USA Sec Def Disses RC-S Forces COIN Capability?
- Thread starter The Bread Guy
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
The level of commentary on this story is several levels above what I read a short while ago on the Globe and Mail's site. It won't post a link as reading most of the comments is a waste of oxygen.
Methinks the reporter took a few answers by Secretary Gates to questions, structured them to fit his story and dug into his speed dialer to find some sources to add depth to his analysis. He, in Edward's words, quite ably came up with lots of good stuff to fit in between the adds. I suspect that he successfully could defend his story on the basis that all the statements are quoted accurately and are therefore factual. At the same time, whether he intended to or not, he damaged NATO's solidarity in the south, which also lies along the border with Pakistan and is subject to infiltration.
Whether the comments are factual is another matter; the enemy situation varies widely across unfortunate Afghanistan from area to area and even from week to week. Did we not just have reports that the Taliban are planning another major offensive in the south? If I was one of the mad mullahs, it would make sense to me to raise all sorts of hades as the rotation between 03/07 and 01/08 was underway.
Methinks the reporter took a few answers by Secretary Gates to questions, structured them to fit his story and dug into his speed dialer to find some sources to add depth to his analysis. He, in Edward's words, quite ably came up with lots of good stuff to fit in between the adds. I suspect that he successfully could defend his story on the basis that all the statements are quoted accurately and are therefore factual. At the same time, whether he intended to or not, he damaged NATO's solidarity in the south, which also lies along the border with Pakistan and is subject to infiltration.
Whether the comments are factual is another matter; the enemy situation varies widely across unfortunate Afghanistan from area to area and even from week to week. Did we not just have reports that the Taliban are planning another major offensive in the south? If I was one of the mad mullahs, it would make sense to me to raise all sorts of hades as the rotation between 03/07 and 01/08 was underway.
midget-boyd91
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 230
Why must CTV open comment threads in their articles on their webpage?
Some comments from the article about Gates' comments.
:
Midget
Some comments from the article about Gates' comments.
:
Midget
TangoTwoBravo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,765
- Points
- 1,110
While I agree that there is much to learn and new methods are always welcome, I found the criticisms in the original article a little odd in how they came across painting the US as squared away and the Canadians, Dutch and British as not having it figured out with respect to firepower and ANA. I also do not think that a straight comparison of RC East with RC South is fair. While the provinces of RC East were a hotbed during the Afghan-Soviet war and are certainly not safe or easy, RC South is the home of the Taliban and was the site of a relativley conventional Taliban offensive in 2006. Context in terms of time and place should be accounted for.
Still, I think that Churchill (or perhaps Ike) said that "The only thing worse in war than having to fight with allies is having to fight without allies."
Criticism between allies can get nasty. We shouldn't offer ways for our enemies and the opponents of the mission to drive wedges into the alliance. Whether he meant it or not, we should move on and not get too hot and bothered.
Still, I think that Churchill (or perhaps Ike) said that "The only thing worse in war than having to fight with allies is having to fight without allies."
Criticism between allies can get nasty. We shouldn't offer ways for our enemies and the opponents of the mission to drive wedges into the alliance. Whether he meant it or not, we should move on and not get too hot and bothered.
Care needs to be taken that what we comment on is factual. I mention this because earlier in this thread it has been pointed out that the "reply" he gave supposedly dissing us and others, is not factual at all, but taken out of context.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
While we as Canadians might not have years of experience in COIN, we are adapting to it, and are doing pretty good, using and adapting the way it is done by the country that has the most experience in doing COIN.. Britain... However it worded it, or whatever he may have meant, I really don't know what to think, cause while the states Lost Vietnam, the Brits did much COIN in the middle east as they were leaving those regions.. And lets not forget about the IRA..
- Reaction score
- 7,690
- Points
- 1,360
Not a transcript, but a bit more detail (highlights mine) from the Armed Forces Press Service, shared with the usual disclaimer...
