What does Greg Mortenson tell us about progress in Afghanistan?
This weekend the New York Times employed the news hook of an e-mail from former commander in Afghanistan Gen. Stanley McChrystal to “Three Cups of Tea” author Greg Mortenson to draw attention to the latter’s influence in the military campaign in Afghanistan.
The e-mail message was in response to a note of support from Mr. Mortenson. It reflected his broad and deepening relationship with the United States military, whose leaders have increasingly turned to Mr. Mortenson, once a shaggy mountaineer, to help translate the theory of counterinsurgency into tribal realities on the ground.
I saw Mortenson speak to several hundred people at Fort Drum last spring. It was hard not to get swept up in his compelling story, clarity of mission, and demonstrations of success: rebuild Afghanistan by educating girls.
It seems to be a hopeful thing that the military is relying in no small part on Mortenson’s writings and actions to reshape its counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.
But what if there had been no “Three Cups of Tea” to learn lessons from?
I’m reminded of a conversation I had with Doug Baker, Troop A commander for the 1-71st Cavalry. He’s in Afghanistan right now.
Baker said that, traditionally, the Army’s specialty was destroying the enemy’s “ability and will to fight”. But the counterinsurgency requires much more…
It’s clear the success or failure of the U.S. effort in Afghanistan hinges on the military’s ability to win over local Afghans, train the police and Afghan Army, stuff outside the wheelhouse of its traditional strength.
It’s hard not to be skeptical, though, when the strategy rests, in part, on the happenstance that some generals’ wives read a book about a mountaineer who happened to wander into a remote Afghan village and build a school.
I am very doubtful that “winning their hearts and minds” will work.
The Army philosophy used to be: “We don’t want you to die for your country. We want the other guy to die for his.”
I don’t like war but do believe that if you are going to do it, kill until someone cries uncle or kill until there is no one left to cry uncle.
I would be willing to make one concession.
If the creeps who are killing us get their money from buying and selling poppies, then let us offer a better price for the poppies, resell and turn a profit out of this deal. At least pay for some of the cost of the war.
Maybe the General’s read the book or maybe the Generals were the wives? We do have female officers at the upper levels.
It’s a good book I am actually happy to see that the Army has the humility or savvy or both to look outside of its own traditional practices to all sources including the success this guy has had in educating girls in the region.
I am not saying it will work I would still favor simply leaving, but if we are going to stay let us at least do something that may have an impact in the future.
We very carefully and skillfully trained Afghans, Pakistanis, Saudis, Yemenis, Chechins, Uighurs…you get the picture… how to fight a war as insurgents in order to force a superpower to quit fighting. Not very smart thinking.
We need our political leaders to think smarter. Military force can’t solve political problems. We need a Diplomatic Surge.
I’ve read both books, what Greg Motenson has accomplished in these 2 countries is absolutely amazing. It’s also obvious that there can be no military solution alone. This book should be read by all military/government officials.
knucklehead,
You make the point I have always held as far back to when we helped the Taliban fight the Russians.
When we did that, we set the stage for 911.
When will we ever learn to keep our noses out of other country’s business.