Small Wars Journal

Blog Posts

SWJ Blog is a multi-author blog publishing news and commentary on the various goings on across the broad community of practice.  We gladly accept guest posts from serious voices in the community.

by SWJ Editors | Fri, 05/07/2010 - 2:19pm | 1 comment
The Surge of Ideas

COINdinistas and Change in the U.S. Army in 2006

by General David H. Petraeus at AEI Online

... Well, let me take you back some four and a half years. Our effort in Iraq was beginning to struggle. Despite progress in a number of areas, the insurgency was spreading. Levels of violence were escalating. Political progress was at a virtual standstill. And in the wake of the February 2006 bombing of the Samarra Mosque, one of the holiest sites in Shi'a Islam, sectarian violence, in particular, began to grow at an alarming rate. A sense of fear and terror grew through the summer as the violence began to tear apart the very fabric of Iraqi society. And while new operations periodically arrested the downward spiral at various intervals, in their wake the violence grew even more.

In truth, by late 2005, a number of us--including my Marine counterpart, General Jim Mattis--had felt it was important to produce a doctrinal manual on counterinsurgency operations. The developments in 2006 heightened the imperative to identify what changes might be necessary in Iraq as well. Indeed, as events marched on in 2006, we increasingly came to recognize the need for change if the forces in Iraq were to arrest a steadily deteriorating situation and help the Iraqis knit back together the fabric of their society.

Now here I want to emphasize the word "we" in that last sentence. What I'm about to describe was not a task I undertook alone. Indeed, you don't change an organization as large as the US Army by yourself. Quite the opposite. I may have been the front man for a good bit of our work, but this was the effort of a team of teams comprised of people who were passionate about transforming our Army. I just happened to be the coach of some of those teams after I left Iraq in the fall of 2005 following a second tour there and in September 2005 became the Commander of the Combined Arms Center at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

The position at Fort Leavenworth brought with it considerable influence over the organizations capable of changing the Army as an institution. Indeed, the Combined Arms Center Commander's responsibilities included developing the Army's doctrinal manuals, which are the repositories of our big ideas; supervising some 15 schools and centers across the US that educate all of the Army's leaders; disseminating the big ideas and fostering debate about them through various additional organizations; overseeing the scenarios at the combat training centers where big ideas are put into practice by units preparing to deploy; and, finally, capturing lessons that need to be learned about the application of the big ideas. And that's why the folks at Leavenworth have long claimed to have their hands on the controls of the Army's "Engine of Change."

That notwithstanding, when my assignment to Fort Leavenworth was announced, some suggested I was being sent out to pasture. Indeed, as those of you who have visited that historic post know, it is located in the middle of America's heartland on the west bank of the Missouri River, that wonderful body of water that farmers describe as being too thick to drink and too thin to plow. Some observers--particularly some in this fair city, which reportedly likes to see itself at the center of every map--felt that Fort Leavenworth was a place where you went to think deep thoughts and never be seen again. That, obviously, was not the case...

Much more at American Enterprise Insitute.

by SWJ Editors | Fri, 05/07/2010 - 12:51pm | 49 comments

Review of Dave Kilcullen's The Accidental Guerrilla: Fighting Small Wars in the Midst of a Big One by Mark Safranski at Chicago Boyz.

I purchased a copy of The Accidental Guerrilla, intending to read it last summer but, being buried under my own academic course work, I was forced to put it aside until recently. I am not finished yet but I can say that Col. Kilcullen has written a seminal, if idiosyncratic, work on the theory and practice of counterinsurgency -- no doubt why some reviewers found The Accidental Guerrilla be difficult book to read, one that "...could be like a junior high school student's attempting "Ulysses." Or were aggravated by Kilcullen's format through which he enunciated a more nuanced understanding of the war and COIN than they found politically tolerable. Most readers in this corner of the blogosphere will find The Accidental Guerrilla an intellectually stimulating book from an author well grounded in the realities of Iraq and Afghanistan, who is the leading theorist of counterinsurgency today...

