Afstan: Poles taking over in Ghazni province

Good news, as had been expected; still wondering where the French will go in the east (via Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs):

Polish troops in Afghanistan will soon take over responsibility for security in a central province of the country from U.S. forces, the Polish defense ministry said on Friday.

Poland has about 1,200 troops in the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) fighting the Taliban and backing the Kabul government and plans to boost this figure by a further 400 soldiers.

"We are moving to take over Ghazni province... The next contingent heading to Afghanistan in late October to early November will be deployed there," ministry spokesman Robert Rochowicz said.

"We will have full responsibility for the province but we will be able to seek American help if needed."..

Will our media notice?

Afstan: Canadians back in combat/Yankee imperialism/Brits, Canadians and US Marines

Looks like the Taliban are reverting to some of their tactics from 2006:

Operation Rolling Thunder ends successfully
Top-secret engagement [??] sees Canadian troops involved in heaviest fighting this year against Taliban militants

PASHMUL, AFGHANISTAN...

Code-named Operation Rawa Tander, Pashto for Rolling Thunder, the joint Canada and Afghan military mission was aimed at disrupting insurgent activity in one of Kandahar province's most dangerous areas, Pashmul.

Located in Zhari district, the birthplace of the Taliban movement, the area is a hornet's nest of insurgent activity. The battle-scarred region, southwest of Kandahar, has been the site of several, often bloody, battles for Canadian soldiers since 2006.

The operation, which involved multiple platoons, started before day-break on Tuesday and, by 6:15 a.m., bullets were already ripping through Pashmul, a collection of small, ancient villages and farmland. The few locals still living in the area either fled by foot or hunkered down in their compounds before the fighting started. Most are poor farmers.

Canadian and Afghan soldiers were able to sneak up on a suspect compound and take the militants by surprise. The insurgents, toting AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenade launchers, returned fire for about half an hour from a grape hut.

The battle ended a short time later after the Canadians called on U.S. military air support to drop several bombs, including Hellfire missiles, on the area.

As the week progressed, the fighting intensified, with yesterday being the most hard-fought for Canadian and Afghan forces.

About 8 a.m. yesterday, a large number of insurgents began shooting at the soldiers from several positions. The terrain, which was mainly lush grape fields and small groves of dense trees, made it difficult at first to tell exactly where the militants were hiding.

For about two hours, the two sides exchanged fire, with the Canadian and Afghan forces calling in air and artillery support. More than 30 rounds of artillery fire whistled through the hot, spring morning air and hit mud grape huts and compounds where the insurgents were positioned.

By 11 a.m., the shooting had largely stopped. A short time later, Afghan National Army soldiers followed a trail of blood into one compound. Four insurgents were inside; only one was alive. He was later detained.

During the lengthy operation, several dozen insurgents were killed or injured. Only one Afghan soldier was hurt; he accidentally shot himself in the foot. No Canadians were injured...

More:

KANDAHAR, AFGHANISTAN -- Canadian troops have swept through a volatile district west of Kandahar in an operation designed to ferret out nests of insurgents.

The four-day swing, code-named Operation Rolling Thunder, was conducted alongside Afghan government forces.

The operation saw several firefights in Zhari district, long a hotbed of Taliban activity.

No Canadian casualties were reported yesterday by military officials who released information about the operation.

An unknown number of militants were believed killed in the operation.

The Taliban had for months been using roadside bombs and booby traps to chip away at better armed NATO troops. Over the last few weeks, however, they have chosen to stand and fight small-arms engagements, using AK-47s and rocket propelled grenades.

Speaking on background, Canadian commanders conceded there has been a "significant increase" in direct-fire attacks, but they are not ready to conclude that the Taliban have switched tactics...

Since the end of the poppy harvest, tens of thousands of local young men have become unemployed. The Taliban were believed trying to recruit them as fighters, and there has been a steady increase in violence.

NATO's principal base in the region, Kandahar Airfield, has also been hit almost nightly with 107 mm Chinese- or Russian-made rockets. The wildly erratic attacks have caused little damage.

And a particular success:

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan — Canadian and Afghan forces appear to have scored a modest victory in an operation west of Kandahar this week, killing a mid-level Taliban commander and a handful of militant foot soldiers.

Afghan police identified the dead insurgent leader on Saturday as Mullah Tohr Agha, a group commander in the volatile Zhari district.

"We are quite satisfied," Gen. Sayed Agha Saqib, the provincial police chief of Kandahar said at news conference in the provincial capital, where some of the captured fighters were paraded out for the local media.

Agha was killed in an air strike Friday on a compound near Pashmul, Saqib said in a later interview.

His elimination is important to the effort to bring stability to the restive region because Agha's cell was apparently involved in planting roadside bombs, burning schools and a co-ordinated campaign of assassination attempts on local government officials.

"They were not selling cucumbers," Saqib added dryly.

As many as 16 other Taliban fighters were killed and up to 40 were taken prisoner, but Saqib conceded that police will have to check the identities of those in custody to ensure they are bona fide militants.

Canadian commanders were not able to confirm the Afghan police account, but seemed pleased that the four-day sweep of the eastern portion of the district had netted some gains...

Meanwhile the Globe and Mail's Doug Saunders manages to find the terrible implications of what many consider increasingly successful US counterinsurgency efforts in the east; I strongly suspect Mr Saunders read the piece at the link and decided to put his own spin on things; gotta keep the paper's agenda going:

Afghanistan: colonialism or counterinsurgency?
Americans bring Afghans their new 60-year plan

Good grief. More on the US in eastern Afstan here. All of which is not to say that things are easy there--see also this post.

Mr Saunders also has a very snarky tone combined with a poor grasp of history:

In practice, I found, it looks and sounds a lot more like old-fashioned colonialism. In the tents of Naray, I had the distinct feeling that I had strolled into Uttar Pradesh at some point after 1858, in the early days of the British Raj.

UP, or United Provinces, were not created until 1902 as the "United Provinces of Agra and Oudh" (see last para at preceding link), shortened to "United Provinces" in 1935; Independent India changed the name to Uttar Pradesh in 1950. Mr Saunders could hardly have been there in the "early days" of the Raj, even in his imagination. Plus it would have been an odd "distinct' feeling" since UP is flat and Hindi-speaking whilst eastern Afstan is hilly and populated by Pathans.

