Small Wars Journal

Compensation in Kandahar

Wed, 02/02/2011 - 6:08pm
Compensation in Kandahar

Matthew Millham

ISAF HQ Public Affairs

Coalition forces in southern Afghanistan provided $1.4 million in compensation in the last four months to Afghan civilians whose properties were rigged with explosives by Taliban militants and later demolished by Afghan and coalition security forces.

The coalition has tried to avoid such demolitions, choosing to defuse explosive devices and save buildings from destruction when feasible. But in some cases, officials say, the risk to security forces' lives is too great to justify trying to save structures that have often been abandoned for months or years.

Most of the demolitions occurred in three districts in Taliban strongholds in Kandahar province, where a major Afghan and International Security Assistance Force offensive, dubbed Operation Dragon Strike, began in September.

Hundreds of families, and in some cases entire villages, abandoned the area under pressure from insurgents before the offensive kicked off. Taliban militants took over hundreds of deserted homes and other structures, turning some into homemade bomb factories, fighting positions or weapons stores.

One major challenge facing both security forces trying to clear the area and civilians eager to return home "is that insurgents are rigging many of the structures and fields, particularly in Arghandab, Zhari and Panjwai, with [improvised explosive devices] and homemade explosives," said Maj. Gen. James L. Terry, who commands ISAF troops in Kandahar, Zabul, Uruzgan and Daykundi provinces.

Taliban bombs hidden in buildings, ditches, walls and other structures in the region killed at least 97 Afghan civilians since September and injured another 167. Similar devices also killed and injured dozens of coalition and Afghan troops, many during operations to clear insurgent bombs.

"When possible, we use our explosive ordnance teams to render safe the IEDs," Terry said, "but when they are more complex and dangerous, we use precision munitions to reduce them."

Gen. David Petraeus, commander of ISAF troops in Afghanistan, has supported the demolitions, saying it would be foolhardy to risk Afghan and coalition troops' lives in attempts to defuse bombs in abandoned structures.

"Remember that it is the insurgents who rig these buildings with IEDs and use them as weapon caches that threaten local Afghans," Petraeus said. It's that Taliban tactic that has necessitated the targeted destruction of buildings too dangerous to inhabit or rehabilitate.

Petraeus has also supported the process leading up to and following such demolitions, which involves close coordination with Afghan authorities, careful surveillance of suspect buildings and strict security protocols to prevent civilian casualties, and swift payment of claims to civilians who suffered damages.

With approval from local leaders, coalition forces have used precision munitions and bulldozers to carry out nearly 300 demolition operations since the beginning of Operation Dragon Strike. The operations have cleared buildings, walls, tree lines and other bomb-rigged structures in Kandahar province. No civilians were killed or injured during the demolitions.

The operations have, however, led to some hardship for Afghans whose property was damaged.

The Afghan government has taken responsibility for reconstructing damaged or destroyed property in the region, and civilians are filing claims through the newly reconstituted local Afghan government. ISAF ensures that claims are legitimate, then processes and pays legitimate claims.

Where public property such as roads and canals are damaged, ISAF has used its own forces and equipment to make repairs, often improving infrastructure beyond its original condition.

The international community spent $4 million to build and repair more that 80 kilometers of roads, and another $230 million worth of improvements to 175 kilometers of roads and bridges will carry on in areas where security has improved.

Coalition forces have also overseen the rehabilitation of Kandahar's main canal system, completed more than three dozen wells and water treatment projects, refurbished 5 medical clinics, developed a nursing and midwife institute, provided medical supplies and expertise to Kandahar's medical school, and donated 11 ambulances to the city.

To date the international community has invested $335 million in reconstruction and development in the province, including $180 million for power projects that will boost electricity production in the provincial capital from 16 megawatts to 36 megawatts by March.

Such development is only possible in areas that are secure, and the demolition of bomb-riddled structures has undoubtedly enhanced security, safety and freedom of movement.

In Zhari district, which the Taliban controlled before the Afghan and coalition offensive, the demolition of unsafe structures made it safe again for civilians to access the district center and allowed the Afghan government to reestablish control.

