PhotoDude.com

Thu. Jun 24, 2004

Tactical Brilliance, Strategic Incompetence

There are a lot of people pointing to this article, many of them wondering why it isn’t being reported elsewhere. I think there might be a reason, but it’s not the one being suggested.

The Army’s powerful 1st Armored Division is proclaiming victory over Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr’s marauding militia that just a month ago seemed on the verge of conquering southern Iraq.

The Germany-based division defeated the militia with a mix of American firepower and money paid to informants. Officers today say “Operation Iron Saber” will go down in military history books as one of the most important battles in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.

“I’ve got to think this was a watershed operation in terms of how to do things as part of a counterinsurgency,” said Brig. Gen. Mark Hertling, a West Point graduate and one of two 1st Armored assistant division commanders, in an interview last week as he moved around southern Iraq. “We happened to design a campaign that did very well against this militia.”

Washington Times: “Army unit claims victory over sheik”

I have no doubt that the US Army was tactically superior and overwhelmed Sadr’s undisciplined militia, reducing them to complete ineffectiveness. And if that was the sole point of going after Sadr’s militia, job well done. On the only level the 1st Armored can be judged, the tactical, they were successful. But that wasn’t the strategic task that started the whole mess, that was the tactical solution to the mess that developed. Counterpoint from TSgt. Stryker (no, that’s not a typo, he got a promotion ... congrats, TSgt!):

Remember Sadr? He was the guy that we wanted dead or alive. We were going to “bring him to justice.” In which jail cell does Sadr sit? Where is his grave? Two months of fighting and a few dead American soldiers later, he now stands poised to become an “influential political player” in the new government.

Remember those contractors whose bodies were mutilated and hung from a bridge? We were going to pursue their killers and “bring them to justice” as well. At what court are their hearings taking place? What sentences have been handed down? A couple of weeks of fighting and a few dead Marines later, we retreated from Fallujah and placed one of Saddam’s former generals in control of the city. The murderers have so far eluded “justice.”

Remember Nick Berg? He was purportedly beheaded by Zarqawi and his followers, who have already killed 700 people in terrorist attacks throughout Iraq. The President, once again, vowed that he would, “pursue those who are responsible and bring them to justice.” Zarqawi is still at large. If this story is to be believed, the Administration had three separate opportunities to “bring him to justice” before the Iraq war, but decided not to out of a fear that doing so would “undercut its case for war against Saddam.” What’s better, Zarqawi is reportedly freely operating out of Fallujah and is rumored to have been made into a town potentate.

And what does the President have to say about the latest American beheading?

“We must pursue these people and bring them to justice before they hurt other Americans.”

If I were a terrorist or nascent Iraqi insurgent, I wouldn’t be too concerned about “American Justice”...

I’m with you, Sarge. In addition, I think America has developed a disturbing trend of creating impressive tactical victories that are ultimately followed by a strategic failure. We overwhelmed the Iraqi army and ejected them from Kuwait in 1991, but we allowed two Republican Guard divisions to escape who soon put down the Shiite rebellions we encouraged, and then ignored. Saddam reigned another 12 years, killing hundreds of thousands more Iraqis, as well as tying up some of our military enforcing “no-fly” zones, and initiating an expenditure of years and billions in UN weapons inspections, because Saddam never even lived up to the cease fire agreement Iraq signed.

It happened again in Afghanistan. The strategic goal was to eliminate Taliban control and destroy Al Qaeda. Brilliant tactics were employed as never before, and soon we had thousands of Al Qaeda, allegedly including Bin Laden, pinned down in Tora Bora. We failed to go The Last Mile. Instead of doing whatever it took to deploy our own forces to surround and reduce Tora Bora, we relied on others. And they screwed us.

Hundreds, if not thousands of Al Qaeda escaped over the mountain passes into Pakistan. Mountain passes we relied on others to block. We had the cat in the bag, and now, 3 years later, we’re still chasing kittens all over the place. This was a major strategic failure, portrayed as a tactical success; hey, look, no more Al Qaeda in Tora Bora!

And finally, Iraq, Round II. Another brilliant tactical victory, toppling Saddam’s regime in three weeks. Followed by near complete strategic failure. Our minimum goals 15 months ago were to create the security and stability necessary to begin to revive and rebuild the economy, and allow a form of representative government to take power.

We haven’t created enough security and stability to even allow the CPA to expend more than 20% of its reconstruction funding, because Western contractors cannot safely complete their assigned projects. For months, we hardly even tried to provide any real form of security, allowing most any government property of value to be looted and/or burned. Including alleged WMD sites and ministries with files of great value. We made no effort to close Iraq’s borders, even as the Pentagon claimed much of the mayhem was caused by outsiders and foreign forces.

As for preparing the country to be turned over to a representative form of government, I’m afraid we could hardly have done a worse job. Face it, until two weeks ago, we didn’t even know who we were going to give it to. And what are we giving them? Authority over a country where there are multiple armed groups with more “firepower” than the Iraqi police and army. It’s an ancient dictate: if you do not have the monopoly on violence within a society, you are not a government in control. This is true in a democracy or a dictatorship. Instead of creating such an environment, instead of handing over the robes of power, we’re handing over some ratty t-shirts with big red targets painted on them.

You can cast much blame on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Baathist holdouts, and other “dead enders” (as well as Taliban remnants mucking about in Afghanistan) for much of the mayhem we’ve seen. But it’s clear Pentagon leadership did not anticipate it and never prepared for it, as has since been admitted up and down the chain. As is the case when a city experiences a sudden crime wave, it’s fair to blame it on the criminals, but when it’s a prolonged crime wave, it’s also fair to question the competence of your Police Chief.

And I don’t mean to minimize the actions of our armed forces, hundreds of whom died in Afghanistan and Iraq. Without them, 50 million people would still be living under the lash (or plastic shredder) of the Taliban or Saddam. That’s a precious gift often lost in the partisan rhetoric. But we’ve been somewhat like a baseball team with a great starting pitching lineup … and no closer. End result: games lost.

Just once, I’d like to see us finish the job, and not waste valid and brilliant tactical victories by following them with such strategic incompetence.