Report: U.S. Overestimated Afghan Police, Army
The U.S. has often overestimated the ability of Afghan military and police units to fight on their own, according to an independent report released Monday that calls into question the strategy to win the war and bring troops home.
The investigation is the first objective look at the rating system the military has used for the past five years to judge the effectiveness of Afghan troops. Its findings seem to contradict upbeat assessments recently provided by senior military commanders overseeing the war.
The capability of Afghan forces is considered the single biggest indicator of whether the war is going well and is seen as the linchpin in the U.S. strategy since the war began more than eight years ago.
Lawmakers are likely to use the latest findings to question President Barack Obama's handling of the war. Democrats say they are frustrated that Mr. Obama is sending more U.S. troops into combat without assurances that Afghan forces are close behind.
Special Report: Afghanistan
"I think the worst nightmare for the Taliban is an Afghan army in charge," said Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who chairs the Armed Services Committee.
The U.S. has spent $27 billion on the effort - about half of the money it has poured into rebuilding Afghanistan. But the program has been hobbled by a lack of trainers, available Afghans and spikes in violence.
"The bottom line to this is that the system ... is flawed, it's unreliable and it's inconsistent," said Arnold Fields, who led the study as the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction.
Two weeks before he was fired by Mr. Obama, Gen. Stanley McChrystal told reporters that "their growth is on track" and "we're ahead of the plan." But the report found that the system used to judge that success was deeply flawed. In some cases, units with the same rating would have different abilities. Also, highly rated units often regressed as soon as U.S. mentors withdrew.
In one stark example, a police district in the northern Afghan province of Baghlan was given the top rating by NATO officials in August 2008. The "CM1" designation meant the police were independently capable of conducting operations. But when investigators asked to visit the district in February, they were told the district wasn't secure and was overrun with insurgents.
One official told investigators that the police force had "withered away to the point that it barely functions."
Levin said the U.S. should delay major operations planned in the southern town of Kandahar until more Afghan troops can deploy to the fight. He called it "totally unacceptable" that there are only about 5,300 Afghan forces in Kandahar and 6,900 coalition troops being led by the U.S.
Fields said that the NATO headquarters in Afghanistan was briefed on his findings in March. Officials agreed in April to change the rating system.
In a written response to the report, NATO says it has made significant progress in both training Afghan forces and measuring their effectiveness in recent months.
Lt. Gen. Bill Caldwell, who heads the training mission in Afghanistan, said that NATO has suffered a severe shortage in trainers with some facilities on the verge of shutting down.
"Building an enduring and self-sustaining force remains a distinct challenge and attainment of the growth objectives is not assured," Caldwell wrote in a letter to investigators.
Meanwhile, Gen. David Petraeus, Mr. Obama's nomination to replace McChrystal, will try to convince a war-weary Congress on Tuesday that he is the man to turn the war in Afghanistan around and mend the military's tattered relations with civilian leaders.
Petraeus is expected to continue McChrystal's strategy in Afghanistan in large part because it is based on Petraeus' own ideas about beating an insurgency. That plan calls for more troops to bolster security while limiting the use of firepower in order to win the support of the local population.
More Coverage:
Panetta: Al Qaeda Has Been Driven Into Hiding
Hotsheet: In Afghanistan, a New General but an Old Strategy
Afghan Questions Arise as Petraeus Takes Over
McChrystal's Complaints: Indiscreet, But Not Unique
Gen. Stanley McChrystal on 60 Minutes
CBS/AP The investigation is the first objective look at the rating system the military has used for the past five years to judge the effectiveness of Afghan troops. Its findings seem to contradict upbeat assessments recently provided by senior military commanders overseeing the war.
The capability of Afghan forces is considered the single biggest indicator of whether the war is going well and is seen as the linchpin in the U.S. strategy since the war began more than eight years ago.
Lawmakers are likely to use the latest findings to question President Barack Obama's handling of the war. Democrats say they are frustrated that Mr. Obama is sending more U.S. troops into combat without assurances that Afghan forces are close behind.
Special Report: Afghanistan
"I think the worst nightmare for the Taliban is an Afghan army in charge," said Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat who chairs the Armed Services Committee.
The U.S. has spent $27 billion on the effort - about half of the money it has poured into rebuilding Afghanistan. But the program has been hobbled by a lack of trainers, available Afghans and spikes in violence.
"The bottom line to this is that the system ... is flawed, it's unreliable and it's inconsistent," said Arnold Fields, who led the study as the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction.
Two weeks before he was fired by Mr. Obama, Gen. Stanley McChrystal told reporters that "their growth is on track" and "we're ahead of the plan." But the report found that the system used to judge that success was deeply flawed. In some cases, units with the same rating would have different abilities. Also, highly rated units often regressed as soon as U.S. mentors withdrew.
