Friday, September 25, 2009

Questions 092209

The U.S. polmil in Afghanistan is lobbying hard for massive reinforcement to its deteriorating campaign. Resorting to fear mongering the military warns that without an immediate troop “surge” the war in Afghanistan will be lost within a year and al Qaida will have a safe base to launch new attacks against the United States. The military declares that the Taliban now controls much of Afghanistan, are rearmed and fighting with new skills. This brings up a number of questions.

Just what constitutes an American victory in Afghanistan? What are the U.S. strategic goals? Are more American troops to open new fronts or are they to replace withdrawing coalition forces? What is the probability that the central administration will now be able to form an effective government? Will sovereign Afghanistan finally be allowed independent freedom to steer its own course? What is fueling the strength of the Taliban? After torpedoing all Afghan attempts to negotiate in the last eight years will America now allow the Taliban to be included in a national solution? How is the friendless Taliban obtaining new weapons and learning new war fighting skills?

In eight years of American warfare in Afghanistan strategy has been redefine so often that all involved have become confused. The new American commander states "Time matters; we must act now to reverse the negative trends and demonstrate progress," According to the “new” or at least the latest plan all foreign troops will be pulled from the countryside to stabilize cities. Apparently a strategy to claim some quick gains.

This tactic surrenders the countryside to the Taliban. A force of 100,000 troops or even 500,000 is insufficient to secure cities from insurgent recruitment and attacks. It concentrates coalition forces into lucrative targets for insurgent attacks. Coalition reactions, in urban areas will result the disproportionate civilian casualties facilitating even more effective insurgent recruitment. Placing foreign troops in the city also reinforces the appearance that Afghan government officials are little more than American puppets. Such a move publicly tars the America with the responsibility for the rampant government corruption.

Insurgents have two primary sources of weapons, a deep pocket sponsor that ships in weapons or they seize weapons from their opponents. The Taliban has no friends among the surround countries. Iran provides limited support for the insurgency as an American distraction but most of Iran’s weapons go to non-Taliban insurgents. No data is so far published on the number of weapons lost by Afghan security forces (ANSF) or coalition. The Taliban’s improved battlefield performance is probably homegrown by skilled commanders but also may result from eight years of coalition ANSF training.

American troop buildup and increased training of the ANSF will likely be counter productive. More foreign troops will increase public friction and a probable fifth column will be trained within the ANSF. The legitimacy of the Afghan administration is already in question and more American troops will be seen as a continued prop to a failing administration. Wasn’t that the Soviet problem?

Friday, September 11, 2009

Plugged nickel 091009

When the Soviet Union collapsed scholarly debate considered the survival of great powers. As the surviving great power the United States became the focus of debate. Purely academic thesis gave way to two emotional hypotheses; the pending and inevitable collapse of the United States as a power, or the surety that it would continue to dominate as the sole world power.

Doom and gloom v. Sound of music in America’s survival and power. Doomers point to history and recent American missteps as proof of decline. Musicians romanticize Americanization and claim overwhelming military and economic power that can never be matched by any other nation. Various musicians claim victory over the Soviets was the result of: Christianity defeating Atheism, democracy over socialism, technology over antiquity, or our stick is bigger than your stick. The truth is that the Soviet economic central planning model failed.

America’s capitalist economic model just cracked loudly enough to be heard around the world. Musicians gleefully sing that the economy is rebounding showing it strength. It’s not strength or government intervention that insured its survival. The fact is that for the moment the world cannot afford to allow an American economic collapse on the scale of the Soviet’s.

Paraphrasing economist John Maynard Keynes a small debtor is at the mercy of the banker while he is at the mercy of large debtors. America has gone from being the banker to being a very large debtor. The international community owns to many dollars and too much American debt. If the American economy collapses so do the linked economies of the community. For sometime the community has been considering its economic options. The Euro is emerging as an economic reality of Europe along with its trading partners and the renminbi is becoming powerful in the Asian trading block. Russian trade is linked to both currencies by location.

Other trading blocks will probably emerge but it will take time for Euro, renminbi and others to mature into international reserve currencies. For the near future the dollar will retain its position as the reserve currency of the world economy but its days of dominance are limited. It will take considerable time for nations to divest themselves of American debt without damaging their own economies.

America will probably attempt to impede the rise of other competitive currencies. It is in the interest of America however to support a multilateral system of reserve currencies. With the world tied to one national currency it is held hostage to that nation’s economic hiccups. Every investor knows the value of diversification. A return to a multilateral system in merely diversification that moderates risk and reduces the possibility of a foreign bank foreclosing America. A multilateral reserve of currencies dampens wide swings in the reserve value. It also forces policy makers to act more responsibly to maintain reserve value than America has demonstrated. For the moment the leaky nickel has been plugged.

