Blog Posts

Office of the Press Secretary

August 18, 2010

Executive Order--Establishment of Pakistan and Afghanistan Support Office

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 202 of the Revised Statutes (22 U.S.C. 2656) and section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Establishment. There is established within the Department of State, in accordance with section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, a temporary organization to be known as the Pakistan and Afghanistan Support Office (PASO).

Sec. 2. Purpose of the Temporary Organization. The purpose of the PASO shall be to perform the specific project of supporting executive departments and agencies in strengthening the governments in Afghanistan and Pakistan, enhancing the capacity of those governments to resist extremists, and maintaining an effective U.S. diplomatic presence in both countries.

More here.

Largely overlooked by many mainstream publications earlier in the week, The Post rightly ends with an important observation: This war is not General Petraeus' war -- it is America's war and it is up to the President to make the case and provide the rationale for that war -- "not once, not twice, but repeatedly".

Conflicting Objectives for U.S. in Afghanistan - Interview with Colonel Gian P. Gentile, CFR Visiting Fellow, by Bernard Gwertzman, Council on Foreign Relations

Time to Talk to the Taliban? - Interview with Matt Waldman, Independent Afghan Analyst; Former Fellow, Harvard University's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, by Greg Bruno, Council on Foreign Relations

Media Conference Call: Defining Success in Afghanistan - CFR conference call with Stephen Biddle, Senior Fellow for Defense Policy, Council on Foreign Relations

Over the past decade, the United States and China have taken completely opposite paths on force structure investment. During this time, China has sharply reduced the headcount of its ground forces. Ground force modernization receives but a brief mention in the report. Instead, the report allocates dozens of pages describing China's investment in new classes of ballistic missiles of all ranges, new long-range land-attack cruise missiles, new nuclear weapons capabilities, new fighter and bomber aircraft, new integrated air defense systems, new diesel and nuclear submarines (attack and ballistic missile), new surface warships, improved expeditionary forces (airborne and marine divisions), cyber operations, space warfare, etc. China has focused its investment priorities on naval and aerospace power projection and high-end asymmetric capabilities, paid for with reductions in the army's headcount and, naturally, China's booming economy. According to the report, China is aiming its future naval and aerospace expeditionary forces beyond Taiwan and China's territorial claims over the South China and Yellow Seas; China intends to reach past Guam and the "second island chain" and deep into the Pacific.

Meanwhile, United States military investment priorities over the past ten years have been a mirror image. The Pentagon has added to its ground force headcount (and its personnel costs) while cutting heads in the Navy and Air Force. The Congress has generously funded counterinsurgency patrol trucks (MRAPs) and large logistic bases in the Middle East and Central Asia. In the meantime, U.S. naval and aerospace investments are waiting, both for defense contractors to sort out their problems and for policymakers to assign a higher priority to these investments. The F-35, when it finally arrives from testing, will have limited utility in Asia due to its short range and scarcity of survivable bases (the F-22's utility in Asia is similarly hobbled). Defense Secretary Robert Gates has had to cancel several of the Navy's surface warship programs due to cost overruns. Over the decade, the Navy has received a few new ships a year and has retired even more, resulting in a shrinking fleet. The Air Force won't get a new bomber for at least a decade. All of this is in sharp contrast to China's military investment program.

The Soviet Union's collapse allowed China to reallocate resources from frontier defense to naval and aerospace power projection. This trend was in place long before the United States intervened in Iraq and Afghanistan. But China is no doubt also exploiting what it likely perceives as U.S. neglect in the Pacific while it focused on ground wars in the Middle East and Central Asia. With the China military power report now in their hands, U.S. policymakers need to question what risks they are taking with America's strategic position and whether they are entirely comfortable with the military investment program they are now managing.

More:

Defense Secretary Gates Would Like to Leave Next Year - Washington Post

Why Would Defense Secretary Gates Want to Retire? - Christian Science Monitor

Gates Hints at Retiring from U.S. Defence - Financial Times

Gates Plans to Retire Next Year - Associated Press

Gates Gone? Not So Fast... (Updated) - Wired

Gates Going - National Review

A conversation with:

Nathaniel Fick

CEO of Center for a New American Security

Michael Corbin

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq

Dr. Colin Kahl

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East

RSVP online here.

President Obama's speech in early August heralded the end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq, but U.S. engagement in the country is far from over. As the military draws down, our nation's diplomats are preparing to expand their role and take the lead in providing guidance and assistance to Iraqis as they build a stable future for their country. However, the transition of responsibility from the Department of Defense to the Department of State in a resource-constrained environment presents challenges for the government in meeting U.S. foreign policy objectives and managing the thousands of contractors needed to provide security and other services necessary for State to operate in Iraq.

