
Photo: David Guttenfelder / AP
The Americans are in their fourth day of an offensive surge in Helmand province, former British stronghold for the ISAF forces in Afghanistan, and the enemy is melting away as they approach. A lightning force of 4,000 marines has been sent to clear out the insurgency there, as Barack Obama begins his most important foreign policy decision in office. The operation is called “Khanjar”, or “Strike of the Sword”, and has been made possible by the 17,000-strong increase in troops from the U.S. and former Iraq veterans.
The operation, with coordination of Afghan and Pakistani troops, has seen thousands of marines storm Helmand river valley, and the success of the operation could be a pivotal one in the current stalemate. It is riskiest move since George W. Bush and General David Petraeus implemented a surge in Iraq to contain the insurgency during the worst days of the Iraq war. The goal of the blitzkrieg, a German world war two strategy used to overwhelm the enemy before they have time to respond, is to rout the Taliban as they inevitably attempt to flee the province to safer ground. The hope is that the move will win hearts and minds, as villagers see how committed the U.S. is to winning. As well, the new directive to U.S. troops, to not fire when civilians could be hurt or killed, seems to have worked. No civilians have been reported killed in the offensive so far.
All reports are that the Taliban has fled from the onslaught of U.S. troops, with sporadic gunfire and RPG attacks being repelled by helicopters and infantry. The pincer attack has been aimed at sending the Taliban at the Pakistani border, where the military there awaits to stop any attempts to sneak across. As a last resort, however, the militants could refuge in the mountains, where it would be difficult to track them. Victory in Helmand would be seen as a great change in the war against the extremists, as NATO tries to create as much security as possible before the August presidential elections.
There have been reprisal attacks, but those have been easily repelled, with the Taliban taking heavy casualties for their efforts [as usual]. The new offensive is meant to assure residents of a long-term American presence in the area, so as not to lose out to cynical fears whereby in the past the Taliban had returned to liberated areas when NATO troops moved on. As a local in Lashkar Gah says:
“But I am not optimistic. [These] operations are like the cat-and-mouse cartoon where the mouse escapes when the cat attacks, but when the cat is gone the mouse comes back and starts again.”
The long-term strategy is to stay in Helmand until the end of the Afghan elections, after which they will assist in getting Afghan security forces settled in a patrol circuit to repel Taliban approaches. Ultimately the Americans admit that they are a stop-gap measure. True success remains in setting up an accountable government that is responsive to it’s own security needs, and the stable economy and governmental services that go with it. While I remain hopeful of this current offensive to maintain the first set of goals, I feel skeptical that the Karzai government will be the one to provide the kind of long-term stability that this mission needs to really succeed.
















July 5, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Not entirely sure you’ve got the emphasis in the right place, Raphael. Blitzkrieg involved smashing the enemy in their weak point with overwhelming force, and then encircling them. The focus was on capture and kill.
I don’t think this is about crushing or even routing the Taliban. The Taliban generally flee whenever they see NATO forces anyway. It’s about camping out in a village and staying until it’s secure. It’s a “nation-building” operation, unless this Marine is being quoted incorrectly:
http://tinyurl.com/mepz5a
The aim of the operation in Helmand is not simply to kill Taliban fighters but to win over the local population, Captain Pelletier said — a difficult task in a region where foreigners are viewed with suspicion.
“We are not worried about the Taliban, we are not focused on them,” he said. “We are focused on the people. It is important to engage with the key leaders, hear what they need most and what are their priorities.”
July 5, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Brian,
No, it isn’t about routing and crushing the Taliban in the literal sense. Nor is the term blitzkrieg used in it’s proper historical comparisons to the Germans. But what the Americans are doing is trying to find a way of marginalizing the Taliban in Helmand with the ultimate goal towards reducing and mitigating the Taliban insurgency. And the speed and tactics they are using are worthy of comparison to the German word, which means lightning war.
Other than that, I think I emphasized the hearts and minds aspect of the campaign in the end of the second paragraph. Ultimately the goal is to provide security, gain confidence from the people, and assist in the development of their own autonomy.
July 6, 2009 at 3:53 am
until a all out effort is undertaken to kill all the enemy then this war will go on and on. a massive effort similar to ww2 will be required to eliminate islamic jihad and make no mistake about it the taliban are islamic jihad.
July 6, 2009 at 11:08 am
I saw that you had written that, Raphael…my concern was with your emphasis. This post is titled “A Blitzkrieg Surge To Crush The Taliban.” I really think that’s not a good representation of what’s going on here.
I’m not trying to nitpick. The way these operations get covered matters. It affects the public debate.
Again, assuming we can take the leaders of the offensive at their word, this Helmand operation is not about aggressiveness at all, but about a permanent presence to build up governance and stability. Rajiv Chandrasekaran had a good article in the Washington Post on this: http://tinyurl.com/n4gqx9
There was an interesting post at Registan on the completely different ways this operation is being covered in the media (which is partly why I’m giving you a hard time about this): http://tinyurl.com/m46pbq
July 6, 2009 at 8:20 pm
Brian,
Your link is interesting. Two articles about the same thing, but with vastly different messages.
So you wouldn’t characterize this as a “surge”? Or it’s the German word and “crush” that you really object to?
July 7, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Raphael: Brian has a point. Blitzkrieg (though in 1940 during the invasion of France it was not a German military term) essentially means defeating the enemy rapidly and utterly by a swift attack that so unhinges his forces, especially their command and control, that they are helpless before the attacker–regardess of other military factors such as the actual strength of the opposing sides and the quality and numbers of their equipment.
That does not apply in Helmand.
In fact in 1940 the French and British had about as many tanks as the Wehrmacht, and generally better ones. But…A book worth reading about a “Strange Victory“.
Mark
Ottawa