+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Armchair Worrier Senior Contributor bolo121's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-12-07
    Location
    india
    Posts
    1,738

    One Tribe at a Time

    I came across this on the WaPo website, and followed the link to Steven Pressfield's blog site.
    Not being a military man, I wonder if any of our resident Afghanistan watchers have come across Maj Gant's paper and what they thought of it?

    Jim Gant, the Green Beret who could win the war in Afghanistan
    Gallery

    U.S. Army Maj. Jim Gant points to his 2003 mission in Afghanistan as proof that the U.S. military can -- and should -- work alongside Afghan tribes in the fight against the insurgency. Here's a look at the tribe that led him to urge the U.S. military to rethink its strategy.


    It was the spring of 2003, and Capt. Jim Gant and his Special Forces team had just fought their way out of an insurgent ambush in Afghanistan's Konar province when they heard there was trouble in the nearby village of Mangwel. There, Gant had a conversation with a tribal chief -- a chance encounter that would redefine his mission in Afghanistan and that, more than six years later, could help salvage the faltering U.S. war effort.
    This Story

    Malik Noorafzhal, an 80-year-old tribal leader, told Gant that he had never spoken to an American before and asked why U.S. troops were in his country. Gant, whose only orders upon arriving in Afghanistan days earlier had been to "kill and capture anti-coalition members," responded by pulling out his laptop and showing Noorafzhal a video of the World Trade Center towers crumbling.

    That sparked hours of conversation between the intense 35-year-old Green Beret and the elder in a tribe of 10,000. "I spent a lot of time just listening," Gant said. "I spoke only when I thought I understood what had been said."

    In an unusual and unauthorized pact, Gant and his men were soon fighting alongside tribesmen in local disputes and against insurgents, at the same time learning ancient tribal codes of honor, loyalty and revenge -- codes that often conflicted with the sharia law that the insurgents sought to impose. But the U.S. military had no plans to leverage the Pashtun tribal networks against the insurgents, so Gant kept his alliances quiet.

    No longer. In recent months, Gant, now a major, has won praise at the highest levels for his effort to radically deepen the U.S. military's involvement with Afghan tribes -- and is being sent back to Afghanistan to do just that. His 45-page paper, "One Tribe at a Time," published online last fall and circulating widely within the U.S. military, the Pentagon and Congress, lays out a strategy focused on empowering Afghanistan's ancient tribal system. Gant believes that with the central government still weak and corrupt, the tribes are the only enduring source of local authority and security in the country.

    "We will be totally unable to protect the 'civilians' in the rural areas of Afghanistan until we partner with the tribes for the long haul," Gant wrote.

    A decorated war veteran and Pashto speaker with multiple tours in Afghanistan, Gant had been assigned by the Army to deploy to Iraq in November. But with senior military and civilian leaders -- including Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates; Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan; and Gen. David Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command -- expressing support for Gant's views, he was ordered instead to return to Afghanistan later this year to work on tribal issues.

    "Maj. Jim Gant's paper is very impressive -- so impressive, in fact, that I shared it widely," Petraeus said, while McChrystal distributed it to all commanders in Afghanistan. One senior military official went so far as to call Gant "Lawrence of Afghanistan."

    The abrupt about-face surprised the blunt-spoken major. "I couldn't believe it," Gant said in a recent interview, recalling how his orders were canceled just days before he was set to deploy to Iraq. "How do I know they are serious? They contacted me. I am not a very nice guy. I lead men in combat. I am not a Harvard guy. You don't want me on your think tank."

    Gant, who sports tattoos on his right arm featuring Achilles and the Chinese characters for "fear no man," is clearly comfortable with the raw violence that is part of his job. An aggressive officer, he is known to carry triple the ammunition required for his missions. (One fellow soldier referred to this habit as a "Gantism.") But he is equally at ease playing for hours with Afghan children or walking hand-in-hand with tribesmen, as is their custom.

    As a teenager in Las Cruces, N.M., Gant was headed to college on a basketball scholarship and had no plans to join the military until he read Robin Moore's 1965 fictionalized account of Special Forces actions in Vietnam. Captivated by the unique type of soldier who waged war with indigenous fighters, Gant decided to become a Green Beret and scheduled an appointment with his father, a middle school principal, to break the news.

    Enlisting in the Army soon after his high school graduation, Gant became a Special Forces communications sergeant and fought in the Persian Gulf War. Later, as a captain, he served combat tours in Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004, and one in Iraq during the height of the violence there in 2006 and 2007.

