08-14-2018, 11:05 PM
*** 14-Aug-18 World View -- Taliban attack on Ghazni brings America's Afghanistan strategy into question
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
****
**** Afghan army, backed by US, struggles to regain Ghazni after four days
****
![[Image: g180813b.jpg]](http://Media.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2010/g180813b.jpg)
Afghan troops on patrol around Ghazni City on Sunday (AP)
Afghan army forces have still not fully regained control of Ghazni
Proving, four days after they were surprised by an unexpected attack by
Taliban militants on Friday. The sophistication and force of this
attack has once again brought into question the Nato and American
strategy in Afghanistan.
On Friday, Taliban militants conducted a multipronged attack on
Ghazni, a city of 270,000 people, and a trading and transit hub
strategically located along a major highway in eastern Afghanistan.
Afghan government officials say that Taliban militants were hiding in
mosques and homes in Ghazni, and were using residents as human
shields. They would slip out at night and attack Afghan forces.
As is often the case in Afghanistan, there are suspicions that the
Taliban militants had support and help from sympathetic civilian
residents of the city. Some Afghans said the assault was not a
surprise, and followed months of build-up by militants near
checkpoints around the city.
It would not be surprising if a substantial number of civilians
supported the Taliban. Many in the civilian population are ethnic
Pashtuns, and the Taliban itself consists of radicalized Pashtuns.
The US military was actively involved in supporting the Afghan army.
US warplanes delivered two dozen airstrikes, killing more than 140
Taliban fighters, according to the military. U.S. military spokesman
Lt. COL Martin O'Donnell downplayed the significance of the situation
and summarized it on Monday:
<QUOTE>"Ghazni City remains under Afghan government control,
and the isolated and disparate Taliban forces remaining in the
city do not pose a threat to its collapse as some have claimed.
That said, the Taliban's attempts to hide themselves amongst the
Afghan populace does pose a threat to the civilian population, who
were terrorized and harassed by this ineffective attack and the
subsequent execution of innocents, destruction of homes and
burning of a market."<END QUOTE>
However, video released by local TV broadcaster Tolo News showed black
smoke rising in the air as buildings burn and Taliban fighters roam
freely around the city. As of Tuesday morning, the situation in
Ghazni is not yet clear. Military Times and ABC News and AP and Tolo News (Afghanistan)
****
**** Taliban attack on Ghazni brings America's Afghanistan strategy into question
****
The assault on Ghazni City comes after another assault on Farah City
in the western part of the country in May. ( "16-May-18 World View -- Taliban launches major military operation in Farah province in Afghanistan"
)
Taliban activists and the American military have dueling narratives
about how to interpret these repeated attacks by Taliban militants.
Over the past months, the Taliban have seized several districts across
Afghanistan, staging near-daily attacks on afghan security forces.
This proves, according to the Taliban, that they can attack and take
control of districts at any time of their choosing.
However, Afghan officials are claiming that this proves that the
Taliban are being defeated because, even though they can attack
at will, they are unable to hold group the way they used to as
recently as 2016.
U.S. military spokesman Lt. COL Martin O'Donnell said:
<QUOTE>"Tactically, operationally and strategically, the
Taliban achieved nothing with this failed attack except another
eye-catching, but inconsequential headline. The fact remains that
the Taliban are unable to seize terrain and unable to match the
Afghan security forces or our enablement, retreating once directly
and decisively engaged."<END QUOTE>
Arguably, both sides make good points: The Taliban can attack as
often as they want, but they can't hold against the Afghan forces.
The problem is that the second part of that statement is true only if
the Afghan forces are backed by Nato military logistics and airpower.
The brutal attack on Ghazni suggests that without the Nato military,
the Afghan forces apparently cannot defeat the Taliban.
The Nato and Afghan government strategy is to use military force to
compel the Taliban to negotiate a peace. As I've described in detail
many times in the
past, a Generational Dynamics analysis proves that's wrong. The
Taliban are ethnic Pashtuns that have been radicalized, and they
include new generations of young Pashtuns that have come of age since
the bloody Afghan civil war in the early 1990s. These young people
are seeking revenge against their former enemies in the Northern
Alliance, and even if the Taliban leadership tries to negotiate peace,
the younger Pashtuns would not be interested.