Update: See the excellent first comment by Dave on Mr Saunders' approach to committing journalism. Meanwhile, as for the Brits:

British troops put Taliban 'on the run'
Forces tactically routed, says army commander

With some help from US Marines (as noted in story above too):

Optimism Grows as Marines Push Against Taliban

Upperdate: US Marines again:

U.S. offensive taking pressure off Cdns in Kandahar

Not cutting and running

The stylist who just cut my wife's hair is going to the Sandbox. She's in her late thirties and leaving soon for a six-month stint with the Canadian Forces Personnel and Family Support Services (formerly Canadian Forces Personnel Support Agency) at Kandahar Air Field. The CF have provided her two weeks' orientation at CFB Kingston--you won't believe the heat was one thing that stood out. She'll be in uniform, working seven days a week. No perms, just haircuts (but females might arrange off-duty perm nights).

How'd it happen? A male Army fellow whose hair she cuts persuaded her. And she met several people who've served in Afstan. One piece of advice: get in with the Brits, they have a "curry house".

Quite a person, I'd say. Good on the (imaginary) CCVBC: the Canadian Civilian Volunteer Barber Corps.

Alternative title: "What are you doing for the summer?" "I'm going to Kandahar." As spoken. Post done with permission.

"THE AIR FORCE AND ITS GOOD NEWS C-17 STORY"

That's the title of a post by David Pugliese of theOttawa Citizen at his blog. Well worth the read. Note the close cooperation with the USAF; I wonder what the usual suspects might say (and a certain renowned defence expert).

Buffalo tempest rather overdone

First there was this in the Globe and Mail:

The Canadian military has been warned internally that there's no guarantee the aging search-and-rescue planes it uses to patrol the West Coast and B.C. mountains will be able to keep running until 2015, the date for replacement aircraft recently unveiled by the Harper government.

The former Liberal government earmarked $1.3-billion in the 2004 budget to buy new search-and-rescue planes for Canada as early as January, 2009 [the budget actually called for first delivery no later than September 2005!], but they didn't move ahead with it and neither has the Harper government.

Instead, the Conservatives have so far focused military equipment spending on items that are useful for the war in Afghanistan, such as the $3.4-billion paid [no! those billions have not been "paid", they're life-cycle costs not the flyaway price] for gigantic C-17 cargo-lifter planes last year [oh! that nasty Afghan war].

In the meantime, Canada's aging search and rescue planes, such as the 41-year-old CC-115 Buffalos that patrol British Columbia and Yukon coastlines and mountains, have been plagued by breakdowns, a shortage of parts and frequent downtime for repairs.

In mid-May, the Tories released a blueprint for future military equipment purchases, setting 2015 as the year they plan to have new Canadian search and rescue planes in service. The Buffalo planes will be 48 years old by then.

But an exploratory review of extending the lifespan of the CC-115 Buffalos, that reported between April, 2006, and April, 2007, warned the Department that the ability to keep supplying and repairing the aircraft is uncertain. "Support for the Buffalo is very precarious," the report said of the plane, a variant of the de Havilland DHC-5.

"Although we currently have support for all systems, nothing guarantees DND that current suppliers and refit & overhaul contractors will remain faithful until 2015," the Department was warned in the document, obtained under the Access to Information Act.

"With a very limited number of DHC-5 aircraft still flying in the world, Buffalo-related support is a dying business and companies will not hesitate to withdraw when a more lucrative opportunity comes along."..

I suspect those writing the report were being a) cautiously prudent and, b) trying to push along the case for a new fixed-wing SAR aircraft.

Then the Globe did provide a bit more context:

VICTORIA, OTTAWA — It's noisy and handles like a bus. It breaks down often and replacement parts are scarce. But once the aging CC-115 Buffalo is up in the air, the search-and-rescue pilots who fly it are trusting and loyal.

"If you have a '67 Mustang, you know you need to give it some TLC," Captain John Edwards, a veteran search-and-rescue pilot said yesterday.

Capt. Edwards, now the air co-ordinator at the Joint Rescue Co-ordination Centre in Victoria, has logged four years as a Buffalo pilot.

"The only thing we have ever called it is the bus," he said...

"There's no question it takes a lot of effort to keep a 41-year-old plane operable," he said. "But when called up, the plane seems to do its task."

In the House of Commons yesterday [May 26], Defence Minister Peter MacKay was fending off opposition attacks over the warnings the Buffalos may not last until 2015 - the date when replacements have been promised by the Harper government.

Mr. MacKay insisted safety will not be jeopardized and that Hercules planes and Cormorant helicopters are also available for duty. He said he's having a difficult time finding a new plane that matches the Buffalo's unique ability to slowly float through British Columbia's mountainous skies.

"It's a very specialized aircraft, and for that reason, we're having difficulty determining what the proper replacement would be, but we're well down the road on making that decision and it'll be made soon [emphasis added, I wonder how soon "soon" is]," Mr. MacKay told reporters.

It's interesting that neither Globe story mentioned an important fact, reported by David Pugliese in the Ottawa Citizen two weeks before the first Globe piece (and why didn't MND MacKay mention it?]:

...
The Defence Department will proceed with what it is calling the "Buffalo Avionics Life Extension -- Lite," which will upgrade various systems on the planes. Some of the instruments now in the Buffalo do not conform to current civilian aviation standards, potentially limiting where the planes can fly in civilian airspace, pilots have said.

The Defence Department expects to have the first upgraded aircraft ready by January of next year.

The estimated cost of the project is $4.6 million, defence spokeswoman Krista Hannivan wrote in an e-mail. "Proven off-the-shelf technologies are being purchased through Field Aviation, of Calgary -- the prime component contractor for the CC-115 -- and integrated into the fleet," she added.

The upgrade will replace outdated aircraft electronic equipment and bring the Buffalo in line with modern aviation electronics standards to take the aircraft to 2015, the e-mail noted. The project will include new radios, instrument landing system receivers, emergency locator transmitters and flight data recorders, among other equipment...

