Taliban Outflank U.S. War Strategy with Insider Attacks
Sharply increased attacks on U.S. and other NATO personnel by Afghan security forces, reflecting both infiltration of and Taliban influence on those forces, appear to have outflanked the U.S.-NATO command’s strategy for maintaining control of the insurgency.
The Taliban-instigated “insider attacks”, which have already killed 51 NATO troops in 2012 – already 45 percent more than in all of 2011 – have created such distrust of the Afghan National Army (ANA) and national police that the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) command has suspended joint operations by NATO forces with Afghan security units smaller than the 800-strong battalion of Kandak and vowed to limit them in the future.
ISAF had intended to carry out intensive partnering and advising of ANA and police units below battalion level through 2012 to get them ready to take responsibility for Afghan security. Now, however, that strategy appears to have been disrupted by the insider attacks, and Afghan military and civilian officials are seriously concerned.
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta sought to minimize the crisis in US war strategy Tuesday by calling the inside attacks on NATO troops the “last gasp” of a Taliban insurgency that has been “unable to regain any of the territory that they have lost.” The “last gasp” phrase recalls then Vice-President Dick Cheney’s infamous 2005 claim that the Iraqi insurgency was “in its last throes”.
But Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, who has no apparent personal stake in touting the existing strategy in Afghanistan, called the attacks “a very serious threat to the campaign” in an interview on Saturday.
“You can’t whitewash it,” said Dempsey. “We can’t convince ourselves that we just have to work harder to get through it. Something has to change.”
The ISAF command also tried to downplay the significance of the decision, portraying it as “temporary” and not unlike previous adjustments to high threat conditions. The ISAF press release vowed that it would “return to normal operations as soon as conditions warrant”.
But the Taliban have power over whether conditions return to a level that would allow resumption of the joint operations between NATO and Afghan forces, which have been touted as the key to preparing the ANA and the police to cope with the Taliban on their own. The Taliban have achieved a strategic coup by creating a high degree of U.S.-NATO fear and mistrust of the Afghan forces.
Even if some joint operations are resumed, moreover, they will be limited to those approved by regional commanders, according to the new policy. And White House spokesman Jay Carney appeared to contradict the ISAF “return to normal operations” language, telling reporters, “Most partnering and advising will now be at the battalion level and above.”
ISAF Commander Gen. John Allen has tried in the past to minimize the role of the Taliban in the insider killings, suggesting that as little as 10 percent of the Afghan soldiers and police who killed NATO troops were Taliban infiltrators. Most of the killers acted out of personal anger at their Western advisers, Allen argued.
But Allen also conceded that, in addition to Taliban infiltrators, some Afghan troops may have acted out of “radicalization or having become susceptible to extremist ideology.”
New evidence suggests that the Taliban had influenced a number of ANA and police who killed NATO personnel. Last month, the Taliban’s media arm released a video showing a Taliban commander in eastern Kunar province welcoming two ANA soldiers who they said had killed US and Afghan troops earlier in the year. Based on the video, the Long War Journal judged that neither of the soldiers had been a Taliban infiltrator but had made the decision in response to Taliban urging.
Douglas Ollivant, who was senior counterinsurgency adviser to the US commander of the regional command for eastern Afghanistan in 2010 and 2011, told IPS the evidence indicates that most Afghan personnel who killed NATO troops and were not already Taliban when they joined the security forces had later become “de facto infiltrators”.
In the Afghan rural social context, the local Taliban and the Afghan troops and soldiers “all know each other”, Ollivant said. “It’s not like they are from two different planets.”
Lt. Col. Danny Davis, who traveled extensively across Afghanistan during his 2010-2011 tour of duty there, found evidence that the Taliban had indeed achieved influence over the Afghan security forces who were supposed to be helping U.S.-NATO forces root out the insurgents.
In a draft report he wrote earlier this year, which had circulated within the US government and was leaked to Rolling Stone magazine, Davis wrote, “In almost every combat outpost I visited this year, the troopers reported to me they had intercepted radio or other traffic between the ANSF and the local Taliban making essentially mini-nonaggression deals with each other.”
In Zharay district of Kandahar province, Davis wrote, he found the Afghan security forces were “in league with the Taliban”.
Taliban spiritual and political leader Mullah Omar issued a statement Aug. 16 saying the Taliban had “cleverly infiltrated the ranks of the enemy according to the plan given them last year.” Omar also called on Afghan security personnel to “defect and joint the Taliban as matter of religious duty”.
For many months the US has been putting intense pressure on the Afghan government to prevent such killings by “revetting” the personnel files of ANA and police personnel. Just last week, the government announced that it had removed “hundreds” of security forces from its ranks.
But there is very little the Afghan government can do to ensure against Afghan troops turning against NATO. “Vetting is virtually impossible in a place like Afghanistan,” former British commander Col. Richard Kemp told the Guardian.
There are no detailed files on the young recruits into the army and police. The only information on the vast majority of new recruits is a statement from village elders vouching for them.