Gates Says NATO Allies 'Committed' to Mission in Afghanistan
Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service, 16 Jan 08
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16, 2008 – U.S. defense officials made it clear today that while they appreciate the hard work NATO troop-contributing nations are doing in Afghanistan, more counterinsurgency training would help further the allies' success.
In response to reports that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was displeased with NATO allies, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said that the secretary praises the allies’ work. But, he added, the secretary is concerned about their need for counterinsurgency training.
“At no time did he ever criticize any single country for their performance in, or commitment to the mission in Afghanistan,” Morrell said.
Gates has praised the countries involved in the fight in Afghanistan’s Regional Command South, he said, and has many times singled out Canadian, British and Dutch forces “for their professionalism, commitment and bravery in their work in RC-South.”
Gates has noted, however, that NATO as an alliance does not train for counterinsurgency,” Morrell said. “The alliance has never had to do it before.”
NATO came into being in 1949 as a defensive alliance aimed at the Soviet Union. NATO forces were structured to stop the Soviet Union’s Red Army from coming through the Fulda Gap in West Germany and striking through Western Europe.
Gates “is concerned, and he expressed that to the allies, that we may be sending operational mentoring and liaison teams to Afghanistan which are not properly trained,” Morrell said.
These teams go to train the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. Gates is concerned that the teams are not well-schooled in counterinsurgency tactics and strategies, Morrell said.
“That’s why there has been a push to send OMLTs to Hohenfels (in Germany) to get counterinsurgency training before going to Afghanistan,” he said, using the military shorthand term for operational mentoring and liaison teams.
The U.S. 7th Army Training Center runs a training area at the base that trains Europe-based American units that are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Gates has seen the progress that forces and civilian organizations can make in following a counterinsurgency regimen, Morrell said. The secretary has visited Khowst in Regional Command East and has seen how American forces have had success with counterinsurgency.
“We’ve been doing this for six or seven years, so we are figuring it out,” Morrell said. “It’s taken us a long time to get there. We’re only now enjoying that kind of cohesive counterinsurgency success in RC East.”
The bottom line with Gates is that he is concerned with NATO and how it is structured to deal with counterinsurgencies, Morrell said, adding that the secretary is not worried about any particular country.
“Everybody is putting themselves on the line to go after the Taliban and al Qaeda,” Morrell said. “They are doing an astoundingly brave job.”
Gates Says NATO Allies 'Committed' to Mission in Afghanistan
Jim Garamone, American Forces Press Service, 16 Jan 08
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16, 2008 – U.S. defense officials made it clear today that while they appreciate the hard work NATO troop-contributing nations are doing in Afghanistan, more counterinsurgency training would help further the allies' success.
In response to reports that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was displeased with NATO allies, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said that the secretary praises the allies’ work. But, he added, the secretary is concerned about their need for counterinsurgency training.
“At no time did he ever criticize any single country for their performance in, or commitment to the mission in Afghanistan,” Morrell said.
Gates has praised the countries involved in the fight in Afghanistan’s Regional Command South, he said, and has many times singled out Canadian, British and Dutch forces “for their professionalism, commitment and bravery in their work in RC-South.”
Gates has noted, however, that NATO as an alliance does not train for counterinsurgency,” Morrell said. “The alliance has never had to do it before.”
NATO came into being in 1949 as a defensive alliance aimed at the Soviet Union. NATO forces were structured to stop the Soviet Union’s Red Army from coming through the Fulda Gap in West Germany and striking through Western Europe.
Gates “is concerned, and he expressed that to the allies, that we may be sending operational mentoring and liaison teams to Afghanistan which are not properly trained,” Morrell said.
These teams go to train the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. Gates is concerned that the teams are not well-schooled in counterinsurgency tactics and strategies, Morrell said.
“That’s why there has been a push to send OMLTs to Hohenfels (in Germany) to get counterinsurgency training before going to Afghanistan,” he said, using the military shorthand term for operational mentoring and liaison teams.
