The Nation: Dangling logistics of Afghan war!

[unhappycamper]

Dangling logistics of Afghan war!
By Khalid Iqbal | Published: October 11, 2010

The American tacticians in Kabul have, indeed, shot President Barack Obama in his foot by conducting the recent air space incursions and shooting down of three Pakistani soldiers by NATO/ISAF helicopters. The US President’s efforts to improve America’s image amongst the Pakistani public has definitely suffered a serious setback due to this incident. The apology tendered by the US Ambassador to Pakistan, on behalf of the administration and people of America, would not help in cooling down the public anger; however, the bad taste may prevail for quite some time.

As regards logistic calculus, around 60 percent of non-lethal supplies to NATO troops in Afghanistan pass via two crossings from Pakistan, through difficult and inadequately secure land routes. The Northern Distribution Network (NDN) handles 25 percent of the supply and the remaining 15 percent is conveyed by air. The monthly average of non-fuel supplies through Pakistan is over 4,000 containers, compared with 1,457 via NDN. The bulk of the fuel delivered by the northern route is aviation related, while diesel and gasoline for ground vehicles and generators is conveyed through Pakistani routes. The NDN is also far slower and is three to five times costlier. It passes through a number of volatile Central Asian Republics; this network has its vulnerabilities which are far more serious than Pakistani routes. It is envisioned to supplement Pakistani supply line and not to supplant it.

NATO keeps a maximum of 30 days logistic reserve in its storage depots in Afghanistan. As the reserves are already under strain due to the operation in Kandahar, in case of protracted closure of Pakistani supply routes NATO could be in a serious danger of hitting a supply bottom rock. So, if it has to rely on NDN only, which does not have the capacity to handle the entire logistic requirement, the accuring shortages would definitely hit operational effectiveness.

To ensure arrival of requisite logistics at destination, the US pays huge bribes to corrupt Afghan officials and warlords. In return, they provide security to these logistic caravans in exchange for the hefty protection money. The cost of a gallon of gas delivered to the US units in Afghanistan is between $800-$1000.

More so, fears are growing in Washington that the Afghan war may be lost. According to polls, the American popular opinion has turned against the war. Pentagon fears that failure in Afghanistan will humiliate the US military and undermine America’s international power - a replica of what happened to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. So, the American strategy is based on a sick premise that by killing enough insurgents, it could “bargain from strength” and force the Taliban into a settlement; whereas any meaningful effort of reconciliation should begin from the Haqqani network - the powerful group that the US is anxious to dismantle. Thus, USA’s effort to decimate various powerful groups is only incurring their heightened antagonism and undermining the process of reconciliation.

[eridani]

1. Supply lines a continuing issue

http://www.truth-out.org/pakistans-convoy-halt-forces-us-reduce-tensions64046

By continuing its halt in NATO convoys headed for Afghanistan through the Torkham border crossing into a second week, Pakistan's military leadership has brought an end to the unilateral attacks in Pakistan pushed by Gen. David Petraeus and forced Washington to make a new accommodation.

And it may make it impossible for Petraeus to make the argument in the future that the United States can succeed in Afghanistan, given the refusal of Pakistan to budge on the issue.
The halt in NATO convoys bound for Afghanistan and unhindered attacks on tanker trucks have continued despite a decision by the White House to direct U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen to apologise to the Pakistani government for the deaths of three Pakistani soldiers resulting from a U.S. helicopter raid from Afghanistan into Pakistan.

Pres. Barack Obama has clearly abandoned the tough line toward Pakistan represented by cross-border helicopter attacks and accelerated drone strikes in an effort to reduce tensions.

U.S. and Pakistani officials have been engaged at various levels to find a way out of the impasse, according to one administration official. The official said some of the tensions should dissipate in the coming days, suggesting that the U.S. is eager to avoid further troubles on the border.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/09/nato-convoy-taliban-pakistan

At the same time, the Pentagon began an effort make military service a more comfortable experience than the proverbial "meals ready to eat" for soldiers living in canvas tents and hastily dug trenches. Today, a soldier has come to expect much, much more: An Easter menu I picked up a military base in 2008 offers soldiers Cornish hen, grilled trout and chocolate-covered bunnies. Mark Larson, a military blogger who recently returned from Afghanistan, wrote that "Camp Phoenix is known for its large PX and barbecue tent that serves everything from steak to ribs daily on a very nice outdoor patio. And after dinner, soldiers can wash down their meal with a smoothie at Green Beans Coffee."

None of these come from local markets: they are shipped in on trucks like the ones going up in flames in Pakistan. The volume of supplies has expanded so much that Matthew Nasuti, a former US Air Force captain and blogger, estimates that the average US army division needs in excess of 3,000 tons of supplies per day. (By comparison, a German Panzer division needed between 30-70 tons of supplies per day in 1942; and a North Vietnamese army division needed less than 10 tons of supplies per day in 1968.) Nasuti concludes:

"Nato and American forces have such exorbitant daily supply needs that the Taliban could force some or potentially most western forces to retreat from Afghanistan within 30 days."

The civilian drivers who risk their life and limb to drive chocolate-covered bunnies to the soldiers in Afghanistan are typically poor locals who work for a couple of hundred dollars a month. (There is a really good documentary currently airing on PBS in the US, "Someone Else's War", on the abysmal labor conditions of third world workers in the war zone.) Some 35 have been killed in recent attacks, according to Yousuf Shahwani, head of the All Pakistan Oil Tankers Owners Association.

Indeed, without this invisible army of third world workers, the cost of the global war on terror in dollars and in US lives would be much greater. Watching video images of the flickering inferno of the trucks burning on the Afghan border, and reading the stories of the drivers who have been killed, one has to ask the larger question: is this morally, let alone economically, sustainable? Should Pakistani civilians be asked to sacrifice their lives in order to buy with Happy Meals the assent of young US men and women to a war they clearly don't believe in?

[KG]

2. hmm. seems the Big Fans no longer drop in to tell remind us how, all evidence to the contrary,

how worthwhile it all is and how great it's going there. :eyes: