# COIN Operations in Afghanistan



## couchcommander (28 Feb 2006)

Hey All,

Been a while. Question has popped into my head over the last little while, especially with Canada taking charge of the multi-national brigade in Kandahar. I apologize if it's been asked before, or if it's presently being discussed (search turned up nothing specific..). But onto the question! 

From media reports of action in Afghanistan, it appears that in the vast majority of cases where contact was made with insurgents, especially if they have successfully ambushed a Canadian patrol, the immediate response is some type of suppressive fire (many times, it appears from the media reports this isn't even done), and then withdraw from the area to the safety of a base (or just out of the kill zone). The most recent incident that made headlines is an example of this http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/02/28/canada-afghan-command.html

Though this is not always the case, and indeed there has been published reports of troops moving to occupy the firing positions, even this response seemed, from the reports, to be slow and lack any real imperative to hunt down and arrest or kill the insurgents. In the case of the RPG ambush that the m777's responded to that happened north of Kandahar on the 20th, I understand that the position was later occupied, but it seemed from the report that this was some time later, and further an officer (I forget who exactly) was quoted as remarking "we have a good idea where they went to", but it appeared (and given the shoddy reporting coming out of there I cannot be at all certain on this), that no attempt was made to follow up on this other than possibly reporting it to the local authorities. The story can be found here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1582149/posts (don't mind the freerepublic address, it's just where google found the story first). Of course there are many more questions that are raised by this report as well, most notably that if this was a known firing position, why was it not reconnoitered before a base was set up below it (or was it? you never know with newsreports), etc... but that is not my point right now. 

Anywho, there are many more examples of insurgents ambushing patrols, then the patrol either using suppressive fire, or no fire, and then immediately returning to base (at least from media reports). Notable exceptions to this are of course if a vehicle is disabled. Given that one of the hardest parts of counter insurgency operations is finding the enemy, why are we not pursuing them when they decide to show their face for us, or, more appropriately, what is the rationale behind this doctrine (or is the reporting just false or misleading)?

I won't presume to tell you guys how do your job, far from it (I've gotten into some pretty interesting flame wars on that front before... something which I wish to avoid). As a curious observer I am just confused by this, and would appreciate it if it was explained to me.


----------



## geo (28 Feb 2006)

well.... 
- when a Suicide bomber rams your car in Kandahar proper.... 
- when an IED is detonated in Kandahar proper.....
..... it is obvious that we cannot nuke the local population - using a 50 lb sledge to swat a fly.

- when those RPG rounds were fired, from a distance, to a patrol base..... yeah, 1st thing done was to call in the Arty for illumination and suppressive fire. Troops did sweep the area - an area that is so riddled with Soviet era trench systems that the insurgents were able to exfiltrate 

Relax - Our troops only just got there - the ink on the handover papers isn't even dry yet.


----------



## a_majoor (28 Feb 2006)

This isn't the kind of war where you can advance blindly against an unknown enemy. One thing which you may not have considered is every time the enemy show their faces, we learn a bit more about them. As our knowledge accumulates, we have a better and better idea of who they are, where they are, how they operate, what they hope to do next....At the same time, we should not be revealing our hand too early.

An excelent primer is the book "War in the shadows; The guerrilla in history" by Robert B Asprey http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385034709/103-9395418-9091025?v=glance&n=283155
Other sources you might consider for a perspective on this kind of war is "Street without Joy" by Bernard B Fall, and "Blackhawk Down", by Mark Bowden.

While reading is not doing, at least you can get an educated perspective of what our soldiers will be facing out there.


----------



## couchcommander (28 Feb 2006)

Thanks for your replies. Much appreciated.


----------



## Journeyman (3 Mar 2006)

Since Arthur took the lead......

I also recommend:

John Nagl. _Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam: Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife._ Westport: Praeger, 2002.

Gen (ret’d) Sir Rupert Smith, _The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World._ London: Alan Lane, 2005.

The recently re-published - -  David Galula, _Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice._ NY: Praeger, 1964. (Written by a French officer, based on his experiences in Algeria and Indochina; very straight-forward)

And, with some serious caveats  regarding his sometimes painful anti-Americanism, D. Michael Shafer, _Deadly Paradigms: The Failure of US Counterinsurgency Policy._ Princeton: Princeton Univ Press, 1988. (Ignore the rhetoric, focus on the lessons).


----------



## couchcommander (3 Mar 2006)

Lol, thanks for the recommendations. Looks like I will be busy for a while...

Thanks,
Joshua


----------



## 54/102 CEF (23 Apr 2006)

A book called "Killer Elite" by Michael Smith published by Weidenfeld & Nicolson extracts http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2035979,00.html


----------



## tomahawk6 (23 Apr 2006)

You might also want to take a look at these documents:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/90-8/Ch3.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-07-22/

This last document discusses pseudo operations within the overall COIN campaign. This is a technique sometimes overlooked in the discussion of counterinsurgency.

http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?p=counterinsurgency+operations&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-tab-web-t&x=wrt&u=www.blackwaterusa.com/btw2005/articles/080105counter.pdf&w=counterinsurgency+operations&d=dseZskaqMku6&icp=1&.intl=us


----------



## ArmyRick (29 Apr 2006)

Some good info posted above


----------