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Sliding on ice 090809

Afghanistan, arguably a slippery slope, is rapidly becoming an ice-covered precipice for American foreign policy. This summer a new U.S. general arrived to straighten out the mess. August was supposed to prove the American success through a democratic Afghan presidential election.

Eight years ago the Bush administration installed Karzai as interim leader of Afghanistan. Propped up by American military Karzai was returned to office through two Jirgas and a less than pristine election. With this history Karzai had expectations that the Americans would again insure his return to office in August elections.

To Afghans however Karzai is perceived as a corrupt American puppet. Government corruption is wide spread and for the most part home grown. For most of Karzai’s administration he followed American dictates but in the last couple of years Karzai appears to have read Afghan history. Foreign puppet rulers have not faired well, with the probability of prejudicial termination the norm. Possibly fearful Afghan justice Karzai publicly began to distance himself from American actions.

Possible because the Bush administration’s continued support of Karzai, he decided to run again for president. With eight years to build his election machine and expecting continued U.S. support he turned on his machine. He failed to understand that the new administration in Washington was not tied to past policies. His machine may have modeled its tactics on 19th century American machine politics but Karzai’s were less than skilful in election fraud. Afghans not only see the corruption of the regime but also links America’s sponsorship of Karzai to the nation’s growing difficulties.

The new American general decreed an end to indiscriminate bombing but bombs continue to fall. Independent reports vary from 70 to 90 civilians killed in the latest incident with the America reluctantly admitting that some civilians might have been injured. The Afghans are use to American denials and cover-ups, which adds recruits to the growing insurgency. Not satisfied with bombs the Americans stormed a Swedish run hospital abusing the staff while reportedly searching for “militants”. Three major mis-steps in an election month underline policy failures for the Americans.

The military blames all insurgent activity on the Taliban to keep the American public focused on one demon while hiding the insurgency’s spread. Taliban activity was used to justify the latest bombing but the location was in American allied Northern Alliance territory, it is possible that other local insurgents captured the targeted tankers. The American military is becoming a victim of its activities and own propaganda as once friendly Afghans join the resistance to corrupt government and foreign occupation. Given the degree of corruption and election fraud Karzai’s ability to govern is questionable. America is faced with two bad choices, continue to prop up a corrupt regime, becoming the focus of growing Afghan resistance or let the government fall and face the ensuing chaos. Eight wasted years down the slippery slope with no hope.

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Captain America 090609

Before there were countries or nations, there were warriors. These early warriors fought each other for survival but over time polities emerged and brought individual warriors into armies whose leadership applied force to their self-interest.

Over time leaders began to dream of armies of super warriors that could, without questions conquer all, to gain their political goals. These small armies battled each other with the victor consolidating vanquished spoils into countries. Early leaders of China, Japan, Persia, Greece, and Rome still dreamed of creating a supreme warrior race obedient only to them. In search of this goal children were drafted into a lifetime of training and warfare. Accomplished warriors were breed like cattle to achieve a super race.

In modern history the NAZI movement carried those dreams forward for a pure warrior race. They established breeding farms for their Nordic ideals and children were raised by the state. The Nazis failed, beaten by amateur citizen soldiers from around the world. America, established by citizen soldiers, provided most of the citizen muscle that defeated the evil Axis alliance but America had help from its own super warriors.

America’s super warriors however were comic book heroes who entered the war against the Axis even before its citizen soldiers. When WW2 began in Europe and Asia comic book super heroes were ready. In 1940 Captain America emerged to lead the fight against the Axis. Employing a weakling in chemical experiments for creation of an army of supermen the government created the ultimate super warrior, Captain America. Unfortunately the scientist who developed the magic formula died with its secret.

The Captain is fiction but in the 1950s the American military began secret drug experiments on real live American soldiers seeking to create super warriors possibly in the Captain America mold. These experiments eventually were exposed and the government dropped its program. Now over 50 years later the polmil is still dreaming of super warriors. This time possibly in the image of Ninjas who focused their minds and bodies to the accomplishment of impossible missions regardless of cost.

The Army intends to train over a million soldiers in the art of metal toughness through Warrior Mind Training (WMT). The highest levels of the military support mind-body programs to channel the soldiers’ energy to goals. The difficulty arises over who defines the channels and goals? It is possible that in the future mind controlled black clad soldiers will slink down dark American streets to accomplish mission in the interest of the polmil. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds for the military leadership has already sent soldiers into the streets on illegal missions. Congressional investigations in the 50s, 60s, and 70s uncovered some of these activities. The post 911 domestic, military operations have yet to be seen in the public light.