Retired Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, senior fellow and director of communications at the Center for Advanced Defense Studies, told IPS that US officers in Afghanistan don’t believe the Afghan government’s efforts to identify potential Taliban infiltrators or sympathizers will slow the pace of insider killings. “They are all saying it isn’t going to have any effect,” said Shaffer.
The decision by ISAF to pull back from joint operations with smaller Afghan units is regarded by Afghan officials and observers as a major boost to the Taliban and a potentially serious blow to the already shaky ANA and police.
Retired ANA Gen. Atiqullah Amarkhail acknowledged in an interview with IPS that insider attacks “have destroyed the NATO trust in the Afghan security forces”. The halt in joint operations with Afghan security forces will “really embolden and raise the morale of the Taliban”, he said. “The Taliban consider that they have achieved the goal they have been working for and are proud that they made coalition forces stop helping Afghan security forces.”
Amarkhail said he doesn’t believe the ANA will be able to conduct operations without the help of NATO forces, because of poor coordination among Afghan security forces and its lack of modern weapons.
“If the foreign forces do not support and leave the Afghan Army in the present condition, things will get worse,” said Amarkhail. He expressed the fear that the result could be that different elements within the ANA will “turn their guns on each other”.
Dawoud Ahmadi, spokesman for Helmand Province Governor Mohammad Gulab Mangal, also expressed the fear that the ANA in the province will not be able to operate effectively against the Taliban if ISAF halts joint operations with the ANA at lower unit levels.
The spokesman told IPS, “We have problems in Helmand province, especially in the North. If NATO doesn’t help in conducting operations at lower level, the Afghan security forces will face problems, because they are not yet ready to launch operations on their own in that part of the province.”
Inter Press Servce – Shah Noori reported from Kabul.
Read more by Gareth Porter
- SOF Troops Still in Wardak as Joint US-Afghan Probe Continues – March 11th, 2013
- Former Insiders Criticize Iran Policy as US Hegemony – February 25th, 2013
- Bulgarian Revelations Explode Hezbollah Bombing ‘Hypothesis’ – February 17th, 2013
- Iranian Bomb Graph Appears Adapted from One on Internet – December 13th, 2012
- News Media Misled by IAEA Data on Sensitive Iranian Stockpile – November 20th, 2012





Texas Ranger
September 20th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Did Obama approve the change in his war strategy by the Pentagon? I may have missed that speech. Or did the Pentagon just do it because the strategy is a complete failure endangering the troops? It appears that even Obama like most Americans do not care about the war anymore. Honey Boob Boo is America's hero now.
davidgrayling
September 20th, 2012 at 10:48 pm
The U.S. has been outflanked, out-maneuvered, out-played, out-fought, and out-strategied!
A Beacon on a Hill? More a candle at the bottom of a crevasse! Yet still the Worst Nation in the History of the World marches on, telling itself how wonderful it is, how superior!
Someone should really tell it the truth!
davidgrayling
September 20th, 2012 at 10:48 pm
The U.S. has been outflanked, out-maneuvered, out-played, out-fought, and out-strategized!
A Beacon on a Hill? More a candle at the bottom of a crevasse! Yet still the Worst Nation in the History of the World marches on, telling itself how wonderful it is, how superior!
Someone should really tell it the truth!
Tom Mauel
September 20th, 2012 at 10:49 pm
Helmand province was where success of the surge was to be measured. Dozens of U.S. soldiers died in Helmand in the last five years. Now the Taliban effectively control the northern part of the province, on the ground, and total Taliban control is likely in coming weeks.
David Smith
September 21st, 2012 at 3:34 am
The "ISAF" control lasts only as long as the foreign (=American) forces are there. As soon as they leave, the Taliban will come right back. The Taliban are not stupid. They are not going to stand around and get shot. They slip away and wait until the coast is clear, then come back. The Afghan army that we are creating will last about as long as the one that the Soviets trained. Insanity is too mild a term for our "strategy" in Afghanistan.
Roger Lafontaine
September 21st, 2012 at 5:20 am
Interesting article by one of the 3 best reporters in the world (Pepe Escobar, Robert Fisk ?). But who is infiltrating who ? Let's say the US was taken over by a bunch of bullies – let's call them Texans just to make it sound real – and France came over and defeated the Texans and then took over the government and ran the police and military, who do you think Americans would see as the 'infiltrators' or 'outsiders' ? I don't think too many of us would be too happy with French troops running around, speaking in a strange language and imposing their culture on us, and using their 'superweapons' on our towns and suburbs… Maybe the real 'infiltrators' are the Americans, heroes every one of them for sure, Hollywood will confirm that, but still…
curmudgeonvt
September 21st, 2012 at 6:19 am
well said.
Afghanistan – September 2012 « Gazala Line
September 21st, 2012 at 10:14 am
[...] Taliban Outflank U.S. War Strategy with Insider Attacks By Gareth Porter and Shah Noori September 21, 2012 Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. [...]
Dr.Khan
September 21st, 2012 at 11:31 am
Remember while Foreign Military Strategist hold on to the Watch,Time remains in Taliban Control.Death by slow bleeding…
John_Muhammad
September 21st, 2012 at 11:39 am
So now the US knows what it's like to be 'divided and conquered' for a change- but it shouldn't be any surprise. That's what the US has been doing to the Middle East- and the Muslim world in general- for the past century.