The U.S. 7th Army Training Center runs a training area at the base that trains Europe-based American units that are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Gates has seen the progress that forces and civilian organizations can make in following a counterinsurgency regimen, Morrell said. The secretary has visited Khowst in Regional Command East and has seen how American forces have had success with counterinsurgency.
“We’ve been doing this for six or seven years, so we are figuring it out,” Morrell said. “It’s taken us a long time to get there. We’re only now enjoying that kind of cohesive counterinsurgency success in RC East.”
The bottom line with Gates is that he is concerned with NATO and how it is structured to deal with counterinsurgencies, Morrell said, adding that the secretary is not worried about any particular country.
“Everybody is putting themselves on the line to go after the Taliban and al Qaeda,” Morrell said. “They are doing an astoundingly brave job.”
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Peter MacKay:
Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay on Wednesday played down criticism of the capabilities of NATO troops in Afghanistan by US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, saying Gates told him the remarks were reported out of context.
Noting that Gates praised Canada's military performance just the day before, MacKay said Gates had just told him by telephone that comments published in the Los Angeles Times that most NATO forces were ill-trained to fight insurgencies were "taken out of context."
"They were comments made of a general nature about the need to focus training of NATO and the alliance on counter insurgency," MacKay said of Gates' explanation.
"He made similar comments, quite frankly, when we were in Scotland at the RC south (the southern Afghanistan regional command) defense ministers conference talking about the need to specifically gear training of the NATO alliance towards counter-insurgency," MacKay said.
"And so his comments were certainly not directed at Canada."
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iCe27wF_cAkNnjBSMj1K7bJSYJIw
Canadian Defense Minister Peter MacKay on Wednesday played down criticism of the capabilities of NATO troops in Afghanistan by US Defense Secretary Robert Gates, saying Gates told him the remarks were reported out of context.
Noting that Gates praised Canada's military performance just the day before, MacKay said Gates had just told him by telephone that comments published in the Los Angeles Times that most NATO forces were ill-trained to fight insurgencies were "taken out of context."
"They were comments made of a general nature about the need to focus training of NATO and the alliance on counter insurgency," MacKay said of Gates' explanation.
"He made similar comments, quite frankly, when we were in Scotland at the RC south (the southern Afghanistan regional command) defense ministers conference talking about the need to specifically gear training of the NATO alliance towards counter-insurgency," MacKay said.
"And so his comments were certainly not directed at Canada."
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iCe27wF_cAkNnjBSMj1K7bJSYJIw
- Reaction score
- 7,690
- Points
- 1,360
Here we find a bit of everybody, with a fair bit of clarification from SecDef's spokesperson, shared with the usual disclaimer....
Pentagon Moves to Blunt Gates' Rebuke of NATO Allies
By Al Pessin, Voice of America, 16 Jan 08
Pessin report - Download (mp3) 894k audio clip
Listen to Pessin report audio clip
The Pentagon is moving to blunt concern and criticism that is already coming from European allies, in the wake of an article in Wednesday's Los Angeles Times. The article quotes Defense Secretary Robert Gates as saying some NATO forces in Afghanistan have not been properly trained for the challenges they face there. VOA's Al Pessin reports from the Pentagon.
The article quotes Secretary Gates as saying he is "worried" that NATO is deploying some military advisers and combat forces that, in his words, "are not properly trained and...don't know how to do counterinsurgency operations."
Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell says Secretary Gates was not misquoted, but that he is "disturbed" that the article implies he was critical of individual NATO countries. The article was published the day after the United States announced it will send 3,000 marines to Afghanistan, most of them to help NATO troops in restive southern areas.
"For the record, he did not -- to the L.A. Times or at any time otherwise -- publicly ever criticize any single country for the performance in or commitment to the mission in Afghanistan," said Morrell.
Rather, Morrell says, Gates was lamenting that NATO, as an alliance, has not updated its training to include counterinsurgency operations.
"As a result, he is concerned, and has expressed that concern to our allies, that we may be sending these Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams to Afghanistan which are not properly trained," said Morrell.