That's a summary of the analysis that I've been posting for years, but
in the last year the situation has become even worse. As ISIS
militants in Syria have lost their caliphate in Raqqa and have
continued to lose ground, many ISIS militants have been returning to
their home countries, whether in Europe, in Russia or in Afghanistan.
They're forming a new terrorist network, ISIS-K, or "ISIS Khorasan"
("Wilayah Khorasan") or ISKP, the South Asian branch of ISIS.
ISIS-K has been conducting its own terror attacks in Afghanistan,
sometimes cooperating with the Taliban, and at other times fighting
against the Taliban. The Taliban, especially the younger generation
militants, have no desire for a negotiated peace with the government,
but even if they did, the militants in ISIS-K would not. So the Nato
plan for Afghanistan has no chance of succeeding.
As I've written in the past, there seems to be another strategy for
the American military in Afghanistan. Donald Trump and the military
understand that this war cannot be won, but they also understand that
war with China and Pakistan is approaching. As war with China and
Pakistan approaches, president Trump wants to keep American troops
active in Afghanistan, and to continue to maintain several American
military bases in Afghanistan, including two air bases in Bagram and
Kandahar International Airport. These bases will be valuable in any
future war with China. Under these circumstances, having troops in
Afghanistan is what matters, whether the Taliban are defeated or not.
Asia Times and Long War Journal and Guardian (London)
Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Afghanistan, Taliban,
Pashtuns, Northern Alliance,
Nato, Bagram, Kandahar International Airport, Martin O'Donnell
ISIS Khorasan, Wilayah Khorasan, ISIS-K, ISKP
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- Afghan army, backed by US, struggles to regain Ghazni after four days
- Taliban attack on Ghazni brings America's Afghanistan strategy into question
****
**** Afghan army, backed by US, struggles to regain Ghazni after four days
****
Afghan troops on patrol around Ghazni City on Sunday (AP)
Afghan army forces have still not fully regained control of Ghazni
Proving, four days after they were surprised by an unexpected attack by
Taliban militants on Friday. The sophistication and force of this
attack has once again brought into question the Nato and American
strategy in Afghanistan.
On Friday, Taliban militants conducted a multipronged attack on
Ghazni, a city of 270,000 people, and a trading and transit hub
strategically located along a major highway in eastern Afghanistan.
Afghan government officials say that Taliban militants were hiding in
mosques and homes in Ghazni, and were using residents as human
shields. They would slip out at night and attack Afghan forces.
As is often the case in Afghanistan, there are suspicions that the
Taliban militants had support and help from sympathetic civilian
residents of the city. Some Afghans said the assault was not a
surprise, and followed months of build-up by militants near
checkpoints around the city.
It would not be surprising if a substantial number of civilians
supported the Taliban. Many in the civilian population are ethnic
Pashtuns, and the Taliban itself consists of radicalized Pashtuns.
The US military was actively involved in supporting the Afghan army.
US warplanes delivered two dozen airstrikes, killing more than 140
Taliban fighters, according to the military. U.S. military spokesman
Lt. COL Martin O'Donnell downplayed the significance of the situation
and summarized it on Monday:
<QUOTE>"Ghazni City remains under Afghan government control,
and the isolated and disparate Taliban forces remaining in the
city do not pose a threat to its collapse as some have claimed.
That said, the Taliban's attempts to hide themselves amongst the
Afghan populace does pose a threat to the civilian population, who
were terrorized and harassed by this ineffective attack and the
subsequent execution of innocents, destruction of homes and
burning of a market."<END QUOTE>
However, video released by local TV broadcaster Tolo News showed black
smoke rising in the air as buildings burn and Taliban fighters roam
freely around the city. As of Tuesday morning, the situation in
Ghazni is not yet clear. Military Times and ABC News and AP and Tolo News (Afghanistan)
****
**** Taliban attack on Ghazni brings America's Afghanistan strategy into question
****
The assault on Ghazni City comes after another assault on Farah City
in the western part of the country in May. ( "16-May-18 World View -- Taliban launches major military operation in Farah province in Afghanistan"
)
Taliban activists and the American military have dueling narratives
about how to interpret these repeated attacks by Taliban militants.
