Knowing Your Enemy Is The Most Important Key To War

[David]

arrow

Registered to :Aug 21, 2001
Messages :1033
From :OKLAHOMA
Posted 03-10-2001 at 01:25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THIS IS AN IMPORTANT READ. PLEASE GIVE IT MAX CIRCULATION. TRY
TO GET THIS DOCUMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE POLICY AND DECISION MAKERS.

KNOWING YOUR ENEMY IS THE MOST IMPORTANT KEY TO WAR. THIS LETTER
WAS WRITTEN BY A VERY BRIGHT AND AFGHANISTAN STREET-SMART WEST POINT GRAD TO
HIS CLASSMATES. HE KNOWS THE TERRAIN, THE ENEMY, AND THE WEATHER IN
AFGHANISTAN FROM BEING THERE, NOT FROM BOOKS.

BURN HIS WORDS AND ADVICE INTO YOUR BRAINS.

WE'LL WIN -- IF WE ALL HANG IN THERE UNTIL IT'S OVER OVER THERE.

HACK
__________________________________________________ ___________

CLASSMATES:

Many of you are probably not aware that I was one of the last American
citizens to have spent a great deal of time in Afghanistan. I was first
there in 1993, providing relief and assistance to refugees along the Tajik
border, and in this capacity have traveled all along the border region
between the two countries.

In 1998 and 1999, I was the Deputy Program Manager for the UN's mine action
program in Afghanistan. This program is the largest civilian employer in the
country with over 5,000 persons clearing mines and UXO. In this later
capacity, I was somewhat ironically engaged in a "Holy War," as decreed by
the Taliban, against the evil of landmines; and by a special proclamation of
Mullah Omar, all those who might have died in this effort were considered to
be "martyrs" -- even an "infidel" like myself.

The mine action program is the most respected relief effort in the country,
and because of this I had the opportunity to travel extensively without too
much interference or restriction. I still have extensive contacts in the
area and among the Afghan community and read a great deal on the subject.

I had wanted to write earlier and share some of my perspectives, but quite
frankly, I have been a bit too popular in DC this past week and have not had
time. Dr. Tony Kern's comments were excellent and I would like to use them
as a basis for sharing some observations.

First, he is absolutely correct. This war is about will, resolve and
character. I want to touch on that later, but first I want to share some
comments about our "enemy."

Our enemy is not the people of Afghanistan. The country is devastated beyond
what most of us can imagine. The vast majority of the people live
day-to-day, hand-to-mouth in abject conditions of poverty, misery and
deprivation. Less than 30% of the men are literate, the women even less.
The country is exhausted, and desperately wants something like peace. They
know very little of the world at large, and have no access to information or
knowledge that would counter what they are being told by the Taliban. They
have nothing left, nothing that is except for their pride.

Who is our enemy? Well, our enemy is a group of non-Afghans, often referred
to by the Afghans as "Arabs" and a fanatical group of religious leaders and
their military cohort, the Taliban. The non-Afghan contingent came from all
over the Islamic world to fight in the war against the Russians. Many came
using a covert network created with assistance by our own government.

OBL (as Osama bin Laden was referred to by us in the country at the time)
restored this network to bring in more fighters, this time to support the
Taliban in their civil war against the former Mujehdeen. Over time, this
military support along with financial support has allowed OBL and his "Arabs"
to co-opt significant government activities and leaders. OBL is the
"inspector general" of Taliban armed forces; his bodyguards protect senior
Talib leaders and he has built a system of deep bunkers for the Taliban,
which were designed to withstand cruise missile strikes (uhm, where did he
learn to do that?). His forces basically rule the southern city of Kandahar.

This high-profile presence of OBL and his "Arabs" has, in the last 2 years or
so, started to generate a great deal of resentment on the part of the local
Afghans. At the same time, the legitimacy of the Taliban regime has started
to decrease as it has failed to end the war, as local humanitarian conditions
have worsened and as "cultural" restrictions have become even harsher.

It is my assessment that most Afghans no longer support the Taliban. Indeed
the Taliban have recently had a very difficult time getting recruits for
their forces and have had to rely more and more on non-Afghans, either from
Pushtun tribes in Pakistan or from OBL. OBL and the Taliban, absent any US
action, were probably on their way to sharing the same fate that all other
outsiders and outside doctrines have experienced in Afghanistan -- defeat and
dismemberment.

