MILITARY ~ Honor, Duty, Country

[rdavis8325]

Outside View: Shock and awe redux

Afghan elections credible and a security success: NATO chief
NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen hailed Thursday's Afghanistan presidential election "a success" in security terms and credible for the Afghan people. "Seen from a security point of view the election has been a success," Rasmussen said in comments on the NATO website published during a visit to Iceland. "All-in-all the election today has been conducted effectively," he added. "The most important thing is that the elections will be considered credible in the eyes of the Afghan people," said Rasmussen, who recently visited Afghanistan. The nationwide elections were "a testimony to the determination of the Afghan people to build democracy," added the former Danish prime minister "I want to congratulate the people of Afghanistan for the courage they have shown in spite of challenging circumstances. We have seen Afghans defying threats of intimidation and violence to exercise their democratic rights." In Kabul the Afghan government said it was "satisfied" with voter turnout at Thursday's landmark presidential and provincial elections. There were sporadic outbreaks of violence and militants stormed one town in the normally peaceful north. However Rasmussen, who took over the top job at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation this month, praised the Afghan security forces, saying "they have done everything possible to make these elections as secure and as inclusive as possible." The world "knew in advance that the enemies of Afghanistan would try to block the road towards the elections through a series of terrorist attacks," and the Afghan forces "should be applauded," declared Rasmussen in the comments carried live on-line. He met all the presidential candidates during his recent trip to Kabul and urged them to handle the outcome of the elections "in a responsible manner." He was assured that the would by their avowed "willingness to cooperate after the elections and embark on a reconciliation process which I think is the way forward." In earlier comments in Reykjavik the tone was equally upbeat, with Rasmussen saying that more polling stations had been open than expected. While proclaiming that the election turnout was "a clear demonstration that the Afghan people want democracy, they want freedom and reject terrorism," he also alluded to reports of vote-buying and corruption. Rasmussen was in Iceland to attend a meeting of Baltic and Nordic foreign ministers, who were set to discuss a number of foreign and regional policy issues during the two-day event. Afghans went to the polls Thursday to elect a president for the second time in history. Seventeen million of them registered to vote and they will also elect 420 councillors in 34 provinces across the largely rural and impoverished country. Pre-election violence stoked fears about whether it would prove safe to vote despite thousands of US and NATO troops stepping up anti-insurgency assaults. Voting centres closed officially at 4:00 pm (1130 GMT), guarded by a huge deployment of 300,000 Afghan and foreign forces. But the election commission s|aid people still in queues would be allowed to cast ballots. (AFP Report and AFP file image)
by Harlan Ullman
Islamabad, Pakistan (UPI) Aug 19, 2009
The apparent elimination of Tehrik-e-Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud two weeks ago in a Predator strike is, on balance, very good news. Mehsud was a villain, murderer and reportedly the mastermind of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's assassination just after her return home as well as responsible for the killing of 1,500 or more fellow citizens in a reign of terror that lasted far too long. Whether Mehsud's demise will provoke a bloodbath in determining a successor, eliminating a major Pakistani Taliban leader will have political and psychological impact and distract the attention of the insurgents for time away from staging major attacks against the government and public.

The strategy in these Predator strikes is one of decapitation -- if you cut off enough heads, the multiheaded hydra will die. The risks are obvious. Kill one and another may be eager to take his place. Kill any and the rest will accuse you of murdering innocent civilians irrespective of the facts. And continue the raids and alienate the Pakistani public who see these attacks as directed against their sovereignty and against their fellow citizens, Taliban or not.

That said, the profoundly and inherently difficult and even intractable problems of dealing with the Taliban and other insurgents on and along both sides of the Pakistani-Afghan border form the heart of the dilemma and the urgency in bringing some measure of peace and stability to the region. The history -- from Alexander the Great to creating and supporting the mujahedin in running out the Soviets -- is well known. Yesterday's allies become today's enemies. And, from the Pakistani perspective, fearful of yet another American withdrawal from the region, ambivalence in dealing with the Afghan Taliban who form an insurance policy should history repeat and Washington retract its commitments is a reality and possible immovable obstacle to progress.

What should be done? First, the strategy of decapitation can work -- if. And the "if" is a big one. Second, assuming the "if" can be addressed operationally and strategically, implementing that strategy will require large quid pro quos on the part of the United States for Pakistan.

In the mid-1990s, I was part of a group of former military and civilian defense officials who created what became known as the doctrine of "shock and awe." The aim of "shock and awe" was to affect, influence and control the will and perception of the adversary through a variety of means including the use of force to achieve particular outcomes. In other words, one started with the desired outcome and worked backwards. Unfortunately, in the run-up to Operation Iraqi Freedom in early 2003, the notion of shock and awe was used in precisely the opposite way.

The objective was a spectacular defeat of the Iraqi army and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein rather than the establishment of a pluralistic state under the rule of law. Militarily, the operation was hugely successful and perhaps the most lopsided victory in the annals of war. Politically, strategically and economically, the war was, to use the title of an important book on the operation, a fiasco.

Fast-forward to Pakistan: a strategy of shock and awe to eliminate the key leadership of both the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban is feasible provided accurate and timely targeting intelligence is available. Knowing the certainty or near certainty of being hit by Predator strikes, Taliban insurgents surely will be open to some form of negotiation as these insurgents are not al-Qaida and all do not hold similar views about martyrdom. But success will require complete support from the Pakistan side -- something that has not been fully forthcoming.

To achieve that support, the United States needs to affect and influence -- not control -- perceptions of the Pakistani public and elite. Symbolism is as important as action. Here, if we are serious, several quids are essential. First, the United States has imposed large tariffs on the import of textiles from Pakistan, higher than for any other country. While Congress has been inflexible in reducing those tariffs, there could not be a more significant and symbolic step than to cut them.

Second, while the United States has poured many hundreds of billions of dollars into Iraq and now Afghanistan, it has been miserly in its support to Pakistan with a population nearly three times larger than the total of the two other states.

Third, and given the $20 billion economic package signed with India, now is the time to put Indo-Pakistan relations on a truly peaceful track.

But are we serious? If we are, the above will indeed be a powerful and positive display of shock and awe that will turn the tide in Pakistan and by extension in Afghanistan. If not, the outcome will not be happy one.

(Harlan Ullman was co-chairman of the group that invented shock and awe.)

http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Outside_View_Shock_and_awe_redux_999.html