Abstractly, Kilcullen's "persistent-presence" has superior strategic qualities -- it isolates and demoralizes the enemy and daunts the latently hostile while connecting our side to the population and "pumping up" the morale of allies and sympathizers. The initiative is seized and control of the battleground is determined. Most of the time, this is an advantage, so long as the chosen ground is also tactically defensible, unlike, say at Dien Bien Phu. When Julius Caesar was carrying out his conquest of Gaul, he often divided his legions for their winter quarters, even though this entailed some risk, because doing so reinforced the political spine of Rome's local allies in tribes of uncertain loyalty and intimidated the malcontents or secured the population against raiding by still hostile Gauls or Germans from across the Rhine. Caesar did a lot better in Gaul than did the French in Indochina...

Much more at Chicago Boyz.

Care for a preview of Dr. David Kilcullen's newly released book on COIN? Then go here: Counterinsurgency, can be ordered and select portions read (Look Inside). Sure to be a classic - SWJ says so - here is the product description from Amazon:

David Kilcullen is one of the world's most influential experts on counterinsurgency and modern warfare. A Senior Counterinsurgency Advisor to General David Petraeus in Iraq, his vision of war powerfully influenced America's decision to rethink its military strategy in Iraq and implement "the Surge," now recognized as a dramatic success.

In Counterinsurgency, Kilcullen brings together his most salient writings on this key topic. At the heart of the book is his legendary "Twenty-Eight Articles." In it, he shows company leaders how to practice counterinsurgency in the real world, "at night, with the GPS down, the media criticizing you, the locals complaining in a language you don't understand, and an unseen enemy killing your people by ones and twos." Reading this piece is like reading a modern-day Sun Tzu--an essential read for officers in the field, and not infrequently an excellent source of wisdom for readers of all stripes, military or civilian. In such pithy adages as "Rank is nothing: talent is everything" or "Train the squad leaders--then trust them," Kilcullen offers advice that any leader would be wise to consider. The other pieces in the book include Kilcullen's pioneering study of counterinsurgency in Indonesia, his ten-point plan for "the Surge" in Iraq, and his frank look at the problems in Afghanistan. He concludes with a new strategic approach to the War on Terrorism, arguing that counterinsurgency rather than traditional counterterrorism may offer the best approach to defeating global jihad.

Counterinsurgency is a picture of modern warfare by someone who has had his boots on the ground in some of today's worst trouble spots--including Iraq and Afghanistan--and who has been studying the topic since 1995. Filled with down-to-earth, common-sense insights, this book is indispensable for all those interested in making sense of our world in an age of terror.

We here at SWJ kind of took a liking to Counterinsurgency's dedication:

For Dave Dilegge and Bill Nagle, founders and editors of Small Wars Journal. They gave the counterguerrilla underground a home, at a time when misguided leaders banned even the word "insurgency," though busily losing to one. Scholars, warriors, and agitators, Dave and Bill laid the foundation for battlefield success; our generation owes them a debt of gratitude.

Much appreciated Dave, it sincerely means a lot to both of us. Order Counterinsurgency today.

by SWJ Editors | Fri, 05/07/2010 - 7:51am | 4 comments
Leading With Two Minds - David Brooks, New York Times opinion.

They say that intellectual history travels slowly, and by hearse. The old generation has to die off before a new set of convictions can rise and replace entrenched ways of thinking. People also say that a large organization is like an aircraft carrier. You can move the rudder, but it still takes a long time to turn it around.

Yet we have a counterexample right in front of us. Five years ago, the United States Army was one sort of organization, with a certain mentality. Today, it is a different organization, with a different mentality. It has been transformed in the virtual flash of an eye, and the story of that transformation is fascinating for anybody interested in the flow of ideas.

Gen. David Petraeus, who had an important role, spoke about the transformation while accepting the Irving Kristol Award Thursday night from the American Enterprise Institute. I spoke to him and others about the process this week.

The transformation began amid failure. The U.S. was getting beaten in Iraq in 2004 and 2005. Captains and colonels were generally the first to see this, but only a few knew how to respond. Those who did tended to have dual personalities. That is, they had been steeped in Army culture but also in some other, often academic, culture. Petraeus had written a dissertation on Vietnam at Princeton. H.R. McMaster, then a colonel, had also written a book on Vietnam. Others were autodidacts and had studied the counterinsurgency tactics that had been used in Malaysia, Algeria and El Salvador...

