# Dutch Soldiers Stress Restraint in Afghanistan



## GAP (6 Apr 2007)

Thanks to Mark for posting this in the Sandbox thread....I think this is going to come back to bite the Americans, Canadians and British in the rear end. It may work for the Dutch, but as one of the adjoining provinces, it simply gives a haven for the Taliban that are incountry.

Dutch Soldiers Stress Restraint in Afghanistan  
QALA-E-SURKH, Afghanistan 
Article Link

The Dutch infantrymen stood on a ridge near the Baluchi Valley, an area in south-central Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban and tribes opposed to the central government.

Whenever they push farther, the soldiers said, they swiftly come under fire from rifles and rocket-propelled grenades. “The whole valley is pretty much hostile,” said one, a machine gunner. 

But rather than advancing for reconnaissance or to attack, the Dutch soldiers pulled back to a safer village. “We’re not here to fight the Taliban,” said the Dutch commander, Col. Hans van Griensven, at a recent staff meeting. “We’re here to make the Taliban irrelevant.”

Thousands of fresh Western troops have flowed into Afghanistan since last year, seeking to counter the resurgent Taliban before an expected spring offensive. Many American units have been conducting sweeps and raids.

More on link


----------



## Bobby Rico (6 Apr 2007)

"We're not here to fight the Taliban...we're here to make the Taliban irrelevant."

The Dutch Army- an army of contradictions apparently.  What exactly IS the point of sending armed soldiers to a warzone if you have no intentions of using them?  Jeeze, if they wanted diplomats there, send freakin' diplomats, not war fighters.


----------



## jarude87 (6 Apr 2007)

> But here in Uruzgan Province, where the Taliban operate openly, a Dutch-led task force has mostly shunned combat. Its counterinsurgency tactics emphasize efforts to improve Afghan living conditions and self-governance, rather than hunting the Taliban’s fighters. Bloodshed is out. Reconstruction, mentoring and diplomacy are in. American military officials have expressed unease about the Dutch method, warning that if the Taliban are not kept under military pressure in Uruzgan, they will use the province as a haven and project their insurgency into neighboring provinces.
> 
> The Dutch counter that construction projects and consistent political and social support will lure the population from the Taliban, allowing the central and provincial governments to expand their authority over the long term.



That actually makes a hell of a lot of sense if you think about it. Okay, maybe it's because I'm fully Dutch-blooded that I'm biased, but the final sentence wraps it up. By blowing the hell out of the Taliban and inflicting collateral damage, people aren't gonna like you. Adopting a defensive mindset while improving the lifes of the people there is a far better idea.


----------



## Fraser.g (6 Apr 2007)

Yup,

And what if Canada did the same thing in WW II with Holland.

"We are not hear to fight the Nazis, we are here to make them irrelevant"

Right :


----------



## Eggy (6 Apr 2007)

The tactic does not seem to be very succesfull however. Dutch units are in firefights a number of times a week (last week 5 TICs in the same region). From all the troops there you hear that we've just been incredibly lucky sofar with only a dozen seriously wounded but if we keep this approach up that might change very soon. It might be better to take the initiative and clear that valley of taliban. Too bad for the people and their property there but waiting untill Dutch troops get killed does not seem the smartest move.

Canada launched Op Medusa to clear taliban from an area where they launched alot of attacks from and since then it seems to be much more peacefull there.


----------



## jimb (6 Apr 2007)

Is it relevant that the Dutch armed forces are unionised soldiers? Could that play into the lack of aggessive patroling and the "strictly defensive " attitude?  Just wondering if anyone had worked with them in the past, and could comment on their "work ethic ". ? Serious question.
JimB.


----------



## Kirkhill (6 Apr 2007)

Also, further to Jim B's question, is there a differentiation between the attitudes of the junior ranks and the officers?  My sense from reading articles on the Dutch is that the newly joined understand why they volunteered to join, union or not, but that the "less aggressive" postures seem to come from the Officer's Corps.  Perhaps the readiness of the Dutch SF types to engage is a related phenomenon.


----------



## jarude87 (6 Apr 2007)

RN PRN said:
			
		

> Yup,
> 
> And what if Canada did the same thing in WW II with Holland.
> 
> ...