Morrell says Secretary Gates made similar points in December during meetings with NATO nations that have troops in Southern Afghanistan. But the Los Angeles Times quotes the secretary as saying none of the other NATO ministers said they agreed with his assessment.
The Times quotes unnamed U.S. military officers as saying their experience in Afghanistan supports the secretary's comments. They accuse NATO nations of using too much brute force, such as air strikes, and not enough foot patrols to provide security and reassure local residents.
The Times also quotes European officers as complaining that the United States allowed the security situation in Afghanistan to deteriorate by keeping too few troops in the country, leaving NATO forces with a particularly difficult situation.
In Europe Wednesday, officials reacted sharply to the Times story. The Dutch defense minister, who has troops to southern Afghanistan, called in the U.S. ambassador for an explanation. The minister Eimert van Middelkoop was quoted as saying "we do not recognize ourselves" in the Gates comments, and said it must be "a misunderstanding."
The Associated Press quotes the Dutch commander in Afghanistan's Uruzgan Province Colonel Nico Geerts as saying his troops "are well-prepared" for their mission. The Netherlands recently extended its commitment to Afghanistan until 2010.
In addition to the Dutch, there are large British and Canadian contingents in southern Afghanistan. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said he has "the greatest respect" for what alliance members are doing in Afghanistan, particularly in the south.
The United States has frequently criticized NATO for not providing enough troops for Afghanistan, but has not publicly questioned its competence or preparation. The Pentagon press secretary, Geoff Morrell, stressed that Secretary Gates appreciates the contributions of NATO members who have sent troops to Afghanistan.
"He has gone to great pains to praise those countries who are, at great risk to their own militaries, taking the fight to the enemy in RC [Regional Command] South," said Morrell. "He has gone to great pains to praise the Canadians, to praise the Dutch, to praise the Brits for their professionalism, for their commitment and for their bravery."
Secretary Gates will meet with NATO defense ministers at a regular meeting early next month. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet with some of her European counterparts next week.
Pentagon Moves to Blunt Gates' Rebuke of NATO Allies
By Al Pessin, Voice of America, 16 Jan 08
Pessin report - Download (mp3) 894k audio clip
Listen to Pessin report audio clip
The Pentagon is moving to blunt concern and criticism that is already coming from European allies, in the wake of an article in Wednesday's Los Angeles Times. The article quotes Defense Secretary Robert Gates as saying some NATO forces in Afghanistan have not been properly trained for the challenges they face there. VOA's Al Pessin reports from the Pentagon.
The article quotes Secretary Gates as saying he is "worried" that NATO is deploying some military advisers and combat forces that, in his words, "are not properly trained and...don't know how to do counterinsurgency operations."
Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell says Secretary Gates was not misquoted, but that he is "disturbed" that the article implies he was critical of individual NATO countries. The article was published the day after the United States announced it will send 3,000 marines to Afghanistan, most of them to help NATO troops in restive southern areas.
"For the record, he did not -- to the L.A. Times or at any time otherwise -- publicly ever criticize any single country for the performance in or commitment to the mission in Afghanistan," said Morrell.
Rather, Morrell says, Gates was lamenting that NATO, as an alliance, has not updated its training to include counterinsurgency operations.
"As a result, he is concerned, and has expressed that concern to our allies, that we may be sending these Operational Mentoring and Liaison Teams to Afghanistan which are not properly trained," said Morrell.
Morrell says Secretary Gates made similar points in December during meetings with NATO nations that have troops in Southern Afghanistan. But the Los Angeles Times quotes the secretary as saying none of the other NATO ministers said they agreed with his assessment.
The Times quotes unnamed U.S. military officers as saying their experience in Afghanistan supports the secretary's comments. They accuse NATO nations of using too much brute force, such as air strikes, and not enough foot patrols to provide security and reassure local residents.
The Times also quotes European officers as complaining that the United States allowed the security situation in Afghanistan to deteriorate by keeping too few troops in the country, leaving NATO forces with a particularly difficult situation.