It is imperative that another public investigation begin before the polmil is able to field super warriors outside the control of a democratic society to terrorize that society.

Friday, September 4, 2009

Blinding the eye 090309

One of the revolutionary changes of the 20th Century was the emergence of electronic news media. For the first half of the 20th Century electronic media meant radio. Today the radio is overlooked in favor of television by those shaping opinions, but radio is far more powerful as it harnesses the listener’s imagination to the message.

Radio news came of age during World War Two and quickly passed its baton to television with victory. However during its short heyday it influenced world events more than Jefferson, Hearst and Pulitzer could ever dream. The NAZI regime used a fake radio report to justify the invasion of Poland. Churchill used radio to stiffen British backs while FDR’s sophisticated media manipulation sold his agenda.

The lessons of both Axis and Allies’ use of media were not lost in the post war years. It became doctrine of coups and countercoups to first seize the media. Seizing the media message also entered the clandestine world of democracies. At the height of the Vietnam turmoil the Department of Defense (DOD) engaged in an extensive plot to control the message. Exposed by the betrayed media in a 1971 TV special “Selling the Pentagon” message control slipped back into the darkness. Subsequent Congressional investigations led to laws to limit DOD’s ability to control the media.

Despite laws DOD continued its attempts to control the message through a series of small conflicts until something larger came along. After the 911 attack DOD established a dis-information bureau. Exposed again DOD claimed to have closed the office and media control again slipped into the darkness. The primary target of Axis, Allies and DOD’s media control is their own domestic populations.

Hoping to side step the law forbidding maintaining records on civilians, DOD hired contractors to create profiles of journalist and rate their positive/negative war coverage. Exposed again U.S. military official claim the program has been terminated. According to the report, the contractor was also attempting to “spin” positive coverage. It is fair to speculate that favored journalists were caught in the spun web, while less favored journalist had restricted access to news events.

Caught with its hand in the cookie jar again a DOD spokesman denying responsibility said,” That while the Pentagon makes the media policy for the military, commands around the world are able to make decisions on their own on how to approach media planning.”

Despite DOD denials the U.S. military controls the media in the best traditions of a third rate dictatorship. Over a year ago the military stormed the Iraqi home of a Reuters’ correspondent, seized his computers, cameras and disappeared the reporter. Reuters and international journalism organizations have been unable to secure the reporter’s freedom. An Iraqi court has ordered his release, but he remains in U.S. military hands without charges, rights or hope. That’s the first amendment military style.

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Metrics Smetrics 083109

A new battlefront has opened in the Afghan War this one down Washington’s Pennsylvania Ave. At one end is the White House and the other the Capital. Congress, as it has every right to do, is asking questions of how do we know how we are doing in Afghanistan. Congress is about eight years late in exercising its prerogative but the White House is on the defensive.

Lawmakers set a deadline in the spring for measurable progress in Afghanistan and Pakistan as a condition for additional war funding. The White House is now in a race to come up with metrics to measure progress before Congress develops its own measurements. The high ground is not progress but rather who controls the message to the public.

The war in Afghanistan has repeatedly been compared to that in Vietnam and there are many parallels. Another benchmark in that comparison has just been reached. Before the United States became decisively engaged in what would become known as the Vietnam War then Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara developed his own metrics. McNamara was a numbers and charts wonk; under his direction the entire military establishment developed new things to count and charted the uncharitable. His system analyst produced massive tomes stating that America had won in Vietnam before it had even begun to fight. The proliferation of metrics led to a piecemeal buildup of forces and a fighting withdrawal. In later years even McNamara admitted it was an unwinnable war, despite his great metrics.

Every graduate student, studying statistics learns how to lie with metrics; they also get a large dose of ethics on why not to lie. Unfortunately politicians and bureaucrats understand the numbers but not the ethics. It is easy to chart how many bullets are delivered and expended, not so easy to determine with what effect. It easy to count the number of soldiers receiving training, but not so easy to determine if they learned of even if they are loyal. Miles of road laid can be measured but do the miles serve the people or the foreign military. Dollars appropriated for civil infrastructure can be tabulated but not the waste and corruption. A decline in the numbers of civilian casualties can be charted, but past dead can’t be resurrected or forgotten.

The Afghans and Pakistanis have incredibly long memories and they have their own metrics. The White House is proposing 50 metrics and Congress will probably add a few more to the count. The question should be what are the local citizens counting as progress?

Progress will be decided in Shari courts, markets, local councils, coffee shops, bus stops and on pilgrimages. This is where progress will accurately be measured. America likes to shout down those that disagree with them, they will have to learn to do what is particularly hard for them, listen. They will have to moderate their belief in those that profit from the American presence. They will also have to objectively consider native opinions and ethically report those metrics to policy makers.