"... the Anso report also reflected the grave doubts held by most Afghan experts that Nato's concentration of force in southern Afghanistan can possibly work.
It said the effort to dislodge the Taliban from Marjah, a former Taliban stronghold in Helmand, had failed to deliver security to local people, allow refugees to return to their homes or given credibility to the local government.
It was sceptical that the next stage of the operation, in and around Kandahar, would be any better. It said the operation was "very unlikely to be the 'breaking point' of the Taliban".
"It seems more likely to go the way of Operation Moshtarak, in Helmand, with lots of public ballyhoo around the actions of the IMF while the Afghan 'partners' discreetly pursue their own, often countervailing, agendas."
It added that the military buildup in Kandahar, which will see fighting take place in districts surrounding the city in the autumn, "will cause a significant rise in support for the armed opposition in Kandahar and, with that, make eventual Taliban ascendency feasible"." Guardian
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amusing, in a sick kind of way. These people are even more "defeatist" than I. So, as I thought, the "marjah" thing is a flop. The COIN guys should start preparing for a collapse of their popularity. There will be other fads. Surely, they can find one before the mortgage is foreclosed.
The business at the end about militias is also funny. Lyautey said something like "On ne fait pas des empires avec les vierges." Well, we are not good at empires, but... pl
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/18/kandahar-us-military-taliban-afghanistan
Richard N Haass (of the Council on Foreign Relations) says today in Newsweek : Afghanistan: We're Not Winning. It's Not Worth It ! :
http://www.readersupportednews.org/opinion/35-35/2423-afghanistan-were-not-winning-its-not-worth-it
He doesn’t discuss the possibility that, if the aim is to continue the war because it’s very profitable, then it is worth it.
Posted by: FB Ali | 18 July 2010 at 07:12 PM
Sir,
Here are the links for the ANSO reports. The first is for the quarterlies and the second for the biweeklies. Just as a warning, when I click on the 2nd quarter 2010 report I just get page after page with "PDF" in the middle. Same for all the 2010 biweekly reports. The first quarter 2010 is there, as are the previous years' biweeklies:
http://www.afgnso.org/index_files/Page595.htm
http://www.afgnso.org/index_files/Page548.htm
Posted by: Adam L Silverman | 18 July 2010 at 09:31 PM
What exactly protection does the American military and Karzai regime give to opium poppy production?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 19 July 2010 at 08:33 AM
Adam,
On my end, the 2Q10 report is fine, as well as the 7-1-10 biweekly. Maybe try downloading, and opening them in a reader.
Posted by: Robert | 19 July 2010 at 11:42 AM
As a Candian I am happy that Canada has handed Kandahar security to USA.
I would be even happier if the USA would had over Afgan security to Afgans and get the H**L out of Muslim Countries and devote the savings to USA economy [Note not the Intelligence networks discussed above]..
Posted by: N M Salamon | 19 July 2010 at 01:03 PM