In Europe Wednesday, officials reacted sharply to the Times story. The Dutch defense minister, who has troops to southern Afghanistan, called in the U.S. ambassador for an explanation. The minister Eimert van Middelkoop was quoted as saying "we do not recognize ourselves" in the Gates comments, and said it must be "a misunderstanding."
The Associated Press quotes the Dutch commander in Afghanistan's Uruzgan Province Colonel Nico Geerts as saying his troops "are well-prepared" for their mission. The Netherlands recently extended its commitment to Afghanistan until 2010.
In addition to the Dutch, there are large British and Canadian contingents in southern Afghanistan. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said he has "the greatest respect" for what alliance members are doing in Afghanistan, particularly in the south.
The United States has frequently criticized NATO for not providing enough troops for Afghanistan, but has not publicly questioned its competence or preparation. The Pentagon press secretary, Geoff Morrell, stressed that Secretary Gates appreciates the contributions of NATO members who have sent troops to Afghanistan.
"He has gone to great pains to praise those countries who are, at great risk to their own militaries, taking the fight to the enemy in RC [Regional Command] South," said Morrell. "He has gone to great pains to praise the Canadians, to praise the Dutch, to praise the Brits for their professionalism, for their commitment and for their bravery."
Secretary Gates will meet with NATO defense ministers at a regular meeting early next month. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet with some of her European counterparts next week.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Just out curiosity I wonder if there is a counter-insurgency manual (or whatever the heck they called it back then) at the National Archives of Canada for the Boer War? Was that Canada's last counter-insurgency? Or do we count the Russian Revolution? Maybe this is an inappropriate thread to have this discussion but is there anything we can learn from those past counter-insurgencies as well as those of the 1883-5 Nile Expedition or even the Riel Rebellion?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I doesn't matter what or how it was said or who published it, the enemy reads newspapers and I'm sure their having a good chuckle at our expense. I think that officials in high places should carefully censor there chatter. No matter how mundane it may sound, some journalist or reporter will be willing to run with it and make it into something it's not and this is a perfect example.
"Loose lips sink ships". "Zip It". I think from now on what ever Secretary Gates says should go through a press Secretary and be worded so there is no room for interpretation, because this type of blunder just gives the enemy exactly what they want.
"Loose lips sink ships". "Zip It". I think from now on what ever Secretary Gates says should go through a press Secretary and be worded so there is no room for interpretation, because this type of blunder just gives the enemy exactly what they want.
- Reaction score
- 7,690
- Points
- 1,360
retiredgrunt45 said:
I'm scratching my head at how the media handled this, too, but it might be a bit drastic having public officials (like Cabinet Ministers here) speaking to citizens ONLY through spokespeople, dontcha think?
I'll be interested to see how easy it is to get a transcript of the original exchange...
- Reaction score
- 66
- Points
- 530
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=48688
Gates Says NATO Allies 'Committed' to Mission in Afghanistan
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16, 2008 – U.S. defense officials made it clear today that while they appreciate the hard work NATO troop-contributing nations are doing in Afghanistan, more counterinsurgency training would help further the allies' success.
In response to reports that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was displeased with NATO allies, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said that the secretary praises the allies’ work. But, he added, the secretary is concerned about their need for counterinsurgency training.
“At no time did he ever criticize any single country for their performance in, or commitment to the mission in Afghanistan,” Morrell said.
Gates has praised the countries involved in the fight in Afghanistan’s Regional Command South, he said, and has many times singled out Canadian, British and Dutch forces “for their professionalism, commitment and bravery in their work in RC-South.”
Gates has noted, however, that NATO as an alliance does not train for counterinsurgency,” Morrell said. “The alliance has never had to do it before.”
NATO came into being in 1949 as a defensive alliance aimed at the Soviet Union. NATO forces were structured to stop the Soviet Union’s Red Army from coming through the Fulda Gap in West Germany and striking through Western Europe.