Now some more interesting background is published in the Victoria Times Colonist; what do think the odds are that the Globe will notice?

It is wrong to suggest that the Buffalo aircraft -- known as the CC-115 in military service and DHC-5 in civilian use -- is an "orphan" with no "ready supply of spare parts," as has been suggested in the Times Colonist. Viking Air Ltd. will not let that happen.

Viking, which is located at Victoria International Airport, is the Transport Canada-approved design owner (known as a type certificate) for the Buffalo and is responsible for worldwide support of the aircraft.

Viking Air Ltd. takes this responsibility very seriously. Viking did not acquire the DHC-1 through DHC-7 (which includes the Buffalo) type certificates and production rights from Bombardier in 2006 simply to abandon them and their owner/operators.

In fact, the service and support of these aircraft is the primary business focus of Viking and our almost 300 employees. Viking and our support partner Field Aviation of Calgary are committed to supporting the Buffalo fleet and working with the Department of National Defence in building a sustainment model to ensure that the Buffalo aircraft meets the current and anticipated needs of our Armed Forces in a safe and effective manner...

Of the aircraft types designed in the '60s, the Buffalo is one of the few that can continue in service without having to undergo a major (and massively costly) rebuild/replacement of fuselage or wings in order to remain structurally viable.

According to our records, more than half the original fleet of Buffalos are still in service around the world. Considering that production stopped in 1986, this alone is a testament to the aircraft's durability, the loyalty of its users and the support provided by Viking and our partners...

There should be absolutely no doubt that Viking and its support partner Field Aviation are committed to supporting the DHC-5 (CC-115) Buffalo until the year 2015 and longer as maybe necessary.

The fact that Viking, located on Vancouver Island and the Buffalo design holder, was not contacted by any media outlet in order to better understand the support arrangements for the CC-115 Buffalo is, in my opinion, unacceptable [emphasis added].

David Curtis is president and CEO of Viking Air Ltd.

Of course both Viking and Field could go out of business or suddenly decide to stop supporting the Buffalos. But how likely is that? Which is not to say that we should not get new fixed-wing SAR aircraft as soon as possible (update: there are problems with Buffalo component suppliers); but budgets and politics stand in the way. More here, here, here, and here. Possible sole-sourcing attacks in particular may have put cabinet off a decision over a year ago.

Viking has its own ideas about the Buffalo's future, including new builds:

It is our opinion that the Buffalo could be modernized by an all-Canadian team in order for it to serve the specialized mission of the DND for many years to come, at a fraction of the cost of a new fleet of C-27Js.

As we have found with the Twin Otter [Viking is building new ones], there is nothing else produced today that will do what the Buffalo is capable of. This is a Canadian-designed and built aircraft, perfectly suited for a specialized Canadian mission and supported by local Canadian companies.

Instead of looking outside of the country, the best solution is to improve on a good thing by investing in a modernization program to extend the useful life of the existing Buffalo fleet. A Buffalo fleet modernization might be the catalyst to return the Buffalo to production...

I can't see the Air Force going for this. They want one plane for fixed-wing SAR across the country (instead of now the six Buffalos in B.C. and our remaining C-130Es in the rest of the country--I'm pretty sure nineteen are not still flying). I think they also want a plane that can double effectively as a tactical transport within Canada to supplement our C-130Js when the C-130Hs are retired. And I don't think the Buffalo, old or new-build, fits that role.

More at Milnet.ca.

Babbler's update: The most snarktastic line of the day goes to Richard Ball, commenting over at SDA:

What the MSM needs is a powerful online search engine so that reporters can stay in their kitchens, sip coffee, and yet still do due diligence. Ideally, this powerful online search engine would have a snappy name, like, Boggle, or Gobble, or Giggle.

Farking brilliant!

Mark's update: Funny that search engine seems to work so much better for me than our media.

CF and HUMINT: "Guys, honestly: Why even bother having a defence critic?"

Colby Cosh discusses a shocking CBC revelation:

The necessity of HUMINT

CBC News scored a fascinating coup on Monday when it disclosed the existence of a dedicated Canadian human intelligence (HUMINT) unit in Afghanistan-- one, according to Brigadier-General Denis Thompson, that has existed in the combat theatre "essentially" since the commencement of hostilities. According to documents obtained by the network, the Canadian Forces (CF) will spend $27-million on equipment for the unit over the next three years.

Unfortunately, the new information in the CBC's story was handled in the usual slightly tone-deaf manner with which civilian reporters treat military news; making matters worse was a canned response from NDP defence critic Dawn Black, who complained that human intelligence gathering in a war zone "raises all kinds of red flags" (say, what have the New Democrats got against red flags?) and stated, "There's never been a debate in Canada that I am aware of on running an intelligence company out of the Canadian Forces."

Guys, honestly:Why even bother having a defence critic?

That scary acronym HUMINT is, in truth, nothing more that mil-speak for any relevant knowledge gathered by an army directly from human sources. Other types include signals intelligence (SIGINT), obtained by intercepting and decrypting the enemy's (or someone else's) information transmissions, and imagery intelligence (IMINT), which comes from the study of photographs taken from the air or space. It is not news that the CF has been trying to strengthen its HUMINT-gathering capacity for years; indeed, it has been openly recruiting bright, curious soldiers for the purpose...

Tips and reports from Afghan civilians opposed to the Taliban must be stored in a way that makes them available for retrieval, rated for reliability and plausibility and turned into memoranda for the timely use of soldiers and staff. The toughest task of all is linking multiple fragments of intelligence together so that they combine into a trustworthy picture of, say, the location of a bomb factory or the date of an attack. Military software developers have been putting a great deal of effort into applying artificial intelligence to HUMINT gathering: arming computers with natural-language recognition abilities would help them navigate databases and put up flags when pieces of evidence point in a common direction.

It is absurd to demand a "debate" on whether a fighting force abroad should have a HUMINT apparatus; it would be exactly like debating whether it should carry ammunition [emphasis added]. And the existence of such an apparatus can only raise "red flags" in the eyes of a person who has never devoted a moment's thought or study to how armies fight.