During the Afghan war with the Soviets, much attention was paid to the
martial prowess of the Afghans. We were all at West Point at the time, and
most of us had high-minded idealistic thoughts about how we would all want to
go help the brave "freedom fighters" in their struggle against the Soviets.

Those concepts were naive to the extreme. The Afghans, while never conquered
as a nation, are not invincible in battle. A "good" Afghan battle is one
that makes a lot of noise and light. Basic military skills are rudimentary
and clouded by cultural constraints that no matter what, a warrior should
never lose his honor. Indeed, firing from the prone is considered
distasteful (but still done).

Traditionally, the Afghan order of battle is very feudal in nature, with
fighters owing allegiance to a "commander," and this person owing allegiance
upwards and so on and so on. Often such allegiance is secured by payment.
And while the Taliban forces have changed this somewhat, many of the units in
the Taliban army are there because they are being paid to be there. All such
groups have very strong loyalties along ethnic and tribal lines.

Again, the concept of having a place of "honor" and "respect" is of paramount
importance and blood feuds between families and tribes can last for
generations over a perceived or actual slight. That is one reason why there
were 7 groups of Mujehdeen fighting the Russians. It is a very difficult
task to form and keep united a large bunch of Afghans into a military
formation. The "real" stories that have come out of the war against the
Soviets are very enlightening and a lot different from our fantastic visions
as cadets.

When the first batch of Stingers came in and were given to one Mujehdeen
group, another group -- supposedly on the same side -- attacked the first
group and stole the Stingers, not so much because they wanted to use them,
but because having them was a matter of prestige.

Many larger coordinated attacks that advisers tried to conduct failed when
all the various Afghan fighting groups would give up their assigned tasks
(such as blocking or overwatch) and instead would join the assault group in
order to seek glory.

In comparison to Vietnam, the intensity of combat and the rate of fatalities
were lower for all involved.

As you can tell from above, it is my assessment that these guys are not THAT
good in a purely military sense and the "Arabs" probably even less so than
the Afghans. So why is it that they have never been conquered? It goes back
to Dr. Kern's point about will.

During their history, the only events that have managed to form any semblance
of unity among the Afghans, is the desire to fight foreign invaders. And in
doing this, the Afghans have been fanatical. The Afghans' greatest military
strength is the ability to endure hardships that would, in all probability,
kill most Americans and enervate the resolve of all but the most elite
military units.

The physical difficulties of fighting in Afghanistan, the terrain, the
weather, and the harshness are all weapons that our enemies will use to their
advantage and use well. (NOTE: For you military planner types and armchair
generals: around November 1st, most road movement is impossible, in part
because all the roads used by the Russians have been destroyed and air
movement will be problematic at best). Also, those fighting us are not
afraid to fight. OBL and others do not think the US has the will or the
stomach for a fight. Indeed after the absolutely inane missile strikes of
1998, the overwhelming consensus was that we were cowards who would not risk
one life in face-to-face combat.

Rather than demonstrating our might and acting as a deterrent, that action
and others of the not so recent past, have reinforced the perception that the
US does not have any "will" and that we are morally and spiritually corrupt.

Our challenge is to play to the weaknesses of our enemy, notably their
propensity for internal struggles, the distrust between the extremists/Arabs
and the majority of Afghans, their limited ability to fight coordinated
battles, and their lack of external support. More importantly through is
that we have to take steps not to play to their strengths, which would be to
unite the entire population against us by increasing their suffering or
killing innocents, to get bogged down trying to hold terrain, or to get into
a battle of attrition chasing up and down mountain valleys.

I have been asked how I would fight the war. This is a big question and well
beyond my pay grade or expertise. And while I do not want to second guess
current plans or start an academic debate, I would share the following from
what I know about Afghanistan and the Afghans.

First, I would give the Northern Alliance a big wad of cash so that they can
buy off a chunk of the Taliban army before winter. Second, also with this
cash, I would pay some guys to kill some of the Taliban leadership, making it
look like an inside job to spread distrust and build on existing discord.
Third I would support the Northern alliance with military assets, but not
take it over or adopt so high a profile as to undermine its legitimacy in the
eyes of most Afghans.