Gates “is concerned, and he expressed that to the allies, that we may be sending operational mentoring and liaison teams to Afghanistan which are not properly trained,” Morrell said.
These teams go to train the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. Gates is concerned that the teams are not well-schooled in counterinsurgency tactics and strategies, Morrell said.
“That’s why there has been a push to send OMLTs to Hohenfels (in Germany) to get counterinsurgency training before going to Afghanistan,” he said, using the military shorthand term for operational mentoring and liaison teams.
The U.S. 7th Army Training Center runs a training area at the base that trains Europe-based American units that are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Gates has seen the progress that forces and civilian organizations can make in following a counterinsurgency regimen, Morrell said. The secretary has visited Khowst in Regional Command East and has seen how American forces have had success with counterinsurgency.
“We’ve been doing this for six or seven years, so we are figuring it out,” Morrell said. “It’s taken us a long time to get there. We’re only now enjoying that kind of cohesive counterinsurgency success in RC East.”
The bottom line with Gates is that he is concerned with NATO and how it is structured to deal with counterinsurgencies, Morrell said, adding that the secretary is not worried about any particular country.
“Everybody is putting themselves on the line to go after the Taliban and al Qaeda,” Morrell said. “They are doing an astoundingly brave job
Gates Says NATO Allies 'Committed' to Mission in Afghanistan
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 16, 2008 – U.S. defense officials made it clear today that while they appreciate the hard work NATO troop-contributing nations are doing in Afghanistan, more counterinsurgency training would help further the allies' success.
In response to reports that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was displeased with NATO allies, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said that the secretary praises the allies’ work. But, he added, the secretary is concerned about their need for counterinsurgency training.
“At no time did he ever criticize any single country for their performance in, or commitment to the mission in Afghanistan,” Morrell said.
Gates has praised the countries involved in the fight in Afghanistan’s Regional Command South, he said, and has many times singled out Canadian, British and Dutch forces “for their professionalism, commitment and bravery in their work in RC-South.”
Gates has noted, however, that NATO as an alliance does not train for counterinsurgency,” Morrell said. “The alliance has never had to do it before.”
NATO came into being in 1949 as a defensive alliance aimed at the Soviet Union. NATO forces were structured to stop the Soviet Union’s Red Army from coming through the Fulda Gap in West Germany and striking through Western Europe.
Gates “is concerned, and he expressed that to the allies, that we may be sending operational mentoring and liaison teams to Afghanistan which are not properly trained,” Morrell said.
These teams go to train the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police. Gates is concerned that the teams are not well-schooled in counterinsurgency tactics and strategies, Morrell said.
“That’s why there has been a push to send OMLTs to Hohenfels (in Germany) to get counterinsurgency training before going to Afghanistan,” he said, using the military shorthand term for operational mentoring and liaison teams.
The U.S. 7th Army Training Center runs a training area at the base that trains Europe-based American units that are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Gates has seen the progress that forces and civilian organizations can make in following a counterinsurgency regimen, Morrell said. The secretary has visited Khowst in Regional Command East and has seen how American forces have had success with counterinsurgency.
“We’ve been doing this for six or seven years, so we are figuring it out,” Morrell said. “It’s taken us a long time to get there. We’re only now enjoying that kind of cohesive counterinsurgency success in RC East.”
The bottom line with Gates is that he is concerned with NATO and how it is structured to deal with counterinsurgencies, Morrell said, adding that the secretary is not worried about any particular country.
“Everybody is putting themselves on the line to go after the Taliban and al Qaeda,” Morrell said. “They are doing an astoundingly brave job
- Reaction score
- 7,690
- Points
- 1,360
And a bit more....
Gates rejects reports of NATO criticism
William H. McMichael, Air Force Times, 17 Jan 08
Article link - .pdf permalink
On the heels of recommending a new U.S. troop deployment to support NATO operations in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is “disturbed” that a news story published Wednesday made it seem like he was criticizing America’s NATO partners in Afghanistan for lacking essential counterinsurgency skills, a Pentagon spokesman told reporters today.
