Taliban offensive expected in spring
Some observers worry that NATO forces in
Afghanistan have failed to seize the initiative.
By Laura King
Times Staff Writer
February 18, 2007
KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN — As the U.S. Black Hawk helicopter skimmed low
over the desert, the signs of approaching spring were everywhere:
melting frost in the hollows, the first shoots of green in the nearby
fields, shrinking snowcaps on distant peaks.
In coming weeks, winter will loosen its grip on Afghanistan. Senior
NATO generals insist that their troops are well positioned to confront
the Taliban offensive that is expected to follow.
But some analysts, diplomats and other observers think the Western
alliance, and the Afghan government it supports, has failed to use
winter's relative lull in fighting to seize the initiative in advance
of a new battle with the insurgents.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization's forces in the south are being
bolstered, but the influx of about 3,000 additional troops is privately
described by field commanders as both tardy and considerably smaller
than what they had hoped for.
The reinforcements will come almost exclusively from the United
States and Britain; troop commitments by other alliance members have
failed to materialize.
In some key districts, Taliban militants have reinfiltrated areas they
were driven from months ago. Even before the start of any large-scale
offensive, the insurgents are demonstrating an ability to capture
territory, including their brazen seizure of the town of Musa Qala in
Helmand province this month.
With Western troop levels at their highest since the fall of the
Taliban in 2001, including a record 26,000 U.S. soldiers, senior NATO
officials in Kabul, the capital, described the insurgents as scattered
and demoralized after defeats last year — the bloodiest year of the
conflict, with about 4,000 people killed.
The Taliban harbored ambitions of seizing Kandahar, the movement's
onetime stronghold, but were blocked in that drive last autumn, though
fighting came within 10 miles of the city.
"2006 was a year of Taliban failure," said British Gen. David Richards,
who turned over command of NATO forces to U.S. Army Gen. Dan McNeill
this month. "The Taliban did not achieve a single objective…. We proved
that NATO can and will defeat the Taliban militarily."
But commanders of remote coalition outposts that have come under
frequent hit-and-run attacks this winter describe a resourceful and
determined foe they think will be back in force to fight again.
"They're hard-core — very determined, very disciplined. They know the
ground and they know how to fight, and they know how to adapt to
changing conditions," said Canadian army Capt. Piers Pappin, whose
mud-walled, thatched-roof outpost in the desert west of Kandahar was
repeatedly attacked by bands of insurgents, even during the supposed
winter lull.
Insurgent commandants have boasted that in coming months they will step
up the use of crude yet lethal tactics such as suicide and roadside
bombings, with which they can counter NATO troops' vastly superior
firepower.
Suicide attacks increased fivefold in 2006, and the use of remotely
detonated devices nearly doubled from the previous year, according to
U.S. military figures.
'The call of extremists'
In Afghanistan's impoverished south, which is expected to be the
focal point of fighting in the spring and summer, the slow pace of
reconstruction has hurt allied military efforts to build the trust of
villagers.
"While the growing insurgency is attracting increasing attention,
long-term efforts to build the solid governmental institutions a stable
Afghanistan requires are faltering," the Brussels-based International
Crisis Group said in a report released at the end of January. As a
result, "disillusioned, disenfranchised Afghans are … responding to the
call of extremists."
Aid groups and nongovernmental organizations have characterized the
reconstruction effort as falling far short of the targets set a year
ago by Western nations and the Afghan government.
"So much could have been done over the winter to make these people's
lives better," said Norine MacDonald, who works in Kandahar province in
village outreach programs sponsored by the nonprofit Senlis Council.
"Instead, their situation is getting worse all the time."
Heading into the next round of fighting, the dubious efficacy of the
Afghan army is also a growing cause for concern. Coalition goals call
for the force to expand to 80,000 troops by next year, but at this
point, struggling with a high desertion rate, it is fielding about
20,000.
Senior Western military officials put a positive face on the progress
made in arming and training the force. But field-level allied officers
who work closely with the Afghan troops privately predict that it will
take many years to shape them into a professional army capable of
confronting the insurgents on their own.
