Mattis Discusses Afghan Transition at Marine Symposium

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va., Aug. 30, 2011 — Tran­si­tion is an ongo­ing process in Afghanistan, and it entails far more than sim­ply win­ning on the bat­tle­field, the com­man­der of U.S. Cen­tral Com­mand said here today.

Marine Corps Gen. James N. Mat­tis said 2010 was a very bad year for the ene­my, and that 2011 is going to be even worse. The Tal­iban are “los­ing lead­er­ship, ground, logis­tics, and pub­lic sup­port,” he said at an Emer­ald Express Sym­po­sium at the Marine Corps Uni­ver­si­ty.

Time and again, Mat­tis stressed that tran­si­tion in the coun­try is going to work only if the coali­tion and the Afghan gov­ern­ment get the inputs right.

The NATO-led Inter­na­tion­al Secu­ri­ty Assis­tance Force has been work­ing over the past two years to focus resources on build­ing the right orga­ni­za­tions, staffing those orga­ni­za­tions cor­rect­ly, and devel­op­ing civ­il-mil­i­tary plans and approach­es for the unique sit­u­a­tion for Afghanistan, the gen­er­al said. Get­ting the orga­ni­za­tions in place is “real­ly the stuff of get­ting tran­si­tions cor­rect,” Mat­tis told the inter­na­tion­al audi­ence at the sym­po­sium.

One orga­ni­za­tion that has stood up and become cru­cial is the ISAF Joint Com­mand, a three-star com­mand that focus­es on the day-to-day activ­i­ties of the war, free­ing the four-star ISAF com­man­der to focus on longer-range oper­a­tions and rela­tions with­in the alliance and with the Afghans.

“It’s as if you are at the bat­tal­ion lev­el and you are in the cur­rent fight, and you are also respon­si­ble for oper­a­tions a week from now,” he said. “All of your atten­tion is focused on the cur­rent fight and get­ting the resources to those in con­tact right now.” The same thing hap­pens at every lev­el of com­mand, the gen­er­al added.

NATO Train­ing Mis­sion Afghanistan took a mis­sion spread out over the coun­try and made sense out of chaos, Mat­tis said, and is per­form­ing a mis­sion crit­i­cal to the long-term suc­cess of efforts in the coun­try. U.S. troops are draw­ing down in Afghanistan, he said, but the num­ber of Afghan sol­diers and police is increas­ing far faster than the draw­down.

Work­ing on get­ting the rule of law in place in Afghanistan is anoth­er key capa­bil­i­ty, Mat­tis said. “These are areas you’ve got to deal with,” he added. “Oth­er­wise, you have a ‘catch and release’ pro­gram or eth­i­cal vio­la­tions � nei­ther of which can be sus­tained.”

The ISAF head­quar­ters has an ele­ment that works on rein­te­gra­tion and rec­on­cil­i­a­tion. Rein­te­gra­tion is a bot­tom-up process, and thou­sands of young Afghan men have turned away from the Tal­iban and are throw­ing their lot in with the Afghan gov­ern­ment, Mat­tis explained. Rec­on­cil­i­a­tion, he said, is worked top-down, as Afghan gov­ern­ment offi­cials work with lead­ers who have com­plaints and try to get them into the polit­i­cal process.

“Nobody rec­on­ciles if they’re win­ning,” Mat­tis said. “First of all, you’ve got to dri­ve the ene­my and destroy their hopes. Nobody rein­te­grates to the los­ing side. You are not read­ing about an Afghan army pla­toon going over to the ene­my,” or a police sta­tion join­ing forces with the Tal­iban.

Get­ting the inputs right means build­ing on the secu­ri­ty that bat­tle­field suc­cess caus­es, the gen­er­al explained. If this is not the case, he added, “then you’d bet­ter change your strat­e­gy, change your tac­tics.”

Oth­er orga­ni­za­tions in the com­mand also are part of the tran­si­tion effort. A com­bined spe­cial oper­a­tions com­mand fea­tures intel­li­gence fusion cells, infor­ma­tion oper­a­tions cells and anti-cor­rup­tion task forces. Some of these are not tra­di­tion­al or nor­mal jobs for the mil­i­tary, Mat­tis acknowl­edged, “but they are absolute­ly crit­i­cal.”

Peo­ple are the most impor­tant part of any orga­ni­za­tion, the gen­er­al said, but it has to be the right type of per­son in the right place.

“Some­times, you need to get rid of some peo­ple whose approach to coali­tion and civ-mil fight­ing is obso­lete,” he said. “If some­one can­not cre­ate har­mo­ny across inter­a­gency lines, across inter­na­tion­al lines, if some­one can’t get the inter­a­gency to work togeth­er, that person’s lead­er­ship is obso­lete. That per­son is a big­ger asset to the ene­my than they are to our own mis­sion, our own nation.”

The real­i­ty of plan­ning and get­ting these con­cepts right may be lost on Amer­i­cans who believe the Unit­ed States is alone in the effort, Mat­tis said.

“There are 49 nations fight­ing togeth­er in the largest coali­tion in mod­ern his­to­ry,” he said. “The rea­son I bring this up is … [Amer­i­cans] some­times won­der if we’re doing it on our own. I would just tell you that Cana­da, Esto­nia and the Nether­lands have lost more troops per capi­ta in this fight than we have, and that the Pak­istan mil­i­tary has lost more troops than all of NATO com­bined. They are not a per­fect ally, [but] every­body com­ing to the table brings some­thing.”

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →