Tue

29

Apr

2008

Which Rules of Engagement?
Written by Joe Hueglin   
Tuesday, 29 April 2008 18:39
smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon
Which Rules of Engagement: "Iraq Rules" or NATO?
by Joe Hueglin
Canadian officials in Kandahar "expressed wariness at the suggestion that an Americanization of the approach to the Afghan war is under way."

"General Dan McNeill, the U.S. Army officer who currently commands the 40-nation NATO coalition fighting in Afghanistan, said in an interview that he hopes Canada and other nations will adopt U.S.-style tactics and doctrines, including lengthier deployments for soldiers, harder-line opium-poppy-eradication strategies and the use of military forces in reconstruction and humanitarian work."

You must judge whether the Marines "surge", which will come and go in a few months, will leave Canadian Forces personnel in an improved situation vis-à-vis the non-committed general Afghan population that must be won to the Afghan Government side if NATO is to eventually disengage, or not.

A little over 13 months a 120 Marines were removed from Afghanistan for following "Iraq Rules" of engagement " not the less violent procedures employed in Afghanistan."

Presumably they would not have been removed had General McNeil's desired rules of engagement been in place.



GENERAL SEARCH LINK
100 marines removed afghanistan

QUOTE AND REFERENCE SPECIFIC LINKS
U.S. brings Iraq-like surge to Afghan conflict


Marines open rare tribunal into allegations that special forces killed 19 Afghan civilians


Marines Use the Wrong Rules


March 29, 2007: In an unusual move, the commander of U.S. special operations troops in the region, ordered a unit of 120 U.S. Marines out of Afghanistan on March 23rd. This was because of the way the marines handled a March 4th incident where they were ambushed by a suicide car bomber and gunfire.

The marines were removed because their reaction to the ambush used "Iraq Rules", and not the less violent procedures employed in Afghanistan. There's more to it than that. SOCOM (Special Operations Command) has long had an uneasy relationship with the U.S. Marine Corps. SOCOM was also uneasy with the leadership of this Special Operations company, and was hoping that the unit would perform well in Afghanistan. The March 4th incident became big news, and that made it difficult for the marine unit to do well in the "winning hearts and minds" department.
 
Comments (0)Add Comment

Write comment
quote
bold
italicize
underline
strike
url
image
quote
quote
smaller | bigger

busy