"Tribal leaders and all those people who were displaced during the operations are returning back to their villages and living in a secure environment," said Javid Faisal, a government employee in the province.

"The security situation has gotten better after the clearing operations in Kandahar, and the number of development projects [has] increased," Faisal said.

Comments

IntelTrooper (not verified)

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 10:50pm

<blockquote>So the rich get richer, the poor get "cleared" and the causation for a resistance insurgency grows stronger.

We just aren't smart enough to know how to spread the money around for best effect on reducing causation. We also don't want to be accused of giving money to known Taliban associates. Problem is, our target audiance for best effects are known Taliban associates....</blockquote>

Quoted for truth.

There was a time when I thought we could be savvy enough to use money and projects to create the right conditions and turn the tide of the insurgency.

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/world/asia/12afghan.html?_r=1&ref=wor… was the horse I bet on.</a>

Granted, these weren't the specific guys that I would have used, but in general I thought it was the right thing. We screwed it up big time.

Ben Gilbert (not verified)

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 5:40pm

I was embedded with the 2-101st Airborne in Zhari District in October when many of these demolitions were taking place. Not all of the buildings troops demolished were rigged with explosives -- in fact, very few from what we saw. Any position the troops from 2-101 suspected of having a possible use as a fighting position or risked coalition or Afghan forces were demolished. As is mentioned later in the press release, walls and trees were also destroyed that CF considered for use as possible Taliban "rat lines." There were also many structures damaged or destroyed as CF created roads through areas they suspected of being mined with IEDs.

Bob's World

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 3:38pm

Trooper,

No arguments here on that. One of the current buzz phrases is "money as a weapon," and certainly the Shirzais, AWK, and the handful of other powerbrokers are standing by to help ISAF to spend it vic Kandahar. But it all flows through those who are already apointed or annointed by Karzai, and then out to their friends and families. Those who were on the outs before are the ones who turned (reasonably) to the Taliban. So the rich get richer, the poor get "cleared" and the causation for a resistance insurgency grows stronger.

We just aren't smart enough to know how to spread the money around for best effect on reducing causation. We also don't want to be accused of giving money to known Taliban associates. Problem is, our target audiance for best effects are known Taliban associates....

IntelTrooper (not verified)

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 12:24pm

Hi COL Jones:

<blockquote>Numbers, seasons, etc.

But this is winter, and fighting dies way down, and there is nothing wrong with giving cash to people whose homes are destroyed in this process.
</blockquote>

I definitely do not take issue with using money -- even <i>a lot</i> of money -- as part of a COIN operation. I do take issue, however, with the ISAF Public Affairs TTP of either attempting to distract their readers (from the possibility of negligible progress) or using money spent as some sort of metric. T

hey seem to constantly be implying that if they can just throw enough money at random things, the war will be won. That's been an assumption and approach that's failed for 9 years.

Bob Resseguie (not verified)

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 11:38am

"Such development is only possible in areas that are secure..." and they are only secure while the troops are there, but when they move on.....well, that'a another issue! "The security situation has gotten better after the clearing operations in Kandahar..." - remember "clear, hold, build". Ask the folks working in the area if there is really any more security "after clear" than before once the troops move on to the next village! There is very little "hold", and thus very little "build"! signed, Bob R

Anonymous (not verified)

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 10:27am

she is also a reserve military intelligence major who has served reserve rours with special operaitons so she is a special operator as well- she is the whole enchilada

gian p gentile (not verified)

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 8:07am

IntelTrooper:

nice post. I especially appreciate your support of current criticism like that of analyst Josh Foust who has made some very important and thoughtful (if not at times strident and feisty)observations of this entire episode.

gian

(ps; I am still trying to figure out in what capacity Ms Broadwell writes. Is she an embedded reporter, a contractor-anlayst, an advisor to the command, a biogropher of General Petraeus, an academic, some kind of combination of all of the above, what?)

Bob's World

Thu, 02/03/2011 - 7:25am

Numbers, seasons, etc.

MG Terry inherited a tough mission, and my assessment of him is that he will do as well with it as anyone.

But this is winter, and fighting dies way down, and there is nothing wrong with giving cash to people whose homes are destroyed in this process.