The Afghan troops protest that they are counted on to smooth over anger
when NATO operations result in civilian deaths and injuries. At least
100 Afghan civilians died last year at the hands of allied forces,
according to New York-based Human Rights Watch, and Afghan rights
groups put the figure many times higher.
"Whenever they do something that is against our culture, people get
angry, very angry," said Lt. Col. Sheehin Shah Kabandi, a regional
Afghan army commander in Kandahar. "We remind them again and again: If
you enter someone's house by breaking down his door, that man and all
his relatives are your enemy forever."
Local resentment is sometimes inflamed by what Western military
officials see as an effort by Afghans to better their lot. In the
Panjwayi district outside Kandahar, NATO troops for months have been
bulldozing vineyards, arbors and orchards to build three wide roads
radiating from their bases. Alliance officials say the roads will be an
economic boon to villagers.
But some farmers said that promised compensation never arrived and that
the roads appeared to be mainly for the troops' use.
"What do we gain?" said a weathered villager named Rahmatullah, bent
nearly double under a load of dry sticks. "My grapes are gone, and I
have nothing.
"I'm angry at the Taliban who were hiding here, but I'm angry at them
too," he said, pointing with his chin toward NATO combat engineers
leveling ground for the latest stretch of road.
Civilian casualties
As they seek to benefit from any NATO missteps, the insurgents have
honed their tactics. Western commanders describe how the insurgents
seed an area with arms caches, then blend with farmers and villagers
until they are ready to pick up their weapons and fight.
One commander at an outpost near Kandahar said he was grudgingly
impressed when Afghan men who later proved to be insurgents loitered in
a field by day, stacking stones that hours later were used to precisely
position a rocket-propelled grenade launcher for a nighttime attack.
During a sweep last month, NATO soldiers found a compound that
apparently had been used as an insurgent field hospital, with bandages,
syringes and painkillers, within 200 yards of a troop outpost.
When the insurgents are able to establish themselves in a populated
area, coalition forces face a difficult decision: whether to risk
civilian casualties by attacking.
Musa Qala, a town in Helmand province's poppy-growing belt that was
overrun by the Taliban early this month after a British-brokered truce
collapsed, is a case in point.
NATO used a pinpoint airstrike to kill the Taliban commander who had
led the takeover and said it would evict the rest of the insurgents
when it was ready to do so. But military officials acknowledged it
would be difficult to dislodge the Taliban fighters without inflicting
civilian casualties, even though many residents had fled.
Civilian deaths have become a highly sensitive subject,
particularly after Afghan President Hamid Karzai publicly broke into
tears late last year while imploring allied troops to be more careful.
Bombers-in-waiting
Air power has become a much-relied-on advantage for coalition
troops, but in addition to the risk of civilian casualties, springtime
fighting will bring other challenges: for example, keeping helicopters
and other aircraft in the skies when dust storms send columns of fine,
sandy grit thousands of feet aloft.
Low-altitude surveillance carries the risk of drawing fire, but from
higher altitudes "it's really hard to tell what's a threat and what
isn't," said Sgt. Scott Campbell, a Black Hawk gunner with the Army's
10th Mountain Division at the Kandahar base.
Travel on the ground is also dangerous. Over the last several months,
Taliban commanders have boasted that hundreds of would-be suicide
bombers are waiting to be sent into action. Afghan and coalition arrest
figures seem to bear out the claim; during one recent week, nearly a
dozen suspected bombers-in-waiting were detained in and around Kandahar.
As a result, coalition convoys tend to race through the city after dark
rather than moving about freely during the day.
Late one moonless night last month, NATO soldiers prepared for a run
that would take their armored vehicles through downtown Kandahar and
deep into the desert. With the engines rumbling, they listened to a
squad commander's grim and detailed litany of attacks that had taken
place recently in the area.
"What I'd say is this: Try not to stop," he told them. "Really try not
to stop."
Everyone nodded.
Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times