More at The New York Times.

by SWJ Editors | Thu, 05/06/2010 - 7:01am | 23 comments
We are working on something that requires a narrative of Small Wars Journal's impact. We have our own ideas, but would like yours -- to confirm, expand, or adjust our own assessment.

While we always appreciate "we love you" commentary, we are really looking for some particulars beyond broad commentary to help us understand our impact and expand upon our strengths.

What are the debates and themes in the site that have been most meaningful to you?

How have they influenced action in the field? How did things play out on SWJ and impact something else?

What particular impact has SWJ had for you?

Please discuss in comments below, and/or email to us. A bullet point is welcome, a richer narrative from your perspective would be even more welcome. With a deadline in about 24 hours, we'd GREATLY appreciate your opinions NOW and ask you to expedite whatever thoughts you can provide quickly. But with continued assessment and self-awareness on our plate, your comments are welcome whenever you are able to provide them.

Thanks.

by SWJ Editors | Thu, 05/06/2010 - 5:56am | 1 comment
In Afghanistan, the Clock is Ticking - George Will, Washington Post opinion.

The ticking clock does not disturb the preternatural serenity that Gen. David H. Petraeus maintains regarding Afghanistan. Officially, the U.S. Central Command is located here; actually, it is wherever he is, which is never in one place for very long. He is away about 300 days a year, flying to and around his vast area of responsibility, which extends from Egypt to where his towering reputation is hostage to a timetable - Afghanistan.

He earned his own chapter in American military history by advocating and presiding over the surge that broke the back of the Iraq insurgency. This was an instance of a military intellectual given full opportunity for the unity of theory and practice.

Today, however, only about half of the surge of 30,000 troops for Afghanistan, announced by the president in his speech at West Point five months ago, have arrived. The rest will be there by the end of August. Eleven months after that, the withdrawal the president promised - in the sentence following the one that announced the increase - is supposed to begin...

More at The Washington Post.

by SWJ Editors | Wed, 05/05/2010 - 4:12pm | 0 comments
Book Series Launch: Decisionmaking in Operation Iraqi Freedom

May 6, 2010

Reserve Officers Association

Washington, DC, United States

Open to the General Public

Registration Fee: None

Was the Iraq troop "surge" really responsible for today's strategic success? How was the 2007 decision made? Do the lessons of Iraq's surge apply to Afghanistan in 2010? Dr. Steven Metz will discuss these issues at the Operation Iraqi Freedom Key Decisions Monograph Series launch event at the ROA Building in Washington, DC, on May 6, 2010, from 9:30AM-11:30AM. Special guests include Joe Collins of NDU and Greg Jaffe of the Washington Post.

Read more about the Operation Iraqi Freedom Series and the Strategic Shift of 2007.

This event is free and open to the public.

by Robert Haddick | Tue, 05/04/2010 - 5:32pm | 2 comments
During his speech yesterday to the Navy League, Defense Secretary Robert Gates wondered, "Do we really need eleven carrier strike groups for another 30 years when no other country has more than one?" (Gates made the same side-by-side, navy-to-navy comparison earlier in the speech).

It's true, the Battle of Midway did occur 68 years ago. Ever since then the U.S. Navy's aircraft carriers have employed their power almost exclusively in support of land campaigns, including the two current land campaigns that Gates so rightly wants his department to focus on.

But we also have an Air Force (and Army and Marine Corps aviation) supporting those campaigns. With money tight, shouldn't that bring some deserved scrutiny on the hugely expensive Ford-class aircraft carrier program?

Yes, it should. But today's New York Times also provided a reminder of why redundancy is a good thing. Fierce local opposition to the U.S. airbases on Okinawa may not only cause Japan's prime minister to lose his job, it may eventually create a big strategic hole in America's Western Pacific defense plans if (when) Kadena AFB falls to political pressure. After that happens, the Secretary of Defense (it won't be Gates) will be glad for the 7th Fleet's carrier strike groups.