Afstan/Pakistan news

A roundup:

Already besieged by Bernier affair, Tories come under attack for Italian gaffe
Wrongly saying Italy was prepared to lift caveat on combat in Afghanistan 'just stupid': Ignatieff

Focus on terrorists, not Taliban, Afghan elders urge Canadians

Canadian officials urged to focus on job-creation projects

Who needs the Germans?
Whether Berlin's 3,500 troops stay or leave `makes no difference to us,' says one senior Afghan official

Why NATO Troops Can't Deliver Peace in Afghanistan
Forty nations are embroiled in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan. Anyone who travels through the country with Western troops soon realizes that NATO forces would have to be increased tenfold for peace to be even a remote possibility...

U.S. commander in Afghanistan faults Pakistan for not pressing militants

On fighting the information war in the ether

Via the indispensable Castle Argghhh! comes this tidbit from a U.S. three-star that puts the CF's dark-ages blogging policy to shame:

Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, who heads the Combined Arms Center [CAC] and Ft. Leavenworth, told his soldiers in a recent memo that "faculty and students will begin blogging as part of their curriculum and writing requirements both within the .mil and public environments. In addition CAC subordinate organizations will begin to engage in the blogosphere in an effort to communicate the myriad of activities that CAC is accomplishing and help assist telling the Army’s story to a wide and diverse audience."

Lt. Gen. Caldwell, the former commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, is a blogger himself, contributing to Small Wars Journal. He made waves in January when he wrote that "we must encourage our Soldiers to... get onto blogs and to send their YouTube videos to their friends and family."

Yes, yes, he's a bit of a maverick in this regard. And yes, I do understand that QR&O's are not the UCMJ, and that our constitutional foundations for free speech are markedly different.

Still, I have yet to see a Canadian Major-General or Rear-Admiral stand up and say that milblogging is a good thing for his soldiers, sailors, or airmen to do. From what I can tell, if a commander were to give blanket permission to blog to those in his chain of command, it might well comply with the requirements in the appropriate CANFORGEN.

Unfortunately, I think there are a couple of obstacles in the way: most general officers don't have any clue how powerful social media can be, and even if they did, I'm not sure how many of them would think this is a hill worth dying on.

They're wrong - horribly shortsighted and wrong. Every mission those generals take on at home or abroad depends ultimately upon the support of the Canadian people. And yet they won't let soldiers talk directly in electronic format to the public that pays them, equips them, and gives them their mandate...

"PO, hand me my clue-bat..."

You could just see LCdr Thompson saying that after reading this letter in the Toronto Star the other day about a U.S. deserter denied asylum in Canada:

I hope all would-be soldiers learn from the sad case of Corey Glass. Do not join the military to do community service, to do charity, to learn a trade or to get university tuition credit. Do not believe the promises made by military recruiters...

When I read it, I was tempted to make a comment here myself. After all, it's been awhile since I've gone on a good rant. But reading LCdr Thompson's rebuttal in today's paper, I'm glad I didn't; he did a much better job of it than I would have:

Why is the military painted as dishonest or even evil because recruiting campaigns emphasize the benefits of military service (education, travel, adventure, etc.)? The ads that have been circulating in recent years are true and accurate – an observation based on more than 25 years of service.

Every job has aspects that are less than pleasant, yet we do not admonish trade schools for not mentioning that plumbers sometimes end up covered in raw sewage. Anybody who joins the military thinking they're only going to do humanitarian work isn't paying attention.

It should be no secret that the military goes in harm's way and occasionally uses force to carry out government policy. To reap the benefits of military service, but then cut and run when things start to heat up, is reprehensible and Canadians should want nothing to do with it.

Did Corey Glass not realize when they handed him a gun during training that military service was more than filling sandbags during a flood? Not only has he turned his back on a voluntary commitment, he has now forced someone else to go in harm's way in his stead.

I do think the killing of men, women and children is abhorrent, but indiscriminate killing is not what professional armies do. Some things are worth defending and if that means using force, including deadly force, to stop those who would behead a teacher, then so be it. It's that simple. [Babbler's bold]

Hear, frickin' hear.

Old and new

Quite a contrast but the same lineage:



Thanks to an American reader who remarked:

A C-47 and a C-17 are doing a side-by-side flyby at an air show this year at Altus AFB in Oklahoma. Unfortunately, they're not in CF livery in the shot but that aside, it's nevertheless a rather striking photo. No doubt, a few Torch surfers can walk down memory lane seeing that old Dakota.

I can remember when I was in the USAF, in the early 70s, they had one of the last of the AF Gooney Birds there, used mainly for the pilots in desk jockey assignments to get their requisite monthly minimum flying hours to get flight pay, although they called it "maintaining flying proficiency". (A C-47 helping you maintain your KC-135 or F-4 driving skills? Yeah, right. :-) A pilot told me that for a "proficiency flight", they'd load up the seats with desk jockeys and just fecklessly fly around northern California and Nevada all day, taking turns at the controls, otherwise reading a novel or BS'ing with each other when not at the controls. Ah, well, the ones I knew were good guys and were mostly Korean or Vietnam combat veterans and had earned the perq, I guess.

The difference in specs [see following links] is a microcosm of air transport development and history. One thing for sure, if the Globemaster ends up with as distinguished a history as does the Gooney Bird/Dakota, it'll be no less a milestone.

RCAF Dakota:



Canadian Air Force Globemaster III:



And here are DC-3s still flying in the Canadian north:



Lots more on old planes still flying in the north here.

Update: The first Globemaster:



And the second:



Upperdate: Here's a video of the Gooney Bird and Globemaster together (see about 50 seconds in; h/t to Astrodog at Milnet.ca)

Interview with CDS Gen. Hillier in Vanguard magazine

The general adheres to Auftragstaktik: good on him. Some brief excerpts, whole thing worth reading (as is the magazine as a whole, check it out):

...
I draw our transformation as a four-stage rocket. The first part we concentrated on was force employment: Canada Command and CEFCOM. That’s where I felt we needed the most change. Guiding this are the CDS’s principles: a Canadian Forces focus, operations primacy, command centric – commanders with the appropriate staff who then have responsibility, authority and accountability to accomplish their missions – and mission command: I want you to achieve this effect in Afghanistan, as opposed to here’s what I want you to do and how to do it [the author at the link seems to share some views with Gen. Hillier]. Lastly, we are an organization based upon civilians, regular force and reservists, and all three components play a part in what we do...