The story, published in the Los Angeles Times, drew immediate criticism from NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.
“I’m surprised because I have no indication — and neither has the military chain of command — that any country or countries are not exercising their tasks to the highest levels,” de Hoop Scheffer told Reuters. “I think there is no reason not to conclude that all nations, including the ones in the south, are performing very well.”
The 43,000-member International Security Assistance Force is currently commanded by U.S. Army Gen. Dan McNeil; current major troop contributors include Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, Estonia, Romania and the U.S., which has 14,000 troops assigned to the force.
The story begins: “In an unusual public criticism, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said he believes NATO forces currently deployed in southern Afghanistan do not know how to combat a guerrilla insurgency, a deficiency that could be contributing to the rising violence in the fight against the Taliban.”
The story was based on a Jan. 7 interview, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. That was four days before Gates was briefed on the proposal, since approved by President Bush, to send 3,200 Marines to Afghanistan to help fend off what is expected to be an attempt at a spring offensive by Taliban insurgents.
Morrell said Gates did not take exception to any of the quoted material in the story. But “the totality of the piece leaves the impression that the secretary is disturbed with the performance of individual countries in Afghanistan. He is not. He has never expressed such concerns, publicly, to anyone,” Morrell said.
“His criticism ... is exactly what he told the Alliance” in December and repeated to the newspaper in January, Morrell said. “And that is that we as an Alliance have to adjust better to the new reality we find ourselves in — which is not preparing to fight the Soviet army coming through the Fulda Gap, but to fight what may be a persistent threat in the future.”
The Alliance, he said, is “having to make up for those failings,” he said.
Gates is specifically concerned, Morrell said, that NATO is sending to Afghanistan improperly trained 16- to 20-member operational mentoring and liaison teams, known as OMLTs, to conduct training for Afghani army and police forces.
De Hoop Scheffer told Reuters that while he had not verified Gates’ comments, he did not recall Gates having raised the issue of counterinsurgency capability with him or at NATO meetings.
Gates has publicly and repeatedly expressed concern that other NATO countries have not contributed enough combat forces and other capabilities to the coalition effort in Afghanistan — which, he said during a Dec. 19 news conference, “remains threatened by ruthless extremists and destructive narcotics trade.”
Gates has said the International Security Assistance Force is short about 3,500 trainers, and a total of 7,500 additional troops would be needed to meet every command requirement.
Gates expressed no concern during that news conference over any lack of capability in any member nation’s troops.
Gates renewed his manpower concerns at a December meeting of NATO defense ministers in Scotland but acknowledged that “political realities” make it difficult, if not impossible, for some members to increase their commitments of troops. He said he would look for more “creative” solutions, such as an increase in funding for specific needs, like helicopter maintenance.
The NATO effort to rebuild and secure Afghanistan, Gates said Dec. 19, “must be sustained and expanded into next year and beyond.”
Gates rejects reports of NATO criticism
William H. McMichael, Air Force Times, 17 Jan 08
Article link - .pdf permalink
On the heels of recommending a new U.S. troop deployment to support NATO operations in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is “disturbed” that a news story published Wednesday made it seem like he was criticizing America’s NATO partners in Afghanistan for lacking essential counterinsurgency skills, a Pentagon spokesman told reporters today.
The story, published in the Los Angeles Times, drew immediate criticism from NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.
“I’m surprised because I have no indication — and neither has the military chain of command — that any country or countries are not exercising their tasks to the highest levels,” de Hoop Scheffer told Reuters. “I think there is no reason not to conclude that all nations, including the ones in the south, are performing very well.”
The 43,000-member International Security Assistance Force is currently commanded by U.S. Army Gen. Dan McNeil; current major troop contributors include Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, Estonia, Romania and the U.S., which has 14,000 troops assigned to the force.