Other reminders of the fragility land bases for tactical air power:

1. In 1986, the French decision to prohibit overflight by USAF F-111s launched from the UK and bound for Libya. Having to instead fly around Spain, aircrew fatigue contributed to a partially botched mission.

2. The final removal in 2003, due to political toxicity, of USAF basing rights in Saudi Arabia.

3. Political turmoil threatening, and sometimes closing, USAF bases in central Asia.

4. Saturation cruise and ballistic missile threats against USAF and USMC air bases in Japan and Guam.

5. The precision rocket, missile, and mortar threat against fixed tac-air bases which by necessity must sometimes be located in unsecure areas.

The fact that no other country, today at least, operates anything like a USN carrier strike group says nothing about their utility. I am surprised that Gates said this, especially to an audience of naval officers.

Is eleven the right number of carriers? Is $11 billion for a fully loaded Ford-class carrier the right price? Those are worthy questions. Gates had some good points in his speech and properly challenged his audience to come up with new ways of solving some of the Navy's problems. Gates mentioned some of his own ideas in his speech. Ironically, one of the reasons some of Gates's good ideas for the Navy (and Air Force) are not further along in their development is Gates himself. I will discuss this more soon.

Whatever its strengths and weaknesses, Gates's speech to the Navy League has opened up a timely debate over what America's grand military strategy should be over the next two decades. And how, within a tightening budget constraint, it should purchase that strategy.

(For an even more forceful critique of Gates's speech, see this post at the naval blog Information Dissemination.)

by SWJ Editors | Tue, 05/04/2010 - 6:28am | 0 comments
U.S. to Send Trainers to Afghanistan as Stopgap - Thom Shanker, New York Times.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has signed an order sending 850 more American military personnel to Afghanistan as a stopgap measure to fill vacancies in the high-priority effort to train local security forces, Pentagon officials said Monday.

Officials said the decision reflects Mr. Gates's assessment that while European allies have made substantial commitments to support the war effort, some nations have asked for and deserve more time to fulfill their pledges to supply trainers for the Afghan Army and police.

The additional American personnel - about 150 Marines and an Army battalion - have a specific and limited deployment schedule. They will serve for 90 to 120 days between now and September...

More at The New York Times.

The Way Out - New York Times editorial.

... Illiteracy, corruption and other problems are not unexpected in a country as poor and undeveloped as Afghanistan. But a disturbing Pentagon report to Congress last week acknowledged that one of the "most significant challenges" to fielding qualified Afghan security forces is a shortage of "institutional trainers."

The training effort - like everything else about Afghanistan - was shortchanged for years under President George W. Bush. It has received more attention and resources under President Obama. In November, the United States and NATO opened a new integrated training mission. Its leader, Lt. Gen. William Caldwell IV, who previously led leadership schools and training programs at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., was a West Point classmate of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top American and allied commander in Afghanistan.

General Caldwell has brought a new coherence and purpose to the mission by revamping the Afghan Army leadership program and standardizing police instruction, among other innovations. And he has managed to double his number of trainers from 1,300 when he started to roughly 2,700 today. But he - more to the point, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and General McChrystal - is having a very hard time getting the rest of NATO to deliver on commitments...

More at The New York Times.

by SWJ Editors | Mon, 05/03/2010 - 7:21pm | 2 comments
Gates: Sea Services Must Question Embedded Thinking

By Jim Garamone

American Forces Press Service

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md., May 3, 2010 -- The Navy and Marine Corps are going to have to question some embedded thinking, such as whether the Navy needs 11 carrier battle groups or whether the Marines ever will launch another amphibious landing, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today.

Gates spoke at the Navy League's annual Sea-Air-Space Convention at the Gaylord National Convention Center.

The world is changing, and the sea services must be on the leading edges of those changes, Gates said to an auditorium full of Navy and Marine Corps officers and defense contractors that was just a bit smaller than an aircraft carrier's hangar deck...

Continue on for much more...

by SWJ Editors | Mon, 05/03/2010 - 5:50pm | 2 comments
SWJ friend, and sometimes critic, Joshua Foust has a new home at PBS. Foust, along with Dan Ariely and Jessa Crispin, are the Voices at PBS' Need to Know. Best of luck to you!

