November 20, 2007 ... The Afghanistan problem.

For almost twenty-eight years Afghanistan has consumed the military might of the former USSR and the combined forces of the United States and the United Kingdom. This has been possible because of western support for the guerilla war against the USSR, and is currently possible because of a lack of will to vanquish the enemy in favour of a strategy of controlled confrontation, the winning of hearts and minds, redevelopment and the introduction of democracy, etc.

The consequence of this approach is that United States and United Kingdom forces are at the point of exhaustion in both numbers and endurance, and are bemoaning the reluctance of Germany to commit more resources to maintain a campaign now exceeding the length of time it took to win World War 2.

In 2005, Colonel Tim Collins, formerly of the United Kingdom’s armed forces, repeatedly said that this was unsustainable And he was correct. The key to this failure was the decision to not decisively defeat the Taliban and Afghan warlords as the means of persuasion, but to attempt victory across a number of conflicting fronts: political, military and ideological. And, as is well known, wars are not won on many fronts.

It is also argued that Germany has a vested interest in a successful Afghanistan because it would a placating example to Germany’s Muslim population. However, like their United Kingdom counterpart, Germany will not address the problem of Muslim extremism by vacillating to the extremist’s demands. This will simply make matters worse for everyone, including Muslims that do not want to live in fear of Muslim extremists.

To engage in the current Afghanistan strategy, would be to follow an ideological path as counter to German interests as the paths chosen for World Wars 1 and 2. Germany has clearly demonstrated its military capability, but any involvement must coincide with a proper strategy for total victory. At this time this is not possible in spite of the high regard that Germany has for the United States and its commitment to keeping the peace in Europe since World War 2. A peace which is threatened by a similarly failed strategy in Kosovo, which may erupt into conflict at any moment.

To begin with, and to share some of the burden with our allies, the following would be possible.

1. Finance Private Military Contractors (PMCs), such as Aegis Defence, to supplement the coalition forces already in Afghanistan on a purely seek and destroy basis against the Taliban, uncooperative Afghan warlords, and their associates.

2. Destroy the entire Afghan poppy crop production apparatus and product to deprive the enemy of funds. It has been suggested that this will alienate farmers and encourage farmers to join the Taliban and/or Afghan warlords.,for example. However, this is why properly confronting the Taliban and Afghan warlords is vital, as a disincentive to such an alternative to farming something else.

This would have a positive impact on the situation. After all, the United Kingdom successfully quelled Afghan unrest in 1919.