Pity US Commanders in Afghanistan

Strange, Yet Sadly True

Regular readers of this blog will know that we have taken the view that the US should not be fighting a war in Afghanistan. We have argued that such wars are neither just nor biblically sanctioned. We have also argued that the war is unwinnable, because wars do not change "hearts and minds"; Afghani culture is too deeply ingrained and sanctified by centuries of tradition to be dismissed in such a facile manner.

Nevertheless one cannot remain unmoved by the plight of American forces in that country. And we use the word "plight" deliberately. To their many challenges has now been added coping with political correctness gone mad--or, in a more sinister possibility, coping with a war where political strategists are starting to influence military tactics. Since American casualties lead to waning public support, let's make commanders responsible for any casualties. Expect morale to drop like a stone.

The Washington Post carried recently the following hard-to-believe story.

U.S. commanders in Afghanistan face tougher discipline for battlefield failures

By Greg Jaffe
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 5, 2010; A01

The U.S. military has reprimanded an unusually large number of commanders for battlefield failures in Afghanistan in recent weeks, reflecting a new push by the top brass to hold commanders responsible for major incidents in which troops are killed or wounded, said senior military officials.

The military does not release figures on disciplinary actions taken against field commanders. But officials familiar with recent investigations said letters of reprimand or other disciplinary action have been recommended for officers involved in three ambushes in which U.S. troops battled Taliban forces in remote villages in 2008 and 2009. Such administrative actions can scuttle chances for promotion and end a career if they are made part of an officer's permanent personnel file.

The investigations are a departure for the U.S. military, which until recently has been reluctant to second-guess commanders whose decisions might have played a role in the deaths of soldiers in enemy action. Disciplinary action has been more common in cases in which U.S. troops have injured or killed civilians.

OK. So you are a field commander and your command comes under fire. If you take casualties, it is increasingly likely that your career will be over. It will go down as a black mark on your performance record. This is so bizarre as to be relegated to the unbelievable.

In response to the recent reprimands, some military officials have argued that casualties are inevitable in war and that a culture of excessive investigations could make officers risk-averse.

Ya reckon?

"This is a war where the other side is trying, too," said one Army officer who commanded troops in Afghanistan and requested anonymity in order to speak freely.

As many as five battlefield commanders have received letters of reprimand in the past month or have been the subject of an investigation by a general who recommended disciplinary action. A sixth commander received a less-severe formal letter of admonishment. None of the investigations or letters of reprimand has been released publicly.

We predict that this will go down in the annals of shame for the US Army. The sad thing is that the top brass appears to be complicit to a significant degree.

The reprimands come amid growing political pressure from lawmakers who have pushed the military to assign greater accountability for incidents in which large numbers of U.S. troops are killed or wounded. The Pentagon's top leaders -- Adm. Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman, and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates -- also have been quicker to dismiss senior officers, fostering a change in the overall culture. In 2009 they relieved the top commander in Afghanistan for his stewardship of the war. "The issue of holding people accountable is something Admiral Mullen watches very, very carefully," said a senior military official.

The problem is that war is always messy. Reviewing actions in hindsight with the luxury of full knowledge ex-post, and with twenty-twenty vision will always find errors and mistakes.

If you are a field commander, caught up in conflict, you will know that it will likely end up as a blot on your career if any one your soldiers are killed. Aggression will go out the window. Safety first will become the order of the day.

Here is how one "investigation" played out.

In the attack last fall in Kamdesh, in which eight U.S. soldiers were killed, senior Army officials quickly dispatched a three-star general from outside Afghanistan to investigate the battle. This was done at the request of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, officials said.
On Wednesday, the families of the soldiers killed at Kamdesh received a call from an Army casualty assistance officer. The officer read from a prepared script informing them that the investigation was completed and that members of Congress would be briefed on its findings as early as Thursday.

The script praised the bravery of the troops at the Kamdesh outpost, which was briefly overrun by the enemy. It also suggested that commanders should have focused more attention on improving the base's defenses and on analyzing intelligence reports that the enemy was planning a large-scale assault.

The final investigation recommended that the squadron commander overseeing the outpost receive a letter of reprimand. The brigade commander was given a less-severe letter of admonishment, said military officials.

Both the squadron and brigade commanders overseeing the Kamdesh outpost had been pressing to close it for months after they determined that it made no sense to keep troops in the area. But plans to close the outpost were regularly delayed because of pressure from Afghan officials, who did not want to cede territory to the Taliban, and because of other missions deemed a higher priority.

Some family members of the deceased soldiers in the Kamdesh ambush said the officers who postponed shuttering the base, know as Combat Outpost Keating, should also be held accountable. "Combat Outpost Keating was predisposed to fail and it did," said John Petro, grandfather of Spec. Stephan Mace, who was killed at Kamdesh.

So the local commanders were warning of the dangers of maintaining the outpost. Eventually it gets attacked: troops are killed. The same commanders are reprimanded in an ex-post review. Morale will disappear into a deep space Black Hole.