Joshua's first post is The Battle for Kandahar.

The International Security Assistance Force - ISAF, as it's known in Afghanistan - hasn't been shy about its plans to "retake" Kandahar. But as with so many other operations in the country, there seems to be as much myth as there is fact about what the city is like, and what ISAF's plans are for occupying it. As the second-largest city in Afghanistan, rich with history both for Pashtun rule in the country and as the Taliban's birthplace, Kandahar holds tremendous symbolism. Here's what's important about Kandahar, and what the military is intending to do about it...

More at PBS.

by SWJ Editors | Mon, 05/03/2010 - 5:48pm | 5 comments
German Troops Face Pitched Battles in Afghanistan as Insurgency Spreads - Tom Coghlan, The Times.

German troops are fighting the first pitched battles witnessed by the Bundeswehr since 1945 in the face of a growing Taleban insurgency in the north of Afghanistan.

Security has deteriorated in areas such as Badghis province in the northwest, Kunduz, Baghlan and some parts of Takhar and Badakhshan provinces.

In April there was heavy fighting in Kunduz province during Operation Towheed, in which seven German soldiers were killed. Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, the German Defence Minister, gave a warning last week of "new and greater risks" that German forces must bear. Recent opinion polls have put German public opposition to the country's 5,000-strong Afghan deployment at 62 per cent.

A spokesman for the German forces in Kunduz told The Times this weekend: "It was intensive fighting in April. The situation is not stable and not secure. It has been deteriorating for more than a year." ...

More at The Times.

What is This Thing Called War? - The Economist.

Slowly and painfully Germany's leaders and voters are coming to terms with being at war in Afghanistan.

German troops have been fighting in Afghanistan for eight years. But Germans have been slow to accept this. "Stabilisation deployment" was how the politicians described Germany's role in the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), to which it is the third-largest contributor of troops. This was meant to convey the impression that the soldiers were helping Afghans build schools and dig wells rather than killing or being killed. Thus did ministers seek to reconcile Germany's duties as an ally with its instinctive pacifism, born of the horrors of the second world war.

The euphemism now lies buried beneath the rubble of reality. On April 15th the Taliban killed four and wounded five German soldiers who were escorting two Afghan battalions south of Kunduz in northern Afghanistan, the main area of German operations. Three soldiers were killed on patrol two weeks earlier. In September a German commander called an airstrike near Kunduz that killed and wounded as many as 142 people, some of them civilians. This was the bloodiest action involving the German army since 1945. German war deaths now stand at 43...

More at The Economist.

by SWJ Editors | Sun, 05/02/2010 - 8:47am | 4 comments
The Dangers of Embedded Journalism, in War and Politics - David Ignatius, Washington Post opinion.

The American news media has made great use in recent years of a practice called embedding, in which journalists travel with the U.S. military to cover wars...

But embedding comes at a price. We are observing these wars from just one perspective, not seeing them whole. When you see my byline from Kandahar or Kabul or Basra, you should not think that I am out among ordinary people, asking questions of all sides. I am usually inside an American military bubble. That vantage point has value, but it is hardly a full picture.

I fear that an embedded media is becoming the norm, and not just when it comes to war. The chroniclers of political and cultural debates increasingly move in a caravan with one side or another, as well. This nonmilitary embedding may have a different rationale, but there's a similar effect that comes with traveling under the canopy of a particular candidate, party or community. Journalists gain access to information and talkative sources, but also inherit the distortions and biases that come with being "on the bus" or "on the plane." ...

More at The Washington Post.

Reporters on the Battlefield: The Embedded Press System in Historical Context - Christopher Paul, James J. Kim , Rand.

Clear differences between the missions and goals of the press and those of the military, particularly centering around the issues of access and operational security, make historical tensions between the two unsurprising and complete avoidance of tension unlikely. However, significant overlaps, including core goals of professionalism and public service, make cooperation a reasonable possibility. This book traces the back-and-forth interactions between the press and the military over the past several decades. In Vietnam, the press enjoyed high levels of access to events, largely because of the relatively amicable relationship that had developed between the press and the military, particularly in World War II. However, this relationship experienced a significant shift during the Vietnam War-news coverage critical of both the war and the military engendered tensions. The legacy of these tensions significantly influenced military-press relations in later operations in Grenada, Panama, and the first Gulf War. Another notable shift occurred during the first Gulf War, however, establishing the basis for new kinds of press access, which ultimately led to the embedded press system used in the second Gulf War. The outcomes and goals for the press and the military are also explored in relation to each other and those for the public.