    Intellectually, Gant is driven by a belief that Special Forces soldiers should immerse themselves in the culture of foreign fighters, as British officer T.E. Lawrence did during the 1916-1918 Arab revolt. In Iraq as well as in Afghanistan, Gant relied on his Special Forces training to build close bonds with local fighters, often trusting them with his life.
    This Story

    In Iraq in December 2006, a roadside bomb flipped over Gant's Humvee twice and left it engulfed in flames, with him pinned inside. Members of the Iraqi National Police battalion that Gant was advising pulled him out. Soon afterward, Gant led those same police in fighting their way out of a complex insurgent ambush near the city of Balad, saving the lives of two policemen and an Iraqi girl while under heavy fire, and deliberately driving his Humvee over two roadside bombs to protect the police riding in unarmored trucks behind him.

    Gant earned a Silver Star for his bravery, but he remembers most the goat sacrifice the police held for him that day. "We had just won a great battle. We had several [police] commandos there, with several goats, and they were putting their hands in the blood, and putting their handprints all over us and on the vehicles," Gant recalled in a 2007 interview. He felt both strange and honored. "It's something I will never forget," he said.

    Under Gant's plan, small "tribal engagement teams," each made up of six culturally astute and battle-tested Special Forces soldiers, would essentially go native, moving into villages with rifles, ammunition and money to empower tribal leaders to improve security in their area and fight insurgents. The teams would always operate with the tribes, reducing the risk of roadside bombs and civilian casualties from airstrikes.

    The U.S. military would have to grant the teams the leeway to grow beards and wear local garb, and enough autonomy in the chain of command to make rapid decisions. Most important, to build relationships, the military would have to commit one or two teams to working with the same tribe for three to five years, Gant said.

    Such a strategy, he argues, would bolster McChrystal's counterinsurgency campaign by tapping thousands of tribal fighters to secure rural populations, allowing international troops and official Afghan forces to focus on large towns and cities. Building strong partnerships with the tribes, whose domains straddle Afghanistan's border with Pakistan, could also prove critical to defeating insurgents entrenched in Pakistan's western tribal areas, he contends.

    Adm. Eric Olson, who leads the 57,000-strong Special Operations Command, said in the latest issue of Joint Force Quarterly that Gant's proposal is "innovative and bold" and likely to have "strategic effects." And in recent congressional testimony, Gates agreed that the U.S. military should step up cooperation with Afghan tribes, saying many security responsibilities are likely to fall on them rather than the Afghan army or police force.

    Thorough intelligence analysis should drive the selection of the tribes, Gant said, noting that the U.S. military has already gathered much of the intelligence. "There are 500-page documents breaking these tribes down. You would be shocked how much we know about who is who," he said.

    Gant's proposals go well beyond the more cautious tribal-outreach efforts underway in Afghanistan, where the U.S. military is experimenting with neighborhood-watch-type programs such as the Community Defense Initiative, in which Special Forces teams partner with tribes selected by an Afghan minister. With time running out, Gant believes tribal engagement must be bolder. "We are trying not to lose, not trying to win," he said. (Gant's experiences helped shape the CDI effort, and he is currently preparing to return to Afghanistan to implement his vision, according to a senior military official.)

    Still, Gant acknowledges that his strategy has risks. The teams would depend on the tribes for their safety. "American soldiers would die. Some of them alone, with no support. Some may simply disappear," he wrote in his paper on the strategy. Another possibility is that intertribal conflict would break out between two or more U.S.-backed tribes. "Could it happen? Yes. Could it cause mission failure? Yes. Could we have to pick sides for our own safety? Yes," Gant said. But he believes that if American advisers forge strong ties with the tribes, the chances of such conflicts can be minimized.

    Gant's greatest fear is that the United States will lack the fortitude to back the tribes for the long haul, eventually abandoning them. He, for one, plans to stick with his tribe in Afghanistan, at least to fulfill a personal promise to return to Konar province to see elder Malik Noorafzhal, now 86.

    "I am not here to imply that I think I could win the war in Afghanistan if put in charge," Gant wrote in his paper. ". . . I just know what I have done and what I could do again, if given the chance."

    Ann Scott Tyson, a staff writer for The Washington Post, has covered the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001.
    washingtonpost.com

    One Tribe At A Time #4: The Full Document at last!
    For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

  2. #2
    S-2
    S-2 is offline
    Military Professional S-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-09-06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    5,679

    Bolo 121 Reply

    I'm reading it and sent it to a Pakistani friend to look at as well.

