TOUGH GOING

Posted at 5:40 a.m. ET

Urgent Agenda has some awfully good sources.  One of them is an American currently traveling in Asia, with first-hand knowledge of American and Asian affairs.  He has sent us a detailed letter, based on observations and discussions in Afghanistan.  It is quite a remarkable analysis, and we present a section of it here.  This is important, and grim:

Why am I so pessimistic?

NATO.  This system is not working.  I know you have read about it, but it is something altogether to observe at close range that lack of seriousness and commitment displayed by our NATO "brothers."  It goes beyond national caveats that will not allow certain countries to fully participate in necessary operations.  Some NATO countries come here merely to punch tickets, serving in very short rotations (4-6 months) mostly in safe regions and staying as much as possible in safe, fortress-like facilities. Their nations get credit for supporting NATO, but they are doing very little to advance the cause here...

Leadership.  The Afghans lack it, at least the sort of leadership that holds nations together and allows complex organizations to function.  The military is a good example.  The individual Afghan soldier is a formidable fighter, brave and committed.  Unfortunately, this is not enough.  To lead, organize, train and equip an army that is going to soon exceed 100,000 soldiers, you need people who have time horizons that exceed the next ten minutes.  I am exaggerating for effect, of course, but sometimes it does seem that way.    Afghans must attain the ability to run logistics systems, plan large-scale operations, oversee campaigns that will cover months and even years and train and empower the successors who will have to execute them...

American "can-do."  We all know the famous T.E. Lawrence quote that says it is better for the native to do it poorly than for the outsider to do it well.   We put this in our literature and we hang it on our walls, but we surely do not follow it.  We do EVERYTHING for them.  We will not allow them to fail.  It is not in our nature or our training to allow them to fail.  We constantly step in to bail them out, allowing Afghan muscles to atrophy by always stepping in to carry the load.  And this will certainly get worse as the same inadequate leaders are left in charge of a larger and larger Army...

Ethnic divisions.  I believe the ethnic divisions and historical grievances are much deeper than we would like to believe.  Afghans know they must sing the right songs about ethnic diversity to keep the billions flowing.   I have detected hints that these divisions will not be healed in the short time we are here.  They took thousands of years to develop and a decade of semi-peace will not paper them over.  I suspect that within a year of America's inevitable departure they will flare up violently, undoing much of the good we have tried to bring them...  

Drugs.  Though narcotics bring in only a pittance, it is their only pittance. And you can disregard any harsh words coming out of NATO, asserting a new willingness to attack the nexus between the drug market and the insurgency.  This has always been the policy, but the international community has always been too squeamish to execute it.  95% of the world's heroin supply comes from Afghanistan and it touches and corrupts every aspect of Afghan civil life.  No one here as the political will or incentive to do anything about it...

Pakistan.  The Pakistanis can do almost nothing about the sanctuaries from which attacks are more and more frequently being launched into Afghanistan.  They are about to be insolvent, rejecting IMF stipulations for further support.  The ISI (Pakistani intelligence) is allied with Pashtun warlords who benefit from uncertainty and unrest along the Afghan border...

So, some influential voices will be arguing that since Afghanistan will never be a nation...why should we continue to pour troops and soldiers into a losing proposition?  Instead, why not simply use special forces to decimate the leadership of the most dangerous of the terrorist organizations..?

The problem is that this shift could be labeled a NATO failure and preclude any future serious or threat of use of NATO power.  In the face of a rejuvenated and cantankerous Russia, could our president (no matter how naive) allow this?  Possibly not.  I think this will be the main reason that the Petraeus/McKiernan plan to introduce new units will be approved.

It is discouraging.  We're getting more and more reports like this every day.  Mr. Obama has a huge task in Afghanistan.  He doesn't seem to have much of a plan.

November 10, 2008.