Holbrooke and Mullen's Af-Pak Trip

Diplomatic: “The Diplomatic Surge: Can Obama’s Team Tame the Taliban?,” by Joe Klein, Time.com, 9 April 2009; “A Short Fuse in Pakistan,” by David Ignatius, Washington Post, 10 April 2009; and “Holbrook of South Asia,” by Matthew Kaminski, Wall Street Journal, 11 April 2009

In a recent trip to Afghanistan and Pakistan (Af-Pak), Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, President Obama’s special envoy to the region, and Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, took Obama’s new “regional” Af-Pak strategy to the people of both countries.

What Holbrooke and Mullen learned was not necessarily unique, but what was unique was who they learned it from. Instead of the usual round of private meetings with government officials, which were conducted, additional meetings with farmers, tribal leaders, women legislators, rule-of-law advocates, journalists, the local diplomatic corps, and religious leaders provided the two with the best insight into the complexities of the Af-Pak problem.

What they learned in Afghanistan

• U.S. military plan for developing other than opium crops is undermining a USAID plan to do the same thing
• U.S. Army National Guard farmer-soldier teams are having a positive impact in remote Afghan districts – helping to plant and protect crops
• Afghans believe the Taliban is being supported by the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), which is supported by American funding
• There is a growing comparison by the Afghan people of the U.S. military to the Russian military as a result of collateral deaths from air strikes and direct action raids

What they learned in Pakistan

• The Zardari government is unwilling to admit the extent of Pakistan’s terror problem
• U.S. Predator drone strikes are alienating the population
• U.S. should channel aid through the tribal chiefs, rather than the Pakistani government
• U.S. should train the Frontier Corps, rather than rely on the Pakistani army, who are seen as outsiders in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas
• To curb the militant Islamic madrassas, the U.S. should help improve public schools in the region

During the trip, Mullen repeated on multiple occasions, “We’ve developed the best counterinsurgency capability in the world.”

The key tenants of that counterinsurgency capability are to protect the public and build civil order. Exactly the types of things that would resolve the majority of the issues highlighted above.

Gates Against the Establishment

Defense: “Gates Seeks Sharp Turn in Spending,” by Greg Jaffe and Shailagh Murray, Washington Post, 7 April 2009; “Military Budget Reflects a Shift in U.S. Strategy,” by Elisabeth Bumiller, New York Times, 7 April 2009; “Pentagon Pushes Weapon Cuts,” by August Cole and Yochi J. Dreazen, Wall Street Journal, 7 April 2009; and “Gates: Champion of Our Troops,” by Ralph Peters, New York Post, 7 April 2009

Yesterday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates fired the first round in what will likely be an ugly battle to overhaul defense spending. Gates, to be sure, is not the first defense chief to take on the so-called iron triangle of defense contractors, lawmakers and military service executives – nor will he be the last.

However, Gates may be in a “perfect storm” which will make his battle somewhat more reasonable. The U.S. has been fighting an irregular war in Iraq for going on seven years and is ramping up irregular warfare efforts in Afghanistan, and is currently mired in an economic downturn.

There is a saying in the military that, “Troops in contact trumps everything else.” Gates is using this rationale to justify some of his cuts. The troops currently in contact are fighting irregular conflicts and have limited use for gilded high tech weapons systems. According to Gates, what they need are more troops and intelligence collecting platforms.

Additionally, as one of the results of a poor economy, President Obama has vowed to reign in defense spending. Instead of adding to the defense budget to pay for limited value high tech weapons systems for fighting a near peer opponent, Gates is targeting those programs in order to funnel funding to current irregular warfare initiatives.

Gates, in comments made yesterday, said his plan represents “one of those rare chances to match virtue to necessity; to critically and ruthlessly separate appetites from real requirements.”

Major Proposed Cuts

-Limit the DDG 1000 destroyer purchase to three ships

-Halt production on the F-22 fighter at 187

-Dramatically cut back on the Future Combat System

Major Proposed Adds/Saves

-Low tech tools, such as the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle (MRAP)

-Surveillance technology, such as Predator unmanned drones

-Funding to pay for planned increase in Army and Marine personnel

Congressional Response

According to the Washington Post,

“The initial response on Capitol Hill was restrained, reflecting Gates’s credibility among Republicans, the president’s popularity and the fact that midterm congressional elections are still 18 months away.”

In remarks Gates said, “My hope is that members of Congress will rise above parochial interests and consider what is in the best interest of the nation as a whole.”

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton said Gate’s plan was “a good-faith effort,” but that “the buck stops with Congress.”

Senators Joe Lieberman and Jim Inhoffe urged in a letter “not to allow deep cuts in U.S. missile defense programs that are critically important to protecting our homeland…” Lieberman added that the decision to stop building F-22’s “would result in the loss of thousands of jobs…”

My Take

The pragmatic Gates strikes again. Prioritizing spending to meet the realistic enemy we are likely to be fighting…? What a blinding flash of the obvious. However, as noted in all of the referenced articles, what Gates has proposed and what he is likely to get through Congress are two different animals. The politicians will fight like crazy to keep their constituents whole. I wish they could take politics out of the equation and do what is best for the troops.

Also, see

Gates the Pragmatist

"Cutting" the DoD Budget???