In one stark example, a police district in the northern Afghan province of Baghlan was given the top rating by NATO officials in August 2008. The "CM1" designation meant the police were independently capable of conducting operations. But when investigators asked to visit the district in February, they were told the district wasn't secure and was overrun with insurgents.
One official told investigators that the police force had "withered away to the point that it barely functions."
Levin said the U.S. should delay major operations planned in the southern town of Kandahar until more Afghan troops can deploy to the fight. He called it "totally unacceptable" that there are only about 5,300 Afghan forces in Kandahar and 6,900 coalition troops being led by the U.S.
Fields said that the NATO headquarters in Afghanistan was briefed on his findings in March. Officials agreed in April to change the rating system.
In a written response to the report, NATO says it has made significant progress in both training Afghan forces and measuring their effectiveness in recent months.
Lt. Gen. Bill Caldwell, who heads the training mission in Afghanistan, said that NATO has suffered a severe shortage in trainers with some facilities on the verge of shutting down.
"Building an enduring and self-sustaining force remains a distinct challenge and attainment of the growth objectives is not assured," Caldwell wrote in a letter to investigators.
Meanwhile, Gen. David Petraeus, Mr. Obama's nomination to replace McChrystal, will try to convince a war-weary Congress on Tuesday that he is the man to turn the war in Afghanistan around and mend the military's tattered relations with civilian leaders.
Petraeus is expected to continue McChrystal's strategy in Afghanistan in large part because it is based on Petraeus' own ideas about beating an insurgency. That plan calls for more troops to bolster security while limiting the use of firepower in order to win the support of the local population.
More Coverage:
Panetta: Al Qaeda Has Been Driven Into Hiding
Hotsheet: In Afghanistan, a New General but an Old Strategy
Afghan Questions Arise as Petraeus Takes Over
McChrystal's Complaints: Indiscreet, But Not Unique
Gen. Stanley McChrystal on 60 Minutes
Popular on CBSNews.com
- British flower show in full bloom 16 Photos
- Boat hijack stokes tension between N. Korea, China
- China probes rice tainted with cancer-causing cadmium
- Hezbollah suffers heavy losses fighting inside Syria
- Israel and Syria exchange fire on Golan Heights
- Lebanon reportedly stopping Syria refugees at border
- Syria activists: 31 Hezbollah fighters killed in Qusair
- Russia shows accused U.S. spy heading home
This is a American WAR,so Americans stop being such a coward and
join the Military to fight the Enemy there.
Understand you will be concidered a HERO in my books.
So stop playing your X-BOX and join-up now,in 20 weeks you will
be ready to show who controls the Afghans.
Meanwhile I'll keep the beer cool and post whom-ever.
------------------------------------
Arnold Fields, how do we know "your" study is not flawed, unreliable or inconsistent ? What a bunch of garbage. We are starting to hear calls to get out of Afghanistan so we will surly see more in the media of these "independent" studies. The media works well in helping lead the sheep. The sad part is that the sheep believe what they read.
The Iraqi government is to award a series of key oil contracts to British and US companies later today, fuelling criticism that the Iraq war was largely about oil.
The successful companies are expected to include Shell, BP, Exxon Mobil, Chevron and Total.
Non-Western companies, notably those in Russia, are expected to lose out.
guardian.co.uk, Monday 30 June 2008 10.12 BST
LOL
So Friggen what? You and the rest of the Obama followers are going to believe the war was about oil no matter who got the contracts!
Are they stealing it? No.
Did the contracts go to the countries that helped liberate them? Yes.
Do you own or buy anything made from petroleuum? Yes
You are the Hypocrite and a Liar!
by jd2408 June 29, 2010 11:33 AM EDT
I guess you could say we liberated Iraq for the same reasons we liberated Japan and Germany then.
Fool
Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq, U.S. Study Says
By JAMES GLANZ
Published: May 12, 2007
Between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq?s declared oil production over the past four years is unaccounted for and could have been siphoned off through corruption or smuggling, according to a draft American government report.
------------------------
That's enough to fill the Gulf of Mexico 30 times over...
LOL!
Once again, you have no evidence that America, Bush , Cheney or anyone else is stealing the Iraqi oil or rocks from Afghanistan. You have nothing. If there were any shred of truth about your statements CBs, NBC, MSNBC, CNN and anyone else with an ax to grind would have this on the news 24/7 not to mention Bush and Cheney being frog marched straight to prision by you, Holder and Obama.
by Ms_enza...And my Navy-lifer father used to say that jarheads were incapable of learning.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That from a guy that just chauffered those Marines around the world. ;o)
Daemn.........where's a rimshot when you need it!?
.
I believe in adequate defense and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.
.
I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket."
- Maj. General Smedley Butler, USMC (Ret). Recipient of two Congressional Medals of Honor