In the past, you’ve mentioned revolutionizing procurement: for the force you need and the complexity of missions, is it possible to create the kind of flexibility that can provide what you want when you want?

I think it is, but I don’t think we’re there yet. It is crucial to the success of the CF to move to something that is flexible and adaptable. We can help that with a strategic-level statement of requirements. No more 1600 pages of specifics; rather we need an aircraft that can deliver the following effect: range, weight, capacity, conditions. Second, we’ve got to take an appetite suppressant on “Canadianization.” [emphasis added] That’s hundreds of millions and it also extends the time line. Lastly, we’ve got to buy off-the-shelf whenever we can. Where we run into problems, and are still running into problems, is when we try to take an aircraft and match it up with, say, a developmental system of sensors. That causes delays and cost overruns.

We’ve also got to demand from the political side that, when those things are done, we don’t then take months and months to sort out industrial regional benefits or contract awarding [emphasis added]. Otherwise we’re into the same dynamic we’re in now...

More on IRBs here. I wonder if frustration over the issues in the two last paragraphs might also have contributed to Gen. Hillier's decision to step down as CDS.

CF and Marines in the field in Afstan (plus Aussie and Brit updates)

Our troops maintaining a necessary presence:

At Afghan outpost, relative luxury of Kandahar is world away

PANJWAI DISTRICT, AFGHANISTAN — Warrant Officer Devin Ramos had flashbacks to Vietnam movies the first time he was dropped off by a helicopter at one of the tiny outposts the Canadian military has scattered throughout the Panjwai district.

"It reminded me of a little fort bristling with machine guns and wire," he said.
m
The 34-year-old Edmonton-based soldier with the 3rd Battalion of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry has spent the bulk of his tour since he arrived in February stationed at outposts, and recently headed up the one in Zangabad.

The station, which is officially named Platoon House Boyes, opened late last year in an effort to hold ground in the hotly contested and turbulent Panjwai district and help train Afghan police. It is named in honour of Sergeant Jason Boyes who was killed in March after stepping on an explosive device a few hundred metres from the station...

At the outposts, there is no plumbing or mess halls or air conditioning, and daytime temperatures now top 40 C. Soldiers use a urinal and outhouse, complete with honey bags - plastic bags filled with waste...

Concerns about isolation have increased in recent weeks because road convoys to resupply the soldiers have become extremely rare as a result of concerns about improvised explosive devices [emphasis added], or roadside bombs. Soldiers are left to hike in and out of the volatile area with all their belongings. Supplies, including military rations, water and fuel, are delivered by helicopter drops...

When not out patrolling or meeting with locals, soldiers often work around the outpost, including building common areas. Nothing is wasted...

Despite the hardships, WO Ramos said the majority of soldiers who are stationed at the isolated stations are happy with their assignment.

"This is an adventure. It's something you'll remember. It's why you are in the army," he said.

US Marines taking back territory (the reporter, Carlotta Gall, has sometimes seemed to have an, er, attitude--see Update here):

Optimism Grows as Marines Push Against Taliban

GARMSER, Afghanistan — For two years British troops staked out a presence in this small district center in southern Afghanistan and fended off attacks from the Taliban. The constant firefights left it a ghost town, its bazaar broken and empty but for one baker, its houses and orchards reduced to rubble and weeds.

The 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit patrolled the southern Afghanistan village of Hazarjoft on May 21. The unit is planning to move on in the next few weeks.

But it took the Marines, specifically the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, about 96 hours to clear out the Taliban in a fierce battle in the past month and push them back about 6 miles.

It was their first major combat operation since landing in March, and it stood in stark contrast to the events of a year earlier, when a Marine unit was removed in disgrace within weeks of arriving because its members shot and killed 19 civilians after a suicide bombing attack.

This time, the performance of the latest unit of marines, here in Afghanistan for seven months to help bolster NATO forces, will be under particular scrutiny. The NATO-led campaign against the Taliban has not only come under increasing pressure for its slow progress in curbing the insurgency, but it has also been widely criticized for the high numbers of civilian casualties in the fighting.

The marines’ drive against the Taliban in this large farming region is certainly not finished, and the Taliban have often been pushed out of areas in Afghanistan only to return in force later. But for the British forces and Afghan residents here, the result of the recent operation has been palpable...

After a month in the region, the marines have secured only half of a roughly six-square-mile area south of Garmser. Taliban forces operating out of two villages are still attacking the southern flank of the marines and are even creeping up to fire at British positions on the edge of the town.

But the bigger test will come in the next few weeks as the marines move on and the Afghans, supported by the British, take over [emphasis added]. The concern here is that the Taliban will try to blend in among the returning villagers and orchestrate attacks...

Update: I wonder how typical this is (brave officers to so publish):

Australian infantry troops are ashamed of their "second rate" role in Iraq and Afghanistan and want to see combat as well as protection and reconstruction roles, according to an army major who served in Iraq.

In an article titled "We Were Soldiers Once" in the latest edition of the Australian Army Journal, Major Jim Hammett, who served in Iraq, Somalia, East Timor, and Tonga, said some infantry soldiers were ashamed of wearing the Australian uniform.

"The restrictions placed on deployed elements as a result of force protection and national policies have, at times, made infantrymen ashamed of wearing their Australian uniform and regimental badge," Hammett wrote.

"(They) have resulted in the widespread perception that our army is plagued by institutional cowardice."

In a second article in the journal, Captain Greg Colton, second-in-command of Sydney's 3rd battalion, said troop morale had deteriorated because infantry were kept away from frontlines like "downtown Baghdad, Basra and Helmand province."

"There is a growing sense of frustration within the ranks of the infantry that regular infantry units are only receiving perceived second-rate operational taskings," wrote Colton...