You're seriously drawing a parallel between World War 2 and the occupation in Afghanistan?

Wow. 

I don't even have to explain the multitude of differences between the two conflicts; I think you're just upset at the fact that the Dutch aren't adopting the same military strategy as every other occupying force. Look back through history - how well do occupying forces in Afghanistan fare? That country has been occupied time and time again and brutalized by offensive military actions over and over and over.

How well did that work?


----------



## Donut (6 Apr 2007)

jarude87 said:
			
		

> You're seriously drawing a parallel between World War 2 and the occupation in Afghanistan?
> 
> Wow.
> 
> ...Look back through history - how well do occupying forces in Afghanistan fare? That country has been occupied time and time again and brutalized by offensive military actions over and over and over...



You're seriously drawing a parallel between ISAF and the imperial forces of the UK, the Occupying Soviets, Alexander, et al?

Wow, I can't believe you're buying the Polaris/Rideau/CCPA crap about NATO being an "occuping force" in Afghanistan, as opposed to an invited, UN sanctioned, multinational reconstruction and security effort.


----------



## Roy Harding (6 Apr 2007)

jimb said:
			
		

> Is it relevant that the Dutch armed forces are unionised soldiers? Could that play into the lack of aggessive patroling and the "strictly defensive " attitude?  Just wondering if anyone had worked with them in the past, and could comment on their "work ethic ". ? Serious question.
> JimB.



I've worked with the Dutch in the past.  I've been under their command, and I've had their soldiers under my command.

The individual Dutch soldier is a fine specimen of soldier.  Unionization has (much to my own surprise), not affected their effectiveness in any measurable way.

Their military, however, is much more politically controlled than our own currently is (their problems stem from their politicians - kinda' reminds me of ourselves in the 80's and 90's) - their politicians are EXTREMELY shy of casualties - these fine soldiers have their hands tied by extremely restrictive ROEs (in my experience - I have NOT worked with the Dutch in Afghanistan - my experience stems from FRY in the 90's and early 00's).

Don't be quick to judge a fighting man based on the politics of his nation - the Dutch soldier is just as capable as us, or any other Western nation - their hands are tied by their politicians - a phenomenon which should be familiar to any Canadian soldier with more than a year or two in.  (And yes, before anybody brings it up - I remember Srebrenica - which event proves my point).


Roy


----------



## TN2IC (6 Apr 2007)

Roy, I think you hit it, bud. I agree with you 100%.


----------



## Fraser.g (6 Apr 2007)

I have had the opportunity to work with Dutch soldiers on a couple of occasions. The first time in 92. The Communicators were excellent in Sector West and more recently this past fall when I worked with a fantastic team of Dutch nurses and doctors at the Role 3 MMU at KAF.
I have never worked with their combat arms and therefore have no opinion.
I have no qualms with the capability of the Dutch armed forces, however, I do have issue with their political masters.
The concept that they can do things the "Dutch way" as General Van Loon stated in November 06 draws strong correlations to Primeminister Chamberlain and his "Peace in our Time" Speech and negotiation with Hitler after the annexation of the Sudaten land.
You can not negotiate with a monster, appeasement does not work. The correlation I am trying to establish here is that if the rest of the Allies in WW II had done things the "Dutch way" Europe would be a very different place today.


----------



## Roy Harding (6 Apr 2007)

RN PRN said:
			
		

> I have had the opportunity to work with Dutch soldiers on a couple of occasions. The first time in 92. The Communicators were excellent in Sector West and more recently this past fall when I worked with a fantastic team of Dutch nurses and doctors at the Role 3 MMU at KAF.
> I have never worked with their combat arms and therefore have no opinion.
> I have no qualms with the capability of the Dutch armed forces, however, I do have issue with their political masters.
> The concept that they can do things the "Dutch way" as General Van Loon stated in November 06 draws strong correlations to Primeminister Chamberlain and his "Peace in our Time" Speech and negotiation with Hitler after the annexation of the Sudaten land.
> You can not negotiate with a monster, appeasement does not work. The correlation I am trying to establish here is that if the rest of the Allies in WW II had done things the "Dutch way" Europe would be a very different place today.



RN PRN:

I agree with you completely.

The original question, however, had to do with the qualities of the Dutch soldier.  I remain convinced that the average Dutch soldier is his western peer's equal.