Margaret Oils
September 21st, 2012 at 2:33 pm
LOL! At the same time, the US declares the surge was a success and starts to withdraw its troops (to another country with oil, of course).
Margaret Oils
September 21st, 2012 at 2:33 pm
LOL! At the same time, the US declares the surge was a success and starts to withdraw its troops (to another country with oil, of course).
MvGuy
September 21st, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Sun Tzu: when the enemy advances, we retreat; when the enemy
halts, we harass; when the enemy seeks to avoid battle,
we attack; when the enemy retreats, we pursue……………..
Remember VIETNAM, Laos and Cambodia and the secret bombing of those places. Remember “Vietnamization”…?? It's the same now with drones instead of B-52s… making an ever wider circle of new enemies for the endless war… Remember Vietnamizatiuon…..????
“[ The plan was to encourage the South Vietnamese to take more responsibility for fighting the war. It was hoped that this policy would eventually enable the United States to withdraw gradually all their soldiers from Vietnam. To increase the size of the ARVN, a mobilisation law was passed that called up into the army all men in South Vietnam aged between seventeen and forty-three"]
Trying to run a puppet led (occupation) army of conscripted natives may look good on paper, but there are peer dynamics which make such policies unwerkable and even dangerous…. as these “green-on-blue” attack now show..!! It is telling decision that our leaders turn to the same solution they attempted unsuccessfully to rescue their ultimate failure and loss in their Vietnam debacle-cum-rout. William S Lind points out the [operational?] liabilities of “Afghanization” but just think what sort of intellectual fecklessness it illustrates… to even contemplate the exact same policy that cost so dear in our last big military disaster.. Is it that America can’t learn from the past..??
As our government enacts ever expanding utilization of the military to any and all aspects of life at home and throughout the entire world…. it risks a Cuba outcome… All cops and soldiers producing nothing but the enforcement of diktats of the out of touch corrupt leader**** of the husk of what was once a productive and prosperous country………. Collapse has become the only hope, now that "O" has chosen the HOPELESS Neocon/ Bush doctrine to squander our future on dreams of full spectrum domination of the entire planet and do so with fiat paper money………
Trying to run a puppet lead (occupation) army of conscripted natives may look good on paper, but there are peer dynamics which make such policies unwerkable and even dangerous….
It is telling decision that the our leaders turn to the same solution they attempted unsuccessfully to rescue their ultimate failure and loss in their Vietnam debacle-cum-rout. Mr. Lind points out the [operational?] liabilities of “Afghanization” but just think what sort of intellectual fecklessness it illustrates… to even contemplate the exact same policy that cost so dear in our last big military disaster.. Is it that America can’t learn from the past..??
As our government enacts ever expanding utilization of the military to any and all aspects of life at home and throughout the entire world…. we need the expertise and especially historical insight of the results such policies have rendered for us here in America and abroad… We need william S Lind!!
MvGuy
September 21st, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Sun Tzu: when the enemy advances, we retreat; when the enemy
halts, we harass; when the enemy seeks to avoid battle,
we attack; when the enemy retreats, we pursue……………..
Remember VIETNAM, Laos and Cambodia and the secret bombing of those places. It's the same now with drones instead of B-52s… making an ever wider circle of new enemies for the endless profits of endless war…
Remember Vietnamization…..???? “[ The plan was to encourage the South Vietnamese to take more responsibility for fighting the war. It was hoped that this policy would eventually enable the United States to withdraw gradually all their soldiers from Vietnam. To increase the size of the ARVN, a mobilisation law was passed that called up into the army all men in South Vietnam aged between seventeen and forty-three"]
Trying to run a puppet led (occupation) army of conscripted natives may look good on paper, but there are peer dynamics which make such policies unwerkable and even dangerous…. as these “green-on-blue” attack now show..!! It is telling decision that our leaders turn to the same solution they attempted unsuccessfully to rescue their ultimate failure and loss in their Vietnam debacle-cum-rout. William S Lind points out the [operational?] liabilities of “Afghanization” but just think what sort of intellectual fecklessness it illustrates… to even contemplate the exact same policy that cost so dear in our last big military disaster.. Is it that America can’t learn from the past..??
As our government enacts ever expanding utilization of the military to any and all aspects of life at home and throughout the entire world…. it risks a Cuba outcome… All cops and soldiers producing nothing but the enforcement of diktats of the out of touch corrupt leader**** in the husk of what was once a productive and prosperous country………. Collapse has become the only hope, now that "O" has chosen the HOPELESS Neocon/ Bush doctrine t squander of our future to dreams of full spectrum domination of the entire planet and do so with fiat paper money………
As our government enacts ever expanding utilization of the military to any and all aspects of life at home and throughout the entire world…. we need the expertise and especially historical insight of the results such policies have rendered for us here in America and abroad.. We need people like William S Lind who have studied where such hubris leads.
His seminal article "Unfriendly Fire"…. How the Taliban mastered the operational art of modern war is here: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/u…