How bureaucrats hamper the war effort

[SuperScout]

[The following is from my new son-in-law, and an edited edition of this letter was published in the London Times.

I write to you from Kabul where I currently work as a security consultant. Last year I spent 9 months living and working in Lashkar Gah in Helmand Province as security manager to, firstly, the USAID funded Alternative Incomes Project and then to the Alternative Livelihoods Project after USAID shut down the AIP.

The British perceptions of the situation in Helmand Province
were flawed from the outset, and the perception of the local
Afghans was that the British were focused on eradication.
Nothing was done in the way of a PR campaign to change this perception, perhaps because the Government failed to set clear parameters to the British deployment.

Added to that was the closure of AIP by USAID which threw 14,000 men back into unemployment with no relief in sight. ALP is not allowed to indulge in cash for work activity because, says USAID, ALP is a long term project (it will last till 2009) and cash for work is an unsustainable short term solution outside of their mandate.

In the mean time these people who looked to the west for help grow more desperate.

Enter the "Neo Taliban" who firstly promised the farmers that they would protect the opium crop from the rampaging British infidels and secondly, they employ unemployed Helmand residents to fight for them. This sudden upsurge in Taliban numbers is not solely about an influx of men from across the
Pakistan border nor, contrary to some opinion, is it an upsurge of popular support against a foreign invader. It is quite simply a question of economics.

The Taliban pay $200 a month with a bonus scheme for successful attacks (in addition, anything fighters obtain via looting, they get to keep as another bonus). We are constantly told that DFiD has huge sums available for ?Quick Impact?
development activities in Helmand, so why not use that to restart the cash for work projects and reemploy these men?

If local citizens were offered $150 a month, which is what we paid them last year, the lowering of the risk level- ditch clearing versus combat- would compensate for the decrease in pay. There are enough labour intensive, low technology projects to employ at least 14 to 20,000 men in Helmand alone (without considering Kandahar) and this solution would with out doubt decrease the
number of men engaged in combat against the NATO forces.

[mcgrunt]

Interesting . Terrorism seems to be a "growth industry" . But in a war torn country like Afganistan who can blame them . It is not a future but it would help feed the family .

Bureaucracy doesn't seem to be able to cope with clans and tribes very well. First saw that idea in " The Sling and the Stone " Colonel Hammes

[SuperScout]

The basic problem, as has been explained to me by my son-in-law and others in the know is that there is no interface between the special ops people and the bureaucrats doling out the money. There are ways to make all of this work, but turf battles are happening with more casualties than actual firefights out in the bush.