Then there's this familiar problem, this time with the Brits:

Fears for patrol vehicles as blast kills serviceman in Afghanistan
...
The underside of armoured vehicles deployed in Helmand has proven to be highly susceptible to mines buried by the Taleban, and the Ministry of Defence is preparing to add extra armour to key vehicles. The relatively new Viking armoured troop-carrying vehicle – which was built for the Royal Marines for use in Norway but is now being used across desert routes in northern Helmand – has proven to be vulnerable to the mines, which are suspected of being supplied from Iran. Five Vikings have been destroyed by mines...[more here]

Yet more:

Failing the troops in Afghanistan

I think we've done pretty well regarding our Army; now to get those Air Force Chinooks, Griffons and UAVs in the field in their support.

LAV III replacement, plus a tracked Infantry Fighting Vehicle?

A CTV story. The LAV-H (more from David Pugliese's blog)? Given political realities something made in Canada would seem a dead cert. Now for a LAV joke--more here.

Israelis in Afstan to support Canadian UAVs?

A very noxious column by Greg Weston of the Sun papers led to this topic of mine at Milnet.ca (make sure you see the Upperdate):

Mr Weston, in this column in the Sun papers,

Supply and unreal demands
Canada's flawed plan to buy spy planes could create an Israeli presence in Afghanistan
http://www.ottawasun.com/Comment/2008/05/25/5661681-sun.html

which I find very offensive in tone, asserts that if Canada buys UAVs of Israeli manufacture Israeli citizens will be needed in Afstan to support the CF's operation of the aircraft. Any truth in that? And reaction to the column generally with its assertion that we are "occupying" the country?

The text (usual copyright disclaimer):

Today's tour of the federal funny farm takes us (yet again) to the Department of National Defence, this time coming to the aid of our troops in Afghanistan with rented Israeli spy planes. Really [emphasis added].

Four months ago, Stephen Harper said the government had ordered a fleet of unmanned surveillance aircraft to help reduce the amount of time our troops have to spend travelling heavily landmined roads of Kandahar.

In fact, the prime minister said in January, the government "has had them on order for some time."

Or not. Truth is, the government still hasn't ordered the planes, the bidding to supply them having closed only this past week.

Sources in the defence industry say the requirements for supplying the unmanned drones are so onerous that most of the world's suppliers politely said thanks, but no thanks.

That left only two companies in the running -- both Israeli.

The concept of Canada's deploying Israeli spy planes to watch over a Muslim country we are occupying [emphasis added] definitely risks some indigestion in diplomatic, if not military, circles.

But the planes may be only part of a much larger Israeli presence joining our Canadian troops in Afghanistan.

Government documents stipulate that the winning supplier will also have to provide the crews needed to maintain the drones at the Canadian base in Afghanistan, prepare the craft for flight, and actually remote-pilot the planes through all takeoffs and landings.

If nothing else, the prospect of an Israeli contingent moving into Camp Canuck in Kandahar [emphasis added] should cause no end of fun over at Foreign Affairs.

The story of how Canada will likely wind up with Israeli drones has caused considerable chatter in the defence industries, and shows just how much federal contracting has changed since the bad ol' Liberal days.

More than a year ago, the Harper cabinet was apparently ready to approve the purchase of American-made Predator drones for use in the Afghan conflict.

The Predators are one of the few unmanned aircraft anywhere that can be outfitted with weapons, including Hellfire missiles.

Besides, it made sense: Both the American and British forces fighting alongside our troops in southern Afghanistan are already using the unmanned Predators.

Integrating a new Canadian fleet for everything from ground control to spare parts would have seemed a no-brainer.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the cabinet table last year.

Word is at least one minister, an unabashed booster of all things Israel, convinced his cabinet colleagues to put the Predator order on ice, and to open the process to, ahem, other suppliers [emphasis added].

[The received view is that the issue was sole-sourcing as such for Predators:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/07/why-cf-do-not-have-predator-uavs-for.html
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/09/uav-under-supported-aerial-vehicle.html

ALARM BELLS

Almost a year later, nothing much had happened when the Manley report set off alarm bells, recommending Canada acquire a fleet of unmanned drones by February, 2009, as a condition of staying in Afghanistan.

In spite of the PM's expressed optimism at the time that new drones were just over the horizon, there was none for sale for delivery to Afghanistan by next winter, and no way to train Canadian crews in such a short time.

That's apparently when someone came up with the rent-a-drone plan, with one other major change.

The winning plane no longer had to have any weapons capability, just surveillance, a provision that opened the door to the two Israeli companies.

[Not so. The weapons capability was dropped in 2007 well before the Manley report:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/11/armed-uavs.html

(In practice, that means Canadian forces will be able to spot an enemy target, but can't do anything about it except call in armed aircraft from the Americans or Brits. Brilliant.)

All of which may have seemed like a good idea at the time, but not to most of the would-be suppliers.

General Atomics Ltd., maker of the American-made Predator, was the first bidder out the door, saying no company could deliver a fleet of drones in just six months, while the rest of the requirements were unreasonably risky.

That left the two Israeli firms -- Elbit Systems and Israel Aerospace Industries.

But on the eve of the May 20 deadline for bid submissions this past week, the Canadian Defence Review reported that Elbit's prime partner, U.K.-based Thales, had pulled out of the deal, too.

ISRAEL FAVOURED

Federal officials say Elbit's bid is still active, but industry sources say Israel Aerospace is now the odds-on favourite to win the bid.

Turns out that company's Canadian partner in the deal is MacDonald Dettwiler & Associates (MDA), the same Vancouver-based firm that just tried to sell itself, the Radarsat satellite, and the iconic Canadarm to the Americans.

The Harper government blocked the $1.35-billion sale of MDA, but maybe a $93-million drone deal would help ease the pain.

Say shalom to Kandahar, baby [emphasis added].

Posts by David Pugliese on the UAV situation and Israeli manufacturers:
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2008/04/21/predator-firm-sitting-on-the-fence-for-canadian-uav-program.aspx
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2008/05/15/it-s-official-no-predator-uavs-for-cf-in-kandahar.aspx

Surely personnel could come via the Israeli companies' partners Thales (Elbit) or MDA (IAI)? And Canadian company L-3 MAS is taking the actual lead on the Elbit side. And note this:

...L-3 has joined forces with Elbit Systems Ltd. of Israel, which is already leasing Hermes 450 UAVs to British forces in Iraq...