Tomorrow, August 17, 2010, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) will host a moderated discussion that will address these questions with two leading Administration officials on Iraq: Michael Corbin, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq, and Dr. Colin Kahl, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East. CNAS Chief Executive Officer Nathaniel Fick, a national security expert and veteran of the Iraq war, will moderate the conversation.

Date and Time:

Tomorrow, August 17, 2010

12:30 p.m.: Check-in and Registration

1:00-2:30 p.m.: Event

Please note the event will begin promptly at 1:00 p.m.

Location:

The Willard Intercontinental Hotel's Crystal Room (Map and Directions)

1401 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, D.C. 20004

RSVP:

RSVP online here.

Or, call 202.457.9427

The Washington Post published two items concerning General David Petraeus' interview with Rajiv Chandrasekaran. Excerpts from the interview can be found here and Rajiv Chandrasekaran's follow-on article, "Gen. David Petraeus says Afghanistan war strategy 'fundamentally sound'", can be found here.

Fred W. Baker's American Forces Press Service overview of the "Meet the Press" interview follows (emphasis SWJ):

Growing pockets of security progress in Afghanistan must be extended and linked to fully root out the Taliban and other extremist organizations, and that will take time, the top U.S. and NATO commander there said in a prerecorded interview aired today.

"We're making progress, and progress is winning, if you will," Army Gen. David H. Petraeus told NBC's David Gregory in the "Meet the Press" interview. "But it takes the accumulation of a lot of progress ultimately ... to win overall, and that's going to be a long-term proposition, without question."

In his first significant interview since taking command of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan, Petraeus acknowledged what he called "up and down" progress, with coalition and Afghan forces taking key sanctuaries from the Taliban, but not without a fight. Petraeus said progress really only began this spring, as more U.S. and international forces began pouring into the country, stretching out into areas that before were Taliban strongholds.

Late spring saw operations in central Helmand province start to improve security conditions there, but now expanding into neighboring Kandahar province is proving to be a "tough fight," the general said.

"What we have are areas of progress. We've got to link those together, extend them, and then build on it, because of course the security progress ... is the foundation for everything else -- for the governance progress, the economic progress, rule of law progress and so forth," Petraeus said.

The general said he understands the growing lack of U.S. patience for the war in Afghanistan, but he noted that only in the past 18 months has the proper focus been in place for the strategy on the ground there.

"A lot of us came out of Iraq in late 2008 and started looking intently at Afghanistan," he said. "We realized that we did not have the organizations that are required for the conduct of a comprehensive civil-military counterinsurgency campaign."

Also, he said the fight in Afghanistan was under-resourced.

Under President Barack Obama's orders, by the end of this month the number of U.S. troops on the ground there will have nearly tripled, Petraeus said. Also, NATO forces have expanded, and the number of civilians supporting the war will have tripled. Funding also was increased to train 100,000 more Afghan national security forces.

The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan now has almost 120,000 troops from 47 different countries assigned to it. The United States provides 78,430 of those ISAF troops, part of the roughly 100,000 American troops now based in the country.

The largest regional command in Afghanistan is in the south, with 35,000 troops. The command is focused on Kandahar, the country's second-largest city and the spiritual home of the Taliban. The next-largest regional command is in the east, with 32,000 personnel.

After the United States, the country with the largest number of troops with ISAF is the United Kingdom with 9,500, followed by Germany with 4,590. France is next with 3,750, followed by Italy with 3,400, Canada with 2,830, Poland with 2,630, Romania with 1,760, Turkey with 1,740, Spain with 1,555, and Australia with 1,455.

"The inputs are already enabling some outputs," Petraeus said. "And, of course, what we have got to show is that these additional inputs can allow greater progress, and that that's progress that can be sustained, over time, by Afghan forces and Afghan officials."

Petraeus said the commitment in Afghanistan will be enduring, and would not say how many U.S. troops will begin to leave under Obama's July 2011 transition timeline.

"It would premature to have any kind of assessment at this juncture as to about what we may or may not be able to transition," he said. But, he added, any troop movement will be based on the conditions on the ground.

"As the conditions permit, we transition tasks to our Afghan counterparts and the security forces in various governmental institutions, and that enables a responsible drawdown of our forces," he said.