Fourth would be to give massive amounts of humanitarian aid and assistance to
the Afghans in Pakistan in order to demonstrate our goodwill and to give
these guys a reason to live rather than the choice between dying of
starvation or dying fighting the "infidel." Fifth, start a series of public
works projects in areas of the country not under Taliban control (these are
much more than the press reports) again to demonstrate goodwill and that
improvements come with peace. Sixth, I would consider very carefully putting
any female service members into Afghanistan proper -- sorry to the females of
our class but within that culture a man who allows a women to fight for him
has zero respect, and we will need respect to gain the cooperation of Afghan
allies. No Afghan will work with a man who fights with women.

I would hold off from doing anything too dramatic in the new term, keeping a
low level of covert action and pressure up over the winter, allowing this
pressure to force open the fissions around the Taliban that were already
developing -- expect that they will quickly turn on themselves and on OBL.

We can pick up the pieces next summer, or the summer after.

When we do "pick up" the pieces, I would make sure that we do so on the
ground, "man to man."

While I would never want to advocate American causalities, it is essential
that we communicate to OBL and all others watching that we can and will
"engage and destroy the enemy in close combat." As mentioned above, we
should not try to gain or hold terrain, but Infantry operations against the
enemy are essential. There can be no excuses after the defeat or lingering
doubts in the minds of our enemies regarding American resolve and nothing,
nothing will communicate this except for ground combat.

And once this is all over, unlike in 1989, the US must provide continued
long-term economic assistance to rebuild the country.

While I have written too much already, I think it is also important to share
a few things on the subject of brutality. Our opponents will not abide by
the Geneva conventions. There will be no prisoners unless there is a chance
that they can be ransomed or made part of a local prisoner exchange.

During the war with the Soviets, videotapes were made of communist prisoners
having their throats slit. Indeed, there did exist a "trade" in prisoners so
that souvenir videos could be made by outsiders to take home with them.

This practice has spread to the Philippines, Bosnia and Chechnya where
similar videos are being made today and can be found on the web for those so
inclined. We can expect our soldiers to be treated the same way. Sometime
during this war I expect that we will see videos of US prisoners having their
heads cut off.

Our enemies will do this not only to demonstrate their "strength" to their
followers, but also to cause us to overreact, to seek wholesale revenge
against civilian populations, and to turn this into the world-wide religious
war that they desperately want.

This will be a test of our will and of our character. (For further
collaboration of this type of activity please read Kipling).

This will not be a pretty war; it will be a war of wills, of resolve and
somewhat conversely of compassion and of a character. Towards our enemies,
we must show a level of ruthlessness that has not been part of our military
character for a long time. But to those who are not our enemies we must show
a level of compassion probably unheard of during war. We should do this not
for humanitarian reasons, even though there are many, but for shrewd military
logic.

For anyone who is still reading this way too long note, thanks for your
patience. I will try to answer any questions that may arise in a more
concise manner.

Thanks, Richard Kidd



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile Qoute
David

Registered to :Aug 21, 2001
Messages :604
From :San Diego, CA.
Posted 03-10-2001 at 08:15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They will respect power no matter if it comes from the air, sea, or land. Without US intervention Russia may have had a much better chance at victory and that has got to eat at the Talibans minds right now. I do agree we need to get as much assistance in for the civilians as possible. To follow this mans advice on the military side however, would be to fight an archaic war with huge casualties on our side. It's great he has thrown his opinion into the debate but his experience comes from the mostly civilian operation of land mine removal not war. I think the Russians have the military advice we need. Just my opinion


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Profile www Qoute
arrow

Registered to :Aug 21, 2001
Messages :1033
From :OKLAHOMA
Posted 03-10-2001 at 11:21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for your input David, if you notice the intro was from "Hack" David Hackworth. I wonder if his agreement with the young man comes from to long away from the field or if he truly feels that technology will not win this war. He's supposed to be on Fox News tonight either O'Riley or Hannity and Combs I can't rememeber which. I'll see if I can find it. He's one of our finest warriors there is no doubt. And although I don't agree with some of what he says esp the endorsement of the book that James wrote the review on I don't want to take his experience for granted. He was a long time at it. Since he was a kid. A lot of up close and personal on the ground experience. I hope I'm able to catch the interview tonight. Thanks for taking the time to read this. It's nice to get some feed back. The only reasoned way to think is to be able to hear from all sides and then make a judgment for my self. arrow>>>>>>>