Somehow I doubt there are any Israelis with the Brits in Iraq. More on leasing the UAVS for Afstan (Project NOCTUA) here, with the MERX "Letters of Interest (LOI) Notice" and requirements.

Update: Upon reflection I think Mr Weston might well be seen as a slightly camp version of what the English used to call a "spiv".

Upperdate: I think this comment by Beauty and says it all:

Note - The Canadian partners (Thales, MDA and L-3) for the UAVs have been fast and furious with job postings for retired Canadian Forces members in the various military base newspapers specifically offering employment with UAVs in Kandahar since early April.

Military intelligence is not a contradiction in terms

It's a necessity in an operational theatre, as the CF well recognize:

The Canadian military has established a special intelligence unit to do spy work on overseas missions, in places like Afghanistan, CBC News has learned.

CBC obtained documents that show the Canadian Forces is spending about $27 million over the next three years to purchase equipment for the new unit, which is actively recruiting soldiers.

Many details about the unit are considered classified, and not being released to the public, but the documents show that members analyze information gathered by other soldiers in the field, such as the information soldiers might pick up while interviewing motorists and searching cars at roadside checkpoints.

The intelligence unit can also be tasked with recruiting and overseeing local intelligence agents who are already operating in a country.

The focus is to gather intelligence about the operational side of a mission, such as hunting for Taliban bomb makers in Afghanistan. Bigger intelligence questions, such the global manhunt for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, won't be handled by the unit.

It's not clear what countries the unit is currently operating in.

NDP Defence critic Dawn Black said more information needs to be made public.

"We don't know, and that leaves it open to all kinds of questions," she said. "Because we don't know, that raises all kinds of red flags."

By the way, the CF have been doing overt (and, I suspect using recruited agents to do rather more) HUMINT for some time with appropriately trained personnel; see the Canadian Forces' general message at the Update here.

Update: Plus a topic thread at Milnet.ca. And commenters gone wild at the CBC, close to 300.

Second verse, same as the first...

One of the issues in the Afghan conflict that just doesn't seem to go away is the tension between the military and NGO roles in aid and development work. That's probably because western militaries are relearning the age-old lessons of counterinsurgency work (improve the lives of the locals, and they'll be less likely to support the insurgents), and because it's a complicated enough situation that there are no easy solutions.

I've weighed in on this topic before, and I have yet to hear or read anything that has changed my views on the issue. But I'm still open to discussion, if anyone wants to make a decent argument for the civilianization of development, aid, and reconstruction in Afghanistan specifically, and failed states in general.

The latest foray into this area of discussion comes from an interview of Fatima Gailani, president of the Afghan Red Crescent Society, in Maclean's magazine by the inestimable Paul Wells. Ms. Gailani's remarks are measured and balanced, but the headline-writer seems to have latched on to one particular quote:

The humanitarian work should be left to the people who have always been doing the humanitarian job. You must not mix up things and change roles. That confuses people.

I won't bother providing a rebuttal of my own, since a couple of Canadian NCM's have already done a better job of it than I could:

Female soldiers are finding an unwritten - but not unwanted - responsibility waiting for them in Afghanistan.

In many rural villages in Kandahar province, the only females who can meet local women wear the Canadian flag on their uniform. Large areas are too dangerous for anyone but a soldier to walk into.

***

"I didn't come here looking for this," said Master Cpl. Sheri Lynn Andrews. "I suppose my views were naive, I was coming to help Afghanistan as a whole. We're not a group of bra-burning woman activists, that's not why we're here. But the security situation is not conducive to civilians walking around. There's just nobody else."

Sgt. Connie Uetz accepts the same position.

"These women have to be helped and if we're the only ones who can do it, then that's just the way it is," Uetz said. [Babbler's emphasis]

And since we throw enough darts at the MSM around here, let me add a laurel where it's due: good on Ryan Cormier for writing this piece. It's important, and very few Canadians would know about it otherwise.

As I said, the safety of civilian workers is a serious concern, and blurred lines between civilian and military assistance can affect that safety. But what's the alternative? I have yet to hear a credible one.

Somebody needs to lead on this. And in the absence of enough civilian takers, that task falls to soldiers.

Understated

Napalm was probably in the mix, said Sgt. Murray, which made putting out the fire on him difficult. But everybody survived. He set up a defence perimeter, checked on the crew, issued fire orders and prepared for an ambush that never came.

"I guess you don't give up," said Sgt. Murray. "And if it works out OK, that's great, and if it doesn't, well, you're not going to be around to worry about it."

La Gouverneure générale du Canada inaugure le Collège militaire royal de Saint-Jean

A photo and a story in La Presse:

The news release:

SAINT-JEAN-SUR RICHELIEU, Qué. – The Royal Military College Saint-Jean (RMC St-Jean) was inaugurated today [more on the ceremony from the College's website], fulfilling a promise by the government to re-open this important facility.

Her Excellency the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean, Governor General and Commander-in-Chief of Canada, presented the Commandant, Colonel François Pion, with the new College coat of arms. Also in attendance were the Honourable Peter Gordon MacKay, Minister of National Defence and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, and General Rick Hillier, Chief of the Defence Staff.

"I am thrilled to have been able to see this institution re-opened - it was a priority for our government and we delivered the goods," said Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence and the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency. "This independent and vibrant academic institution provides a vital educational asset to the region and it's re-opening exemplifies our government's commitment to getting things done right to provide the best education and training for our CF members."

The newly established academic program will enable Officer Cadets to complete a two-year CEGEP program. The Officer Cadets will then be able to pursue their university degree at the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston or at a civilian university depending on their academic program.

Once again, RMC St-Jean renews with a long tradition of a military education for Canadian officers focused on the four components unique to the military colleges. Military training, physical fitness, bilingualism and academic excellence will shape the life of the students.