I understand that you object to the Dutch parliament's stand (and I agree with your objection) - THAT, however, is not a reflection upon the qualities of the Dutch soldier.  The Netherlands is, the last time I checked, a democratic, constitutional monarchy - a system very similar to our own.  The soldiers, therefore, do not SET national policy - they simply enforce it.  This is, as I think most here would agree, an acceptable form of government.  As such, their soldiers are subject to the whims of their civilian masters - as are ours - and properly so.

The fact that their civilian masters are "Chamberlainian" in their approach to world diplomatic matters is in no way an indication of the quality of the individual Dutch soldier.  Any Canadian soldier who lived through the 80's and 90's can tell you how it feels to be considered "inferior" because of the diplomatic stance of their government at the time.

Roy

Roy


----------



## Fraser.g (6 Apr 2007)

True, the original article is titled that Dutch soldiers are showing restraint but as you clearly pointed out, it is the soldiers obeying the directions of their political masters.
Yes, I was one of those soldiers that joined in the late 80s early 90s.

I do not believe my statements are a side note to this thread but a continuance of it. As you well know, a soldier is only a tool of the government it serves. It does not make policy, simply enforces the policy of the state.


----------



## HItorMiss (6 Apr 2007)

I never worked with their Infantry so no opinion

There Arty was good when we got it.

There AH assets however I have no use for, not one bit. Wont shoot wont do anything, fly so high they had to dodge satellites got so bad then our FAC would find out who they were and send them off station and get someone else ANYONE else!

I don't agree with this so called "Dutch" way but I wont say their soldiers are bad they just have gutless leaders and politicians.


----------



## Fraser.g (6 Apr 2007)

HOM,

My thoughts exactly


----------



## Echo9 (7 Apr 2007)

The returns that I've been hearing from the guys just back are not at all positive about the Dutch.  The best that I've heard is "well, they're the best of the continental Europeans, and maybe if I could get past their ear-rings and long hair and goatees, they'd be decent soldiers."  In the same discussion, this speaker said "Continental Europe can F@#$* itself"... damning with faint praise if you ask me.

They seem to be hemmed in by overly tight RoE, which makes them useless.  They don't patrol into Taliban areas because their commanders aren't sure that they will get backing in close calls over the RoE.  The development stuff is the sugar coating that they use to swallow the bitter pill that their government has put them in a war zone with their hands tied behind their backs.

I understand that their RoE requires them to personally identify a target as being hostile.  Think about this for a minute- they have Apaches and F16's in country- how the HECK does an F16 pilot *personally *confirm a target as being hostile???


----------



## Eggy (7 Apr 2007)

Reply to some other comments.

They have a targetting pod. They have to make sure they hit the right compound, overly enthusiastic ground troops are not always a safe bet is what I often hear when there is some item on them in the news. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyianZnc9_A

And a couple of our Apaches have suffered damage from small arms fire so I doubt they "fly so high they had to dodge satellites".

And there is fighting going on there, the ministry of defense releases a weekly update that mentions the serious incidents. I translate them and post them on militaryphotos.net, for anyone that is interested: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=88469&page=5

But like I said earlier, I think this defensive strategy will cost us in the long run.


----------



## EW (7 Apr 2007)

Good discussions.

But, "....I understand that their RoE requires them to personally identify a target..."  For fear of stating the obvious, I wouldn't go much further down the road of discussing ROE's.  Anyone's ROE.

Just my humble thoughts.


----------



## HItorMiss (8 Apr 2007)

Eggy said:
			
		

> And a couple of our Apaches have suffered damage from small arms fire so I doubt they "fly so high they had to dodge satellites".



You wanna bet there Chico? were you there....Make no mistake when I say we had no use for Dutch Air cover NONE they wont shoot because of the RoE constraints. Trust me they came on station our FAC made em l get off station till we could get American,Bit or French fighters and AH assets. Heck we even had an American Apache make the Dutch AH that was orbiting our TIC and doing nothing leave and take over his escort duty for an AMR so we could get the air support we needed. Didn't matter how much we tried to get them to fire they never did not once. We all ways got "Cannot positively ID Enemy" Waste our time and theirs. Maybe they work different in support of their own troops or maybe a few of their pilots have some stones and break the rules I don't know and I don't care cause they never helped me out one bit.

