Category Afghanistan

Disappearing Statistics

There was a time during the Iraq insurgency when statistics on the war were readily available. As a small independent contractor, we were getting the daily feed of incidents, casualties and other such material during the Iraq War. It was one of the daily intelligence reports for Iraq. We had simply emailed someone in the field and were put on their distribution list, even though we had no presence in Iraq and no official position. This was public information so it was not a problem….until the second half of 2005…when suddenly the war was not going very well…then someone decided to restrict distribution. We received daily intelligence reports from 4 September 2004. They ended on 25 August 2005. There is more to this story, but maybe later.

This article was brought to my attention today: https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2017/10/30/report-us-officials-classify-crucial-metrics-on-afghan-casualties-readiness/

A few highlights:

  1. From January 1 to May 8 Afghan forces sustained 2,531 killed in action and 4,238 wounded (a 1.67-to-1 wounded-to-killed ratio, which seems very low).

  2. The Afghan armed forces control 56.8% of the 407 districts, a one percentage point drop over the last six months.

  3. The Afghan government controls 63.7% percent of the population.

  4. Some of these statistics will now be classified.

 

One of our older posts on wounded-to-killed ratios. I have an entire chapter on the subject in War by Numbers.

Wounded-To-Killed Ratios

Status of Books

War by Numbers: Understanding Conventional Combat: For some reason, Amazon.com does not have a Kindle edition available at the moment (I recall that they did). I have talked to the publisher and they are looking into it. The paperback edition is for sale on Amazon.com and of course, University of Nebraska Press. I have heard that some people overseas have gotten copies, but other people are having a problem. I also have the publisher looking into that. There is one 5-star review of the book on Amazon.com. I don’t know the reviewer (meaning it is not a planted review).

Kursk: The Battle of Prokhorovka: The book has been selling at a consistent rate this year, and at that rate, it will be out of stock in the second half of 2018. If you are thinking about getting it, you probably don’t want to tarry too long. There are currently no plans for a re-print.

America’s Modern Wars: Understanding Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam: I do consider this the most significant of my three books, and of course, it is the one with the worse sales. I guess the study and analysis of insurgencies is passé, as we have done such a great job of winning these type of wars.

 

Deployed Troop Counts

Well, turns out we have a little more deployed troops in Afghanistan than is previously reported. Previously it has been reported to be 8,400. Turns out we have 11,000. This does not include the 3,900 that have been recently authorized to go there.

We also have officially 5,262 in Iraq and 503 in Syria. These figures are low with a couple of thousand more troops in both countries (not sure if that is supposed to a couple of thousand more in each of these two countries).

So potentially we are looking at around 15,000 troops in Afghanistan and may have around 8,000 troops in Iraq and Syria.

Reuters article: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghanistan-military-idUSKCN1BA2IF

 

 

Mattis on Afghanistan

Latest testimony to congress: https://www.yahoo.com/news/defense-chief-mattis-not-winning-afghanistan-185831863.html

Points that get my attention:

  1. “we are not winning in Afghanistan”
  2. Promised a new strategy in mid-July
  3. Victory would likely mean a long-term U.S. troop presence (this should really be no surprise to anyone).
  4. Currently has 8,400 U.S forces there and 7,000 from our NATO allies.
  5. Will probably have to add thousands of additional troops.
  6. Overall, around 2,400 Americans have died in Afghanistan and more than 20,000 have been wounded.

 

Sending More Troops to Afghanistan

Well, the head of the U.S. Central Command General Joseph Votel says that we need more troops in Afghanistan: Afghanistan-require-more-troops

This is not a particularly surprising statement. We currently have 8,400 there. This does not include U.S. contractors, U.S. police trainers and such, which still have a reduced presence there. I wonder what the proposed level will be. Last month the U.S. Afghanistan commander General John Nicholson said several thousand more troops were needed.

Anyhow, this is not a surprising conclusion. See America’s Modern Wars, in particular the chapter on Afghanistan; although the focus of our analysis was the number of troops required to fight an insurgency, vice the number of foreign trainers needed to support the indigenous troops fighting an insurgency.

I am guessing as both Nicholson and Votel have said it that it is now administration policy.

1979 to present

We try to stay away from politics in this blog, which is hard to do when discussing national security policy. Still, there are enough political and opinion piece websites and blogs out there, that we do not wish to add to the noise! This article by Major Danny Sjursen borders on the edge of being overtly political but I found it very interesting regardless: http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/165261

I have not read his book Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge but I did invest parts of two chapters in my book, America’s Modern Wars, discussing the surge in Iraq and its later adaptation to Afghanistan. His book will also be added to my growing reading list (right now I am struggling with getting the final edits to War by Numbers completed on time…and should not be blogging at all).

Anyhow, I do like his theme that U.S. involvement and policies in the Middle East fundamentally started shifted with the events on 1979. I think it is a useful timeline.

 

Troop Increase in Afghanistan?

Nicely prepared article that just reinforces my last post on the subject: Trump Mulls US Troop Surge in Afghanistan

  1. 8,400 U.S. troops and 4,900 from 38 other NATO countries.
  2. 57.2% of the countries 407 districts are under Afghan government control (and it used to be better).
  3. In 2010, the US/NATO peak strength was 130,000

We await a decision, but expect that it will be to increase U.S. troops levels (and keep on keeping on).

Stalemate in Afghanistan

By the way, there is a still a war going on in Afghanistan, by most accounts, it is not going that well; and we probably need to increase our troop levels. On Thursday General John Nicholson, commanding general of NATO forces in Afghanistan, told congress “I believe we are in a stalemate.”: nato-shortfall-troops-afghanistan-us-general

Also: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/u-general-calls-more-troops-003147055.html

And: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/09/top-us-general-says-afghanistan-war-at-stalemate-more-troops-needed.html

I have no reason to quibble with that assessment. Victory is certainly not just around the corner.

Some data from these articles:

  1. NATO has 13,300 troops in Afghanstan, about half of them American (8,400)
  2. Afghan losses in the first ten months of 2016 were 6,785 killed, an increase of a third over 2015.
  3. There were 11,500 civilians killed or injured in 2016, the most since the UN began keeping records in 2009 (nearly 3,500 killed and nearly 8,000 wounded).
  4. Afghan government forces control no more than two-thirds of national territory (60% according to another article).
  5. “We have roughly a two-to-one ratio of contractors to soldiers,” said Nicholson.
    1. So, this works out to be 17,000 contractors, 8,400 American troops and 4,900 other NATO troops.
  6. Cost of the 16 year war so far: around 2,000 American lives and $117 billion.

Needless to say, General Johnson has recommended that we increase troop levels there. He has asked for several thousand more. We did have around 100,000 troops there in 2011, now we have less than 10,000.

Mattis’ Reading List (2007)

Here is a 2007 copy of James Mattis reading list, courtesy of the Small War Journal: ltgen-james-mattis-reading-list

Nothing really earthshaking here, except I have not read most of the books on this list. Hard for me to evaluate it.

No Trevor Dupuy books, but Ali Jalali is on the list. He used to be a consultant to Trevor Dupuy’s old company HERO (Historical Evaluation and Research Organization). He was doing Sovietology work for us in the early 1980s along with John Sloan and others. He later became the Interior Minister of Afghanistan: Ali_Ahmad_Jalali