had a chance to win the war against the Mujaheddin. He said no .... they had united the country against the Soviet occupation, and with arms continuously flowing to support the rebellion it was only a matter of time before Moscow would call it quits (In his mind the Soviets should have left in 1982 instead of 6 years later). He was still alive when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and he believed in 2002 that with victory over the Taliban now assured, the U.S. should leave the Afghans and the numerous tribes and ethnic groups that make up the country to sort out what needs to be done .... including security arrangements. That (of course) did not happen, and he believed to his last days that George Bush's support for nation building (backed by the UN) and establishing a major permanent US military presence in the country was one of the most "stupidest" policies that he had ever heard .... a policy (nation building) that President Trump fortunately put the rest in his speech last night. Flash forward to today .... if my uncle was alive today I think he would support US Defense Secretary Mattis' approach and strategy to fighting the Afghan war. He would tell me that the Taliban does have a lot of support, but there are also far more Afghans who oppose them than support them ... and they have proven themselves in the past two years that they are willing to fight. It is from this base that the U.S. (with its international allies) and the Afghan government must work together to present a unified and formidable front against the Taliban, and like Iraq, use the resources at hand and this base of support to confront and if not defeat the Taliban, at least severely limit their influence that will force them to the negotiating table. Will this strategy succeed .... I do not know. I am just a blogger who reads and talks to a lot of people who have a personal history with Afghanistan. But I do know that after last night's speech there is now a different tempo in the air, and like Iraq where a renewed focus spearheaded by the Obama administration and accelerated under President Trump and Defense Secretary Mattis has now helped to change the tide in that war, the same may now start to happen in Afghanistan. And as for Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' legacy .... if extremism in this part of the world is curtailed to a significant degree .... there is no doubt in my mind that he will be viewed by future historians as one of the greatest military planners and strategists of all time. But should he fail .... into the dustbin of history.
Update: Why am I not surprised that Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is in Iraq right now .... Mattis: Islamic State Caught in Iraq-syria Military Vise (RCD).
Update #2: A regular reader just emailed me on what is my percentage for success in this "new strategy". From a historical perspective .... the probability for success is zero. But we also live in interesting times .... case in point .... I did not expect the Islamic State to be defeated as quickly as they have been in the past year. But the U.S. did not vote for President Trump to be involved in foreign conflicts .... and I am sure that many of his supporters are not happy this morning.
7 comments:
"And as for Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' legacy .... if extremism in this part of the world is curtailed to a significant degree .... there is no doubt in my mind that he will be viewed by future historians as one of the greatest military planners and strategists of all time. But should he fail .... into the dustbin of history."
I think he's more likely for the dustbin. With all due respect WNU Editor, I think you are far off the mark here. I think there is too much sugar-coating going on concerning Trumps so-called strategy, if you could call it that.
His strategy is essentially 'More of the Same'.
We are all led to believe that the Taliban are on the rise once again, are still as much of a threat as they were before, and that the Afghani's need 'troop support' cause yes, sending more troops makes your problems go away. I live in a country where that kind of strategy took form and only made things worse.
16 years set to be 20 years set to be 30 years. Who knows at this point.
Trump didn't come up with any strategy. His aim is the same as the Obama Administration.
And if there's one thing we can both agree on, many of his supporters won't be very happy.
As I said in my Update #2, you are probably right D. Plowman. And from what I am reading, the Afghan strategy does sound like President Obama's strategy in iraq (but it is now in Afghanistan). I am trying to be optimistic .... and failing at it .... but the U.S. and (especially) the Afghan people do deserve better.
We also know that Trump is fully aware of the one trillion worth of minerals, much of it rare stuff, in Afghanistan, and that he somewhere said we would get it to pay for what it cost us to be there. I hope the Russians, and now the Chinese, there in various spots, will be cooperative in this.
The annihilation technique should be applied. Worked against isis. Higher civilian casualties though.
While some say that this is Obama 2.0, I think Obama 1.0 undermined his own strategy with micro management.
Trump now will have a chance to let the military execute what it can do under the ROE it wants.
Maybe we should have just split up a fraction of the $1 T and employed the entire country.
Fred,
Your utopia will not work.
Do the math
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/13/life-in-fossil-fuel-free-utopia/
So why pay through the nose for tantalum, etc?
Besides you can build jet fighters out or wood and mild steel.
If you can do that, why do you need special metals for windmills, when even with them you cannot power the planet?
"His strategy is essentially 'More of the Same'." - Plowman
The old adage since 1972/75 is that you can wait American out, because they have an exit date. Even if they do not want to leave war weariness or the Democrats will make them leave.
It is not more of the same, if it is no longer calendar driven.
The Russians almost beat the Afghans. As it was written in the book "Charlie Wilson's War", the Afghans are just people. They get worn out too.
Post a Comment