Now if you want to talk about their Arty assest well I have nothing but good things to say about the SPZ 2000 ( designation maybe wrong) That gun fires and fires well, takes longer to get on target then our M777 but once it is on man can it rain down fire and those crews manning the gun sure kept the rate of fire up.


----------



## GUNS (8 Apr 2007)

There is a saying," Never judge a book by its cover".

Well back in the early 70's I was on a base that had Dutch soldiers, it was up around Bergen-Belsen, Germany.

The Brits were there as well. During morning parade you would have the very much British soldiers, drill and dress by the book.

Canadians soldiers, drill and dress by the book. Then the Dutch,  long hair , facial hair all around, uniforms looked like they were slept in, and a I do not want to be here attitude.

The Brits and us Canadians had a very hard time maintaining an "eyes front"

After hours the Dutch were even worst, hands always in there pockets and total disregard for the rank structure.

As for their ability to be combat soldiers, I don't know. In that time and space of my military career, I would not have been comfortable with a Dutch soldier sharing the same foxhole with me.

But as I stated. you can't" Judge a book by its cover".


----------



## geo (8 Apr 2007)

jarude87 said:
			
		

> That actually makes a hell of a lot of sense if you think about it. Okay, maybe it's because I'm fully Dutch-blooded that I'm biased, but the final sentence wraps it up. By blowing the hell out of the Taliban and inflicting collateral damage, people aren't gonna like you. Adopting a defensive mindset while improving the lifes of the people there is a far better idea.



Are you serious?

What happens when you leave a cancer fester in one area?... the cancer grows, it gets stronger AND it invades the healthy tissue in surrounding areas.

The Taliban & their foreign friends are the Cancer.  By their suicide bomber tactics & indiscriminate killing of civilians across the breadth of Afghanistan, they have proven themselves to be - a cancer on the people of Afghanistan....

Time to use a real big knife to purge the cancer.

WRT the Dutch gov'ts decision to anchor their troops in safe places... with the Germans, Italians & French doing the same - why would they be doing anything else?


----------



## Mike Baker (8 Apr 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> What happens when you leave a cancer fester in one area?... the cancer grows, it gets stronger AND it invades the healthy tissue in surrounding areas.
> 
> The Taliban & their foreign friends are the Cancer.  By their suicide bomber tactics & indiscriminate killing of civilians across the breadth of Afghanistan, they have proven themselves to be - a cancer on the people of Afghanistan....
> 
> Time to use a real big knife to purge the cancer.


That is the best meaning of our job in Afghanistan. +1


----------



## Eggy (8 Apr 2007)

Dutch air assets were heavily involved in Operation Medusa and I'm not claiming that you didn't have any bad experiences (and I'm sorry they have let you down) but judging by the weekly reports from the ministry of defence they do use their weapons (often).



			
				GUNS said:
			
		

> There is a saying," Never judge a book by its cover".
> 
> Well back in the early 70's I was on a base that had Dutch soldiers, it was up around Bergen-Belsen, Germany.
> 
> ...


Can't compare the army back then with the one we there is now. There is no conscript army anymore. It's all proffesional. Facial hair and earrings and stuff like that are not allowed. I believe for this mission facial hair is allowed because it's considered a positive thing over there.


----------



## cameron (9 Apr 2007)

As a historian with a strong interest in military history this story brings a couple of interesting points to mind for me.  Like some of you pointed out, it was not that long ago that the Canadian Forces found themselves hamstruck and undermined by pacifist political leaders who had their heads so far up their arses they couldn't see shit.  This article is a cautionary tale, history shows that one can never predict the future.  While Canada now has a more enlightened government (not enlightened enough, but still better than some previous ones when it comes to defence) that shows some willingness to use its fine military for what a military is supposed to be used for, when the need arises, we have no idea who will be in power the next five, ten or fifteen years.  So while I earnestly pray it will not happen, there is always the danger that Canadian soldiers could one day find themselves in the same situation as their Dutch counterparts presently do.  In a war zone with their hands tied behind their backs, and consequently watching a reputation as soldiers, that was earned over several generations, being quickly eroded in the eyes of their comrades from other countries.


----------