Petraeus said Obama's July 2011 timeline to begin turning security over to the Afghans and drawing down U.S. forces provides a sense of urgency for Afghan leaders, people in uniform and civilians contributing to the effort "that we've got to get on with this, [that] this has been going on for some nine years or so, that there is understandable concern [and] in some cases, frustration."

"And therefore," he said, "we have got to really put our shoulders to the wheel and show, during the course of this year, that progress can be achieved."

Regardless of how the transition plays out next summer, Petraeus predicted an enduring U.S. commitment in Afghanistan that will evolve as the capabilities of the Afghan government and its forces improve. At the end of the day, he said, it boils down to the Afghan government becoming accepted and supported by its people, and in turn providing the support and services the people expect.

"It's not about their embrace of us. It's not about us winning hearts and minds," Petraeus said. "It's about the Afghan government winning hearts and minds."

Petraeus said he is leery of using the term "winning" with reference to the fight in Afghanistan, because it implies a clear-cut and obvious victory that will not necessarily ensue.

"It seems to imply that ... you just find the right hill out there somewhere, you take it, you plant the flag, and you go home to a victory parade. I don't think that's going to be the case here," he said. "I think ... that this [is] going to require a substantial, significant commitment, and that it is going to have to be enduring, to some degree -- again, albeit its character and its size being scaled down over the years."

In the end, the general said, the United States must remember why it began fighting in Afghanistan in first place.

"We are here so that Afghanistan does not, once again, become a sanctuary for transnational extremists the way it was when al-Qaida planned the 9/11 attacks in the Kandahar area, conducted the initial training for the attackers in training camps in Afghanistan before they moved on to Germany and then to U.S. flight schools," he said.

Updated with SWJ reader recommendations.

Continue on for the list...

WASHINGTON, Aug. 13, 2010 -- President Barack Obama has made clear he wants the best military advice possible concerning the drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and ultimately, the situation on the ground will drive the timetable, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top commander there, said in an interview to be aired this weekend.

"What the president very much wants from me, and what we talked about in the Oval Office, is the responsibility of a military commander on the ground is to provide his best professional military advice [and] leave the politics to him," Petraeus told NBC's David Gregory.

NBC released excerpts of the interview, scheduled to be broadcast Aug. 15 on "Meet the Press."

"Certainly, I am aware of the context within which I offer that advice," Petraeus said. "But that just informs the advice; it doesn't drive it. The situation on the ground drives it."

Looking ahead to Obama's July 2011 deadline to begin withdrawing troops, Petraeus said the challenge now is to demonstrate signs of progress.

"I think our job is again to show those in Washington that there is progress being made," he said. "To do that, we've got to build on the progress that has been established so far, because there is certainly nothing like irreversible momentum."

Petraeus, who previously served as U.S. Central Command commander, assumed command of U.S. Forces Afghanistan and the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan last month. He replaced Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal.

Topics include:

1) What happens if Mexico settles with the cartels?

2) Scared of military robots? Get over it.

What happens if Mexico settles with the cartels?

The U.S. Department of Defense defines irregular warfare as "a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant populations." By this definition, Mexico is fighting an irregular war. The Mexican government's campaign against the drug cartels is far more than a law enforcement problem; the two sides are engaged in a violent struggle for influence over the Mexican population.

Four years after Mexican President Felipe Calderón threw 80,000 soldiers at the cartels, their businesses remain as strong as ever. According to the Los Angeles Times, the overall drug trade continues to flourish, bringing in by one estimate $39 billion a year to the Mexican economy, equal to 4.5 percent of Mexico's economic output in 2009. The cartels, formerly just smuggling businesses operating largely out of sight, have evolved into political insurgents, and Calderón has openly wondered whether the Mexican state will survive. Neither side has the capacity to crush the other. This implies an eventual compromise settlement and with it a de facto or actual legalization of the drug trade in Mexico. When Calderón and the cartels make such a deal, the United States will have to deal with the consequences.

Calderón's war has managed to inflict pain on the cartels; government forces killed two top cartel leaders and have set the syndicate into a violent struggle with each other for smuggling routes. According to the Los Angeles Times story, the Mexican government estimates 28,000 people have been killed in the war, the vast majority of whom were cartel employees and associates who died in battles between the various gangs. Responding to the pressure, the cartels have transformed themselves into political insurgencies in an attempt to persuade the government to back off and to attract the support of local populations. Their actions are right out of an insurgency's standard playbook: attacks on the police (recently with car bombs), employees of state oil company Pemex -- the cornerstone of the government's revenue -- and the media.