The education and training of Officer Cadets is only one of RMC St-Jean's mandates. Both Officers and Non-commissioned members of the Canadian Forces are pursuing professional development, all year round, through a variety of programs offered by the institution.

For example, the Continuing Studies Division offers a distance-learning program for university level courses. Non-commissioned members prepare themselves to assume positions, up to Chief Warrant Officer or Chief Petty Officer First Class, at the Non-commissioned Member Professional Development Centre. Finally, the Canadian Forces Management Development School is a unique centre of excellence in applied management and leadership training that also resides at RMC St-Jean.

One might wish though that Mr MacKay had been a tad less, er, political.

What Afstan is all about

An opponent to our mission is taken on, superbly, at Milnet.ca.

Naval F-35C for Canada?

This is fascinating (via Chimera at Milnet.ca):

From Jane's Defence Weekly [text subscriber only]

Canada considers F-35 carrier variant
Canada may scrap plans to buy some conventional F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft in favour of F-35C carrier variants well suited for cold weather and Arctic operations, according to a defence industry source close to the JSF programme. Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Canadian media on 12 May that Canada would buy 65 JSF aircraft [not quite] instead of the 80 aircraft it was expected to buy under an agreement to provide funds for Production, Sustainment and Follow-on Development (PFSD) of the aircraft...

Surely the naval version will be appreciably more expensive than the Air Force F-35A as it will have shorter production run (much smaller USN requirement, RN only foreign likely sale so far) and not need the specialized carrier equipment? But remember about our CF-188s:

...many naval features were retained from the F/A-18 including the arrestor hook, the robust landing gear, and the wing-folding mechanisms. These features proved to be advantageous when operating the new CF18s from smaller airfields, especially in the Arctic...

Well, presumably having them eliminated would just have added to the cost.

By the way, there is a very interesting comment thread, still active, at this post last November on a separate F-35 for non-American buyers (this is the Douglas F-6D Missileer).

Update:

Israel submits request to buy F-35 jets

Paper warriors

Bureaucracies are the bane of ever sailor, soldier and airman throughout their entire career. Many a cold night in the middle of nowhere can be passed swapping stories about who's been screwed over the worst. It is simply accepted as part of life in the military. On the bus, off the bus.

That it should continue to happen after their death is both frustrating and outrageous.

Maybe if a few CBC executives could find it in their hearts to downgrade their hotel accommodations now and again or the Foreign Minister could find a better booking agent for his airfares the government could scrape up a few extra bucks to ensure our veterans don't have to spend their dying days worrying about the expense of their death.

BZ to the Toronto Sun's Peter Worthington who continues to fight for those who can no longer answer the call themselves.

Outside the Wire

Reporter Doug Schmidt returns to Afghanistan for a second stint reporting for Canwest and the Windsor Star.

He's also blogging again at Outside the Wire.

You can read the blogs from his first stint in 2006/2007 here.

Are the CC-177s worth it?

David Akin, at his blog, wonders about the need for the Canadian Air Force's Globemaster IIIs. A dialogue ensues at the "Comments".

Babbling adds in an e-mail to me:

I'd also mention the idea that rentals continue to be a good idea to supplement our strat-lift capacity. But they're not a good idea to actually be the entire capacity! Especially since military aircraft piloted by your own nation's crews can and will take on missions you wouldn't trust to a civilian contractor.

Does anyone think the JSS will obviate the need for civilian sea-lift?

I think your strongest point is the overuse of the C-130's as miniature strat-lifters, and the restrictions that placed upon our other capabilities. For example, the decision to go with the LAV & MGS (Stryker) platforms rather than a tracked direct fire armoured heavy (Leo) was driven to some degree by what we could carry in the back of our largest transport aircraft, the Herc. Logistic purchases aren't quite as clear-cut in terms of what saves lives, enables missions, or extends capabilities...

I would also add that we have not spent $3.4 billion on the aircraft, as the title of Mr Akin's post might make one think. That's the (very) long-term cost of buying and keeping them in service for many years, not the flyaway price.

CF's "war for talent"

The demographics are going to be difficult:

The Canadian Forces is in a domestic "war for talent'' as it attempts to boost its ranks, Canada's top general said Friday.

In an address to the Nova Scotia legislature, Gen. Rick Hillier said the military is competing to attract a shrinking demographic of "select young people'' between the ages of 18 and 29.

"We're meeting our objectives, but this is one in which we can't let up because we need to grow the Canadian Forces,'' Hillier told the audience of politicians and military officers.

The chief of defence staff conceded that while recruiting is a challenge, the Forces is meeting its goal of getting 7,000 people into regular units this year, with a goal in 2009 of more than 8,000.

He said while plenty of potential recruits are coming forward, the military has to find ways to train them quickly enough so they can be deployed to ships, and air and army units.

Hillier said there has been a problem finding enough competent recruits to work in a small number of advanced technical trades in the navy and air force.

He said 40 positions needed to be filled in the last year but only 20 suitable candidates were found.

"The numbers are tiny but they are significant in their impact,'' Hillier told reporters later. "So we are working hard ... to get out to technical colleges and get a greater profile there.''

Briefing materials obtained by The Canadian Press last month showed that attrition levels for the military, particularly for the army, are on the rise as people choose to retire or not renew their contracts.

The attrition rate for the army is 13 per cent, or nearly double the average for all three branches of the Forces.

Hillier said the military is keenly aware of the problem.

"A larger percentage of the Canadian Forces are coming to retirement age because we didn't recruit during the late '90s. ... We've got a variety of measures to keep people for as long as we can or as long as they want to stay,'' said Hillier...

Hillier said those efforts have helped keep the overall attrition rate at around eight per cent, something he maintains is "the envy of every single military force in the western world.''..

Here's an earlier post of Babbling's that deals with "the training block that is currently the CF's biggest barrier to growth".

Afstan: Things heating up in east/ANA Training

These two stories put some more flesh on the bones of parts of this post (and this one):

1) Eastern Afghanistan now a hotter zone for U.S. troops
Officials worry increased attacks are the fallout of peace deals with militants in Pakistan

2) Afghan troops ready for bulk of fight: U.S. general ["by early next year"]

Here's some earlