Afghanistan: Beyond the Politics and Propaganda, The War of Logistics

Less than two weeks after the Presidential election, the political narrative is unravelling in Afghanistan. The New York Times offers a black-comedy "Really? You Don't Say" moment with its headline, "Increasing Accounts of Fraud Cloud Afghan Vote", while Dexter Filkins, the highly-praised Times reporter, turns from recent rah-rah cheerleading of the US military to pronounce, "Seven Days That Shook Afghanistan: a string of disturbing military and political events revealed not just the extraordinary burdens that lie ahead for the Americans and Afghans toiling to create a stable nation, but the fragility of the very enterprise itself".

Still, the US military will press on. The US commander, General Stanley McChrystal, will confirm today in his report to the President that he wants 20,000 more troops. The "private" publicity machine is already in motion, with top analyst/promoter Anthony Cordesman (who happened to advise McChrystal during the report's development) given space in The Washington Post to declare that the General should get Everything He Wants: "We have a reasonable chance of victory if we properly outfit and empower our new team in Afghanistan; we face certain defeat if we do not."

Amidst these predictable political developments and military escalations, Juan Cole offers a valuable reminder of the complexities of the battle:

Are the Taliban Surrounding NATO Armies and Cutting them Off?

There is an old saying in military affairs, that everyone wants to do strategy and tactics, but real men do logistics. That is, moving persons and materiel around and managing supplies seems tedious, but they are crucial to success. The Obama administration has substituted the Logistics of War for the War on Terror. It is moving troops and equipment and assets around in the millions, on a vast scale, and therefore its enemies--whether the Sunni radicals in Iraq or the neo-Taliban, are also concentrating on logistics. The staccato, desultory news items of bombings here and air strikes there, make sense if the individual incidents are viewed as struggles over supply lines-- whether supply lines for military purposes, or supplies of intangibles such as international legitimacy. And in this context, the gingerness with which Washington is now approaching Russia and Iran makes perfect sense.

The logistics war in AfPak were on full view Sunday, with the long fingers of blazing conflagrations jabbing the sky amidst billowing waves of jet black smoke both in Chaman in Pakistan near the Afghan border, and in Kunar Province. The bombing of supply trucks is to this war what u-boat attacks on supply ships were to the two world wars.

Read rest of article...