In a speech to the nation last week, Calderón declared that the cartels' actions are "an attempt to replace the state." He pleaded with his countrymen to support the government and to report on local officials whom the drug gangs have co-opted. Calderón's plea comes as Mexico's main sources of foreign exchange are under pressure: The drug wars are chasing away tourism, competition from Asia threatens the manufacturing export sector in the north, the Pemex oil monopoly is in decline, and the struggling U.S. economy has hit expatriate receipts back to Mexico.

With Mexico's legitimate sources of foreign exchange wilting and with the government facing a bloody and open-ended war against the cartels, the prospect of a settlement must be increasingly attractive to Calderón.

Click through to read more ...

Also see Gates: Time has Come to Re-examine Future of Marine Corps by Kevin Baron of Stars and Stripes and Defense Chief Gates Orders Review of Marines' Role by David S. Cloud of The Los Angeles Times.

More at the Strategic Studies Institute.

The author will host a live chat at 1330 EDT today.

Do you agree with the assessment? Can you think of more examples? Counter-examples? Is there an open source group doing a better job reading the tea leaves (not just reciting the party line) than journalists at large, or a sub-group of journalists that are providing more reliable and less trailing indicators? Your thoughts welcome here in comments below at any time, and on USA Today at 1330.

Officials: Belt-tightening Will Cut 1 Command - Anne Gearan, Associated Press. Officials briefed on the decision say Defense Secretary Robert Gates plans to eliminate a major military command in Norfolk, Va., and try to cut the Pentagon's use of outside contractors by 10 percent next year.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates will conduct a press briefing at 2:30 p.m. EDT in the DoD Briefing Room, Pentagon 2E973.

Andrew Exum at Abu Muqawama - "One of the wisest military analysts I know remarked, upon hearing the rumors, that JFCOM does three valuable things that either the joint staff or another command will now have to pick up: 1) Writing joint doctrine, 2) Monitoring force readiness and modernization across the services, and 3) Coordinating U.S. and NATO modernization efforts."

Update

Via the press briefing here's SECDEF Gates decisions:

1. Reduce the funding for support contractor personnel by 10 percent a year for the next three years.

2. Freeze number of Office of the Secretary of Defense, defense agency and combatant command manpower positions at the fiscal 2010 levels for the next three years.

3. Freeze the number of senior Defense Department leaders at fiscal 2010 levels. Expect this effort to cut at least 50 general and flag officer positions and 150 senior civilian executive positions over the next two years.

4. Increase the use of common information technology functions within DoD.

5. Freeze overall number of required oversight reports, cut by a quarter the money allocated to these reports.

6. Eliminate boards and commissions no longer needed and cut overall funding by 25 percent for these boards and commissions.

7. Immediate 10 percent cut in funding for intelligence advisory and assistance contracts and a freeze in the number of senior executive service positions. Also moving to end needless duplication in the DoD intelligence community.

8. Eliminate the offices of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Network Integration and the Joint Staff's section for command, control, communications, and computer systems.

9. Eliminate the Business Transformation Agency.

10. Eliminate U.S. Joint Forces Command.

Update # 2

Sec. Gates Announces Efficiencies Initiatives - DoD News Release. Today, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates announced a series of initiatives designed to reduce overhead, duplication, and excess in the Department of Defense, and, over time, instill a culture of savings and restraint in America's defense institutions. These initiatives represent the latest of the secretary's efforts to re-balance the priorities of the department and reform the way the Pentagon does business. As part of the fiscal 2010 budget, the department curtailed or cancelled nearly 20 troubled or excess programs - programs that if pursued to completion would have cost more than $300 billion. Additional program savings have been recommended in the defense budget request submitted this year.

Gates Announces Defense Cuts, Allocates Funds to Priority Needs - Al Pessin, Voice of America. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday announced the elimination of a major U.S. combat command and other steps designed to save money and protect his department's ability to defend the country during a time of economic constraints.

Obama Calls Gates Announcement 'Step Forward in Reform' - American Forces Press Service. President Barack Obama today called Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates' announcement concerning Pentagon efficiency initiatives "another step forward in the reform efforts he has undertaken to reduce excess overhead costs, cut waste, and reform the way the Pentagon does business." In a written statement, Obama added that the initiatives "will ensure that our nation is safer, stronger, and more fiscally responsible."

Mullen Issues Statement on Gates Initiatives - American Forces Press Service. Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, issued a statement today supporting initiatives announced by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates designed to make the Defense Department more efficient.