The story begins: “In an unusual public criticism, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said he believes NATO forces currently deployed in southern Afghanistan do not know how to combat a guerrilla insurgency, a deficiency that could be contributing to the rising violence in the fight against the Taliban.”
The story was based on a Jan. 7 interview, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. That was four days before Gates was briefed on the proposal, since approved by President Bush, to send 3,200 Marines to Afghanistan to help fend off what is expected to be an attempt at a spring offensive by Taliban insurgents.
Morrell said Gates did not take exception to any of the quoted material in the story. But “the totality of the piece leaves the impression that the secretary is disturbed with the performance of individual countries in Afghanistan. He is not. He has never expressed such concerns, publicly, to anyone,” Morrell said.
“His criticism ... is exactly what he told the Alliance” in December and repeated to the newspaper in January, Morrell said. “And that is that we as an Alliance have to adjust better to the new reality we find ourselves in — which is not preparing to fight the Soviet army coming through the Fulda Gap, but to fight what may be a persistent threat in the future.”
The Alliance, he said, is “having to make up for those failings,” he said.
Gates is specifically concerned, Morrell said, that NATO is sending to Afghanistan improperly trained 16- to 20-member operational mentoring and liaison teams, known as OMLTs, to conduct training for Afghani army and police forces.
De Hoop Scheffer told Reuters that while he had not verified Gates’ comments, he did not recall Gates having raised the issue of counterinsurgency capability with him or at NATO meetings.
Gates has publicly and repeatedly expressed concern that other NATO countries have not contributed enough combat forces and other capabilities to the coalition effort in Afghanistan — which, he said during a Dec. 19 news conference, “remains threatened by ruthless extremists and destructive narcotics trade.”
Gates has said the International Security Assistance Force is short about 3,500 trainers, and a total of 7,500 additional troops would be needed to meet every command requirement.
Gates expressed no concern during that news conference over any lack of capability in any member nation’s troops.
Gates renewed his manpower concerns at a December meeting of NATO defense ministers in Scotland but acknowledged that “political realities” make it difficult, if not impossible, for some members to increase their commitments of troops. He said he would look for more “creative” solutions, such as an increase in funding for specific needs, like helicopter maintenance.
The NATO effort to rebuild and secure Afghanistan, Gates said Dec. 19, “must be sustained and expanded into next year and beyond.”
To address Stegner's post first, many members who have posted here are well studied in counter-insurgency operations. There was not a specific manual for the Boer War, but the British relied heavily upon their experience in other wars on the fringes of the Empire. Mind you, the concept of operations they employed in South Africa would be unacceptable today, especially the use of concentration camps to separate the Boers from the civilian population. Goodness knows, it was attacked in the press at the time. To take your query further, during the North West Rebellion Riel had decided to defend the Batoche area on the South Saskatchewan River and not harass the advance of Middleton's forces. This was widely considered at the time to have been a strategic error that doomed the already meagre chances for Metis success.
I am not sure that the term counter-insurgency is valid for Afghanistan. I think it is too narrow. Depending upon the area and the time of the year our forces may be engaged with large, disciplined bodies of Taliban troops or very small groups engaged in ambushes, IED attacks and the like. Does three block war fit? Dunno, but I am leaning to little war as being general enough to encompass a wide operational range.
Last, yesterday I saw an interview on Mike Duffy Live with the reporter who wrote the LA Times story. He said it was based on an interview with Gates on an aircraft returning from Afghanistan last week and that he (the reporter) has a taped record of their conversation.
I am not sure that the term counter-insurgency is valid for Afghanistan. I think it is too narrow. Depending upon the area and the time of the year our forces may be engaged with large, disciplined bodies of Taliban troops or very small groups engaged in ambushes, IED attacks and the like. Does three block war fit? Dunno, but I am leaning to little war as being general enough to encompass a wide operational range.
Last, yesterday I saw an interview on Mike Duffy Live with the reporter who wrote the LA Times story. He said it was based on an interview with Gates on an aircraft returning from Afghanistan last week and that he (the reporter) has a taped record of their conversation.