Over the past months, the Taliban have seized several districts across
Afghanistan, staging near-daily attacks on afghan security forces.
This proves, according to the Taliban, that they can attack and take
control of districts at any time of their choosing.
However, Afghan officials are claiming that this proves that the
Taliban are being defeated because, even though they can attack
at will, they are unable to hold group the way they used to as
recently as 2016.
U.S. military spokesman Lt. COL Martin O'Donnell said:
<QUOTE>"Tactically, operationally and strategically, the
Taliban achieved nothing with this failed attack except another
eye-catching, but inconsequential headline. The fact remains that
the Taliban are unable to seize terrain and unable to match the
Afghan security forces or our enablement, retreating once directly
and decisively engaged."<END QUOTE>
Arguably, both sides make good points: The Taliban can attack as
often as they want, but they can't hold against the Afghan forces.
The problem is that the second part of that statement is true only if
the Afghan forces are backed by Nato military logistics and airpower.
The brutal attack on Ghazni suggests that without the Nato military,
the Afghan forces apparently cannot defeat the Taliban.
The Nato and Afghan government strategy is to use military force to
compel the Taliban to negotiate a peace. As I've described in detail
many times in the
past, a Generational Dynamics analysis proves that's wrong. The
Taliban are ethnic Pashtuns that have been radicalized, and they
include new generations of young Pashtuns that have come of age since
the bloody Afghan civil war in the early 1990s. These young people
are seeking revenge against their former enemies in the Northern
Alliance, and even if the Taliban leadership tries to negotiate peace,
the younger Pashtuns would not be interested.
That's a summary of the analysis that I've been posting for years, but
in the last year the situation has become even worse. As ISIS
militants in Syria have lost their caliphate in Raqqa and have
continued to lose ground, many ISIS militants have been returning to
their home countries, whether in Europe, in Russia or in Afghanistan.
They're forming a new terrorist network, ISIS-K, or "ISIS Khorasan"
("Wilayah Khorasan") or ISKP, the South Asian branch of ISIS.
ISIS-K has been conducting its own terror attacks in Afghanistan,
sometimes cooperating with the Taliban, and at other times fighting
against the Taliban. The Taliban, especially the younger generation
militants, have no desire for a negotiated peace with the government,
but even if they did, the militants in ISIS-K would not. So the Nato
plan for Afghanistan has no chance of succeeding.
As I've written in the past, there seems to be another strategy for
the American military in Afghanistan. Donald Trump and the military
understand that this war cannot be won, but they also understand that
war with China and Pakistan is approaching. As war with China and
Pakistan approaches, president Trump wants to keep American troops
active in Afghanistan, and to continue to maintain several American
military bases in Afghanistan, including two air bases in Bagram and
Kandahar International Airport. These bases will be valuable in any
future war with China. Under these circumstances, having troops in
Afghanistan is what matters, whether the Taliban are defeated or not.
Asia Times and Long War Journal and Guardian (London)
Related Articles
- ISIS-K bombing in Kabul, Afghanistan, targets returning vice president Abdul Rashid Dostum (23-Jul-2018)
- Taliban launches major military operation in Farah province in Afghanistan (16-May-2018)
- Nine journalists killed by suicide bombers in Kabul Afghanistan (01-May-2018)
- ISIS-K suicide bomber kills over 50 in Kabul, Afghanistan, registering to vote (23-Apr-2018)
- Brief recent generational history of Afghanistan (25-Jul-2017)
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Afghanistan, Taliban,
Pashtuns, Northern Alliance,
Nato, Bagram, Kandahar International Airport, Martin O'Donnell
ISIS Khorasan, Wilayah Khorasan, ISIS-K, ISKP
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