Joint Forces Command Responds to Gates Announcement - American Forces Press Service. We all will work to carry out the Secretary's decision to disestablish Joint Forces Command. There will be much hard work and analysis in the time ahead and we will do the best we can to provide solid data on which to base decisions.

Gates Strives to Change Pentagon's Culture - Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service. The initiative to reduce Defense Department overhead and to eliminate duplicative capabilities is part of a larger thrust to change the culture of the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.

Making Good on Pledge, Gates Outlines Military Cuts - Thom Shanker, New York Times

Gates: Pentagon to Cut Thousands of Jobs - Craig Whitlock, Washington Post

Gates' Budget Ax Swings at Pentagon Overhead, Joint Forces Command - Howard LaFranchi, Christian Science Monitor

Gates Orders Cuts in Pentagon Bureaucracy - David S. Cloud, Los Angeles Times

Officials: Belt-Tightening Will Cut Major Command - Anne Flaherty and Anne Gearan, Associated Press

Defense Secretary Gates Targets Jobs - Tom Vanden Brook, USA Today

Gates Puts Meat on Bone of Department Efficiencies Initiative - Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service

Gates Says Defense Bureaucracy Bloated, Declares Cuts in Contractor Jobs - Viola Gienger, Bloomberg

Gates Announces Major Personnel Cuts at Defense - Katherine McIntire Peters, Government Executive

U.S. Defence Secretary Gates Proposes Officer Corps Cuts - BBC News

Pentagon to Cut Contractor Budget 10 Percent a Year - Agence France-Presse

Webb Expresses Concern about Norfolk Command - Jeff E. Shapiro, Richmond Times-Dispatch

Virginia Stands to Feel the Most Pain from Defense Cuts - Rosalind S. Helderman, Washington Post

Gates will Eliminate Norfolk's Joint Forces Command - Kate Wiltrout, Virginia-Pilot

Bipartisan Group Blasts Defense Closure Plan - R.E. Spears III, Suffolk News-Herald

Va. Governor, U.S. Reps Condemn Pentagon's Cuts - Bob Lewis, Business Week

McDonnell Attacks Joint Forces Command Decision - David Macaulay, Newport News Daily Press

Gates to Shut Down Va. Command - Jen Dimascio, Politico

JFCOM to Be Shut Down? - Max Boot, Commentary

The Political Audacity of Bob Gates - Marc Ambinder, The Atlantic

Gates Launches Latest Battle Against waste... and Against Congress - Josh Rogan, Foreign Policy

Pentagon War on Waste: Winners and Losers - Sandra Erwin, Defense News Magazine

'Culture of Savings and Restraint' - Colin Clark, DoD Buzz

Odierno Yet Again Asked to Eliminate His Job - Craig Whitlock, Washington Post

A Different Kind of War tells the story of how the coalition planned the campaign against the Taliban regime and then used its military forces to overthrow that regime in 2001. The study then focuses on how The U.S. Army came to take a leading role in a campaign that evolved after the establishment of a new government for Afghanistan in 2002. That new campaign slowly evolved into a counterinsurgency effort that featured combat missions, reconstruction operations, and training programs for a new Afghan army. The study closes with a chapter that highlights the implications for The U.S. Army of these four years of operations in Afghanistan.

Download A Different Kind of War at the U.S. Army Combat Studies Institute.

A Small Wars Journal / MountainRunner Crosspost

Last week, U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) convened the third annual Magharebia.com Writers Workshop. The workshop is a professional development course for new and established writers for AFRICOM's Maghreb-centered news and information website, www.Magharebia.com. According to AFRICOM public affairs, the event "introduced new media tools and technologies while stressing the importance of sound journalistic principles for writing, blogging and podcasting."

The website www.Magharebia.com was started in 2005 by U.S. European Command (EUCOM) to "reach out to a younger audience in the North Africa region with news, sports, entertainment, and current affairs about the Maghreb in English, French and Arabic." It is similar to EUCOM's other sponsored news and information website, www.SETimes.com, "the news and views of Southeast Europe."

These news sites are established and maintained under the regional Combatant Commander's theater security requirement. In other words, due to the absence of information outlets focused on the region (excluding tightly controlled local propaganda stations), the Defense Department created and maintains these sites to provide news, analysis, and commentary collected from international media and contributors paid by the Combatant Commands. Their purpose is to increase awareness of regional and global issues to mitigate security threats that may stem from a lack of information, misinformation, or disinformation by local populations.

Continue on for much more...