Read the entire monograph at Rand.

by SWJ Editors | Sun, 05/02/2010 - 12:58am | 9 comments

"The Slide"

Dynamic Planning for COIN in Afghanistan - The Entire Brief

And a blast from last year by our good friend LCol John Malevich at the COIN Center.
by SWJ Editors | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 10:16pm | 2 comments

Yep, he's back and on Facebook...
by Robert Haddick | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 5:59pm | 0 comments
Here is the latest edition of my column at Foreign Policy:

Topics include:

1) The Pentagon sends mixed messages into space,

2) Does defending a village mean undermining Karzai?

The Pentagon sends mixed messages into space

April 23 was a busy day for the Pentagon's space program. First was a launch from Florida of the experimental X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle, a smaller robotic version of the soon-to-be retired NASA Space Shuttle. The Air Force hopes to develop a reusable robotic spacecraft that can carry satellites and cargo into space, stay in orbit for many months, maneuver to different orbital planes, and land on a runway for reuse. Second that day was the launch from California of the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency's Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle-2 (HTV-2). The HTV-2 is an experiment to test whether the Pentagon can develop an extremely fast maneuvering glider-bomb that could promptly strike fleeting targets anywhere on the planet. Engineers lost contact with the missile 9 minutes after launch.

The Obama administration will soon attempt to explain two contrasting messages regarding the military use of space. On the one hand, it will call for international cooperation on a variety of space issues. On the other hand, as shown by the April 23 launches, it is hedging its bets by expanding the Pentagon's space power.

In its forthcoming Space Posture Review (SPR), the Defense Department will describe how important space and its space programs are to military success. The SPR will very likely explain how dependent U.S. military operations are on the military's reconnaissance, communication, weather, and navigation satellites. The report will also discuss how these systems are increasingly vulnerable to disruption by U.S. adversaries.

In a preview of the SPR's likely content, Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn recently discussed the need for international cooperation in space. Lynn called for "norms of behavior in space" that would include cooperation on space communication spectra, cooperation on navigation and missile warning, and protection of space assets from attack.

Having established the greatest range of space capabilities and with the most to lose from attacks on space assets, it is understandable that the United States government would now call for cooperation in space and the institution of a taboo on attacks on space assets.

In his speech, Lynn recognized that space has become a competitive military environment. Potential adversaries are likely to see a great advantage in offensive space capabilities that threaten the Pentagon's space assets.

Click through to read more ...

by SWJ Editors | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 3:20pm | 0 comments

Find out at Danger Room and maybe help save a bunch of cyber Airmen from getting their lunch money stolen in the ready room or the club.
by SWJ Editors | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 2:46pm | 1 comment
Expeditionary Economics: Spurring Growth After Conflicts and Disasters - Carl J. Schramm, Foreign Affairs.

Washington's approach to rebuilding economies devastated by conflicts and natural disasters is flawed. It assumes that strong economies cannot emerge in poor countries when it should be encouraging U.S.-style entrepreneurism and allow the U.S. military to help...

More at Foreign Affairs.

by SWJ Editors | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 12:33pm | 1 comment
Continue on for three recent articles of interest in Armed Forces Journal...
by SWJ Editors | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 11:13am | 2 comments
The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10cAfghanistan Stability Chartwww.thedailyshow.comDaily Show Full EpisodesPolitical HumorTea Party

Afghanistan Stability Chart

The military encapsulates the solution to all of our problems in Afghanistan with one simple PowerPoint slide.

by SWJ Editors | Fri, 04/30/2010 - 6:32am | 0 comments
Commentary in today's Washington Times:

Fall of Saigon Revisited - Editorial

Slow Going on the Path Toward Democracy - Baoky N. Vu

Culture Clash and Communication Failure - Nguyen Ngoc Linh

Ignoring Lessons From the Ground - Rufus Phillips

by SWJ Editors | Thu, 04/29/2010 - 4:00pm | 0 comments
Afghanistan and Obama: Transparency, Credibility and a Long War - Anthony H. Cordesman, Center for Strategic and International Studies.