    There are real risks with his proposal that stem anywhere from personnel management to personnel security. It'll be hard to place teams on five year tours.

    Would you personally sacrifice five years of your life for an afghan village?

    Would you trust the U.S. to support your team and you for five years in the manner necessary to be successful? Could you go "native" and lose sight of your overarching obligations?

    How many of those selfless men would be necessary to achieve a strategic effect?

    Great idea in theory.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski

  3. #3
    Armchair Worrier Senior Contributor bolo121's Avatar
    Join Date
    19-12-07
    Location
    india
    Posts
    1,738

    I just finished a first brief skim through it, will read it slowly once at home away from my work PC.
    I also got the same feeling, Lawrence of Arabia was only one man but here you would need whole teams of them. The level of commitment and research needed would be huge.
    You can also pretty much guarantee that the taliban will start targeting these guys.
    What would happen when whole teams start to get destroyed?
    For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

  4. #4
    S-2
    S-2 is offline
    Military Professional S-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-09-06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    5,679

    Bolo 121 Reply

    "The level of commitment and research needed would be huge."

    As Gant's indicated, we may know more than we know WRT research...:))

    The problem there is putting the information into coherent and accessible form.

    "What would happen when whole teams start to get destroyed?"

    It wasn't commonplace in SVN so it doesn't have to be here either. I rate both the V.C. and NVA forces above these guys. Whether a team builds the rapport necessary within a village to gain the allegiance essential to survival is key.

    If those you live with are doing the killing, you've failed. If those you live with accede to others doing the killing, you're failing. If those you live with assist you in repelling the killers...

    ...victory. A very small victory but then...

    ...one tribe at a time, correct?
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski

  5. #5
    S-2
    S-2 is offline
    Military Professional S-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-09-06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    5,679

    The Way Ahead In Afghanistan: Does A Silver Bullet Exist?

    This is an article by Major Nathan Springer, Chief Of Operations, USA/USMC COIN Ctr. which argues against Maj. Jim Gant's One Tribe At A Time. The relevance doesn't necessarily lie in the article, which is itself excellent and thoughtful, but in the commentary existing below it.

    Extensive with contributions from Prof. Tom Johnson USNPS and Maj. Gant along with a bevy of field grade types with extensive time in-country. The consensus? A muddle of perspectives that capture the confusion about our ways and means to viable solutions.

    The Way Ahead In Afghanistan: Does A Silver Bullet Exist?-Major Nathan Springer CounterInsurgency Center Blog Feb. 3, 2010

    Occasionally the discussion drifts into the macro realm of host-nation partnership. How can it not as there's a role played by the GoA? I was reminded of a conference in Prague recently where various civilian supranational and NGO types were discussing how services need to be disconnected from the military and attached to the GoA so as to build prestige and affirmation in the eyes of the locals. I was reminded how unlikely that success will be from the comments here.

    We're in a heap of trouble when there very bright men with considerable education, experience, and common values/ethics are so far apart in the perspectives.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski

  6. #6
    Banished New Member
    Join Date
    10-02-10
    Posts
    21

    read british last war and truce in afghanistan

    Quote Originally Posted by bolo121 View Post
    I came across this on the WaPo website, and followed the link to Steven Pressfield's blog site.
    Not being a military man, I wonder if any of our resident Afghanistan watchers have come across Maj Gant's paper and what they thought of it?



    washingtonpost.com

    One Tribe At A Time #4: The Full Document at last!
    whole brithish force was killed and only doctor was purposely left alive sent back to british camp on horse back to tell the story. One tribe will not respect the promise of other tribe, however the promising tribe will even against other afghan tribe.

  7. #7
    S-2
    S-2 is offline
    Military Professional S-2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11-09-06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    5,679

    badil Reply

    "read british last war and truce in afghanistan..."

    It would be better if YOU READ the documents provided and stay on topic. This is really becoming a problem and stems from your eagerness to share your views on matters. It distracts from the topic at hand and adds very little. You presume after all of our threads and posts here that we know nothing of this war and that does the rest of us a disservice.

    I hope your unwillingness to carefully read before posting on these topics will cease soon.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Tibet protest in a perspective.
    By xinhui in forum The Rise of China
    Replies: 915
    Last Post: 27th April 2008, 04:18
  2. An interview with Paul Tibbits aged 87
    By 101st Airborne in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 19th March 2007, 23:05
  3. Parting kiss sparks Sharia law furore
    By troung in forum International Politics
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 15th October 2005, 19:34

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts