Superb Afghanistan analysis

From a PDF briefing I found the link on Flit.

On NATO allies.

Let me just make one quick point. If you’re wondering what the importance of stand-aside forces is, take a look at the map. The French are supposed to be providing security in Kabul. They are only reactive, not proactive. Look where the German and Spanish forces are. Look at the limited areas we control as U. S. forces, and look at the importance of the British, Canadian and Dutch contribution. This cannot be won through American action, and it cannot be won unless NATO countries allow NATO to be effective.

And some more.

when you talk to people, I think the admiration for the Canadians, the British and the Netherlands is very high.

Steve and the boys in Ottawa need to get this guy in front of the Canadian media.

On the point of counterinsurgency.

To make things work and to win, you have to have a strategythat deals with the military side and the police side. You have to have criminal justice. That is one key element of governance. You have to have effective governance. You have to have incentives for national unity. If you fail in any given dimension, you tend to lose in counterinsurgency. This has been a message every since Malaysia, but it was also in the handbooks the U.S. issued after our campaign in the Philippines nearly a century ago – in fact, more than a century ago. These aren’t new lessons, but they’re lessons we have to learn.

The same stuff Sir Robert Thompson talked about back in the 1960s. There's some very interesting information in the rest of the briefing. The author shows what NATO is currently up against and how the upcoming campaign season will be make or break for the Afghan mission. There's also some straight talk about how the American administration has let down the Afghans, they need more American troops and aid money.

afghanistan
war on terror
counterinsurgency
NATO