It has been over a year since President Obama announced the outline of a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, and well over half a year since the appoint of General McChrystal and Ambassador Eikenberry has led to newefforts to define and implement that strategy in practical terms. However, the Obama Administration has yet to address most of the key issues that now shape the ability to implement that strategy.

The Administration has failed to address the most critical aspect of "strategic communications:" Providing the American people and the Congress with a clear picture of progress in the war, the broad structure of US plans, and some picture of the timelines involved and the future costs of the conflict. There has been no meaningful transparency, and the Administration's credibility depends almost exclusively on a leap of faith...

Much more at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

by SWJ Editors | Wed, 04/28/2010 - 9:29pm | 0 comments

All transcripts from the 21 April Emerald Express Strategic Symposium are now posted at the Marine Corps University web page.

This latest EE entitled, Afghanistan: The Way Ahead, was a one-day symposium held at the Gray Research Center, Quantico, Virginia. The purpose of this symposium was to improve understanding of the United States Marine Corps area of operations, to focus on the multidimensional and multinational approaches to enable the USMC and partners to succeed in the historical and ideological birthplace of the Taliban Movement; the current stronghold of the insurgency of Afghanistan; and the epicenter of opium cultivation in the world.

Topics covered at the symposium included a geographical, cultural and historical overview of southern Afghanistan; transition of military authority to the ANSF; governing Afghanistan to include district councils, development, and judicial reform; and defining, dealing and defeating the neo-Taliban and their message.

Transcripts for each of these subjects as well as the opening remarks, keynote address, keynote luncheon address, and closing remarks can be found at the MCU EE site.

by SWJ Editors | Wed, 04/28/2010 - 4:37pm | 14 comments
H/T to Crispin Burke at Wings over Iraq for pointing us to Actually, the Army Kind of Likes Your Blog by Noah Shachtman at Danger Room.

You'd think all the criticism from left-wing websites like the Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and Salon would royally piss off the Army. But at least one Army report finds the sites' posts to be consistently "balanced."

Every week, the defense contractor MPRI prepares for the brass a "Blogosphere and Social Media Report," rounding up sites' posts on military matters. It's meant to be a single source for top officers to catch up on what's being said online and in leading social media outlets. Items from about two dozen national security and political blogs are excerpted, and classified as "balanced," "critical," or "supportive." The vast majority of the posts are considered "balanced" - even when they rip the Army a new one...

Included in the post are links to three of these reports: week of March 20th, week of April 3rd, and week of April 10th. More at Danger Room.

by SWJ Editors | Wed, 04/28/2010 - 1:42pm | 0 comments
Interesting and thought provoking 23 April piece by Michael Cohen at Democracy Arsenal - Kandahar Cluster**** Watch - The You Can't Make This Stuff Up Version.

Over the last few days I've written about the delusional nature of US/NATO efforts around the impending military operations in Kandahar. Today in the Washington Post we have another excellent example of this phenomenon...

This article is reflective of what seems to be an increasingly significant issue in US efforts in Afghanistan - the desire to bring short-term results that will lead to a more immediate US exit and the long-term need to create some level of stability in the country...

But as Josh Foust said to me offline,"it took eight years of construction, culminating in a specific and hard-wrought electricity-sharing agreement with Uzbekistan, to supply Kabul. ISAF now wants to supply all of Kandahar in three months." Of course, this is at pace with the military's increasingly delusional public and private declarations of how quickly they can provide governance, security and extend state legitimacy in Southern Afghanistan. Even if the US is able to buy enough diesel fuel and generators to meet the goal of powering Kandahar what exactly is the point if it's not sustainable? ...

More at Democracy Arsenal.

by SWJ Editors | Wed, 04/28/2010 - 1:12pm | 8 comments

After PowerPoint

Before PowerPoint