We just need to remember that soon the poppy will begin to ripen once again in the lower Helmand, and make its annual march up and accross the south into Kandahar and beyond. With the crop will come young men to work the fields, with the harvest will come cash and an available pool of unemployed young men. Poppy cash is the grease this country runs upon, and while it certainly funds the insurgency as well, it is foreign occupation that is the primary driver of the resistance insurgency.

Can a weight of foreign intervention overcome the momentum of well funded nationalist resistance? Perhaps, for some period of time, and perhaps that is good enough.

But spring is indeed coming, and with it will come fighting season, and the very foreign security forces that are offered as the cure, are the cause as well. And a Tajik in an ANA uniform from the north is nearly as foreign as an American is, particularly when following along in trail.

IntelTrooper (not verified)

Wed, 02/02/2011 - 11:20pm

<blockquote>I'm especially disturbed by all the second-guessing, in real time, of operational and tactical decisions made by those on the ground.</blockquote>

I suppose second-guessing years later would be acceptable to you, then? And what purpose would this years-delayed second-guessing serve, exactly? Is your position that military leaders should not be questioned, especially when that questioning could lead to some sort of timely correction to questionable TTPs? Disturbing, indeed.

Incidentally, we have institutionalized methods of second-guessing, in real time. Unfortunately these methods take far too long to register and for the institution to correct course. Public discourse -- which, by the way, <a href="http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/13/travels_with_paula_i_a_… sparked by cheerleader Paula Broadwell</a> is often a more efficient and efficacious method of altering the course of military operations.

<blockquote>Often that second guessing involves cherry-picking and out of context commentary thinly veiled as "expert opinion" by those removed by thousands of miles, years since "in-country" if at all, and with a "greater agenda".</blockquote>

I assume you're referring to Josh Foust here. Josh's criticisms, though not flawless, certainly contained valuable considerations -- and I would be surprised if some of those are not used in future planning and decision-making about similar courses of action.

<blockquote>The international community spent <b>$4 million</b>...another <b>$230 million</b> worth of improvements to 175 kilometers of roads and bridges will carry on in areas where security has improved.

To date the international community has invested <b>$335 million</b>...including <b>$180 million</b> ...will boost electricity production in the <b>provincial capital</b> from 16 megawatts to 36 megawatts by March. </blockquote>

Look! Numbers! Lots of money! We gave money to Afghans! More money! We can't <i>possibly</i> be making huge tactical and strategic mistakes, we're giving out money! We helped the provincial capital!

I could just be in a bad mood today, but frankly this sort of bait-and-switch move is insulting.

Anonymous (not verified)

Wed, 02/02/2011 - 8:16pm

I agree with SJPONeill concerning IO rounds heading out rather than the constant incoming. I'm especially disturbed by all the second-guessing, in real time, of operational and tactical decisions made by those on the ground. Often that second guessing involves cherry-picking and out of context commentary thinly veiled as "expert opinion" by those removed by thousands of miles, years since "in-country" if at all, and with a "greater agenda". Let's give these guys a break and I don't really care if you think our national strategy is broke, that's not in ISAF's lane. They must execute the best they can with the strategy they were given. I think they are doing the best, nay beyond the best, they can considering the hand they were dealt. Shots from the cheap seats are not helping matters at all. But of course, everyone is a COIN expert now, or at least claims to be.

SJPONeill

Wed, 02/02/2011 - 7:33pm

Great to see some rounds heading back the other way in the info war...

This should be in bold print...

"Gen. David Petraeus, commander of ISAF troops in Afghanistan, has supported the demolitions, saying it would be foolhardy to risk Afghan and coalition troops lives in attempts to defuse bombs in abandoned structures.

"Remember that it is the insurgents who rig these buildings with IEDs and use them as weapon caches that threaten local Afghans," Petraeus said. Its that Taliban tactic that has necessitated the targeted destruction of buildings too dangerous to inhabit or rehabilitate."

It'd be interesting to see how much of the US$1.4mil in compensation comes from Islamic nations eager to relieve the plight of Afghans...and how much from the rest of the world...