|
 vents
in Afghanistan appear to have moved very rapidly over the last few
days, leaving the media and many military "experts" in
the dust. Just a week ago, the New York Times was decrying
the looming Afghanistan "quagmire," even though military
actions have only been underway for about a month.
Michael Gordon, the Times's respected military writer filed
a story on Thursday, November 8, entitled "A Month in a Difficult
Battlefield: Assessing US War Strategy." On the same day, Inside
the Pentagon's Elaine Grossman wrote a story entitled "Pentagon
Hears Growing Calls for Fresh Approach to Afghan War." The
thrust of these stories was that the U.S. strategy for conducting
the war in Afghanistan was not working. After all, the key northern
city of Mazar-e Sharif remained in Taliban hands, despite U.S. air
strikes in support of anti-Taliban Northern Alliance forces. A stalemate
seemed to be developing as winter approached.
But over the weekend, the Northern Alliance captured Mazar-e Sharif
and there are reports that it has seized several other important
cities in the north as well. Its spokesmen are talking seriously
about taking Kabul before the end of the month. What does the fall
of Mazar-e Sharif to the Northern Alliance mean, and what are the
implications for the future?
First it seems to show that the administration's general approach
to the war has been just about right, at least so far. The first
phase, attaining air superiority, was achieved fairly early in the
campaign, although given the geographic location of the Afghan theater
of war and the corresponding "tyranny of distance," this
was more difficult that some might think. The second phase, focusing
air assets against the Taliban forces arrayed around Mazar-e Sharif,
only began a few days ago, but appears to have achieved its goal
of destroying the will of the Taliban fighters fairly quickly. The
third phase will probably see the increasing use of US ground forces,
certainly special operations forces (SOF) but most likely conventional
infantry formations as well.
Second, the fall of Mazar-e Sharif appears to indicate that while
air power is no panacea, it is the sine qua non of military success
in the modern age when employed properly. Even given the limitations
imposed on US air power by the tyranny of distance (the lack of
air bases in the region means that heretofore, most sorties have
been flown by Naval aviators flying from air craft carriers in the
Arabian Sea and by long range Air Force bombers, preventing the
US from generating the intensity of air attacks that most planners
would prefer), air attacks on the Taliban eventually had the intended
effect, which the Northern Alliance exploited over the weekend.
Third, it shows that the Northern Alliance can fight and that the
Taliban are not invincible. This is critical for maintaining US
public support for the war. Although the president has repeatedly
warned us that this will be a long struggle, it is important for
the American people to have tangible indications of success. The
capture of Mazar-e Sharif is such an event.
But as important as the capture of Mazar-e Sharif may be for symbolic
reasons, it also has serious military implications for the future.
First, by opening a corridor to Uzbekistan, it provides an important
logistics link between the Northern Alliance and the outside world,
making it easier to provide the anti-Taliban forces with the military
means to win as well as the supplies necessary to mitigate the looming
humanitarian disaster looming over the winter.
Second, capturing Mazar-e Sharif has cut Taliban forces in the north
into two isolated groups, making it easier for the Northern Alliance
to destroy them in detail. Third, it provides a possible base from
which U.S. air assets could operate, minimizing the impact of the
tyranny of distance, and a jumping off place for a possible U.S.
ground offensive in the spring, should the administration deem it
necessary. Finally, it frees up Northern Alliance fighters who can
now be shifted to the Kabul front.
It is likely that Kabul will be a tougher nut to crack. For one
thing, the Taliban forces outnumber those of the Northern Alliance
on the Kabul front. As was the case with Mazar-e Sharif, opposition
success on the ground will depend a great deal on US air power to
weaken the Taliban. Even if the Northern Alliance is able to penetrate
the Taliban defenses, fighting inside Kabul will be a nightmare
if the Taliban chooses not to abandon the city. Of course, many
were saying the same thing about Mazar-e Sharif only a few days
ago.
It is still very likely that conventional U.S. ground forces will
be needed at some point if we are to translate military success
into political success. The political complications for the Northern
Alliance increase as they move farther away from their ethnic base
in the north and penetrate the Taliban strongholds of the Pashtun
south and west of Kabul.
No matter what happens in Kabul over he next few weeks, the capture
of Mazar-e Sharif before the onset of winter is an important success.
The U.S. and the Northern Alliance will be able to use the winter
to their advantage, building up forces for operations in the spring
and while keeping up the pressure on Osama bin Laden and the al
Qaeda network by employing SOF to hunt and destroy them. Recent
reports indicate that many in the SOF community believe that it
actually will be easier to target and destroy these targets during
the winter. It is pretty clear that they will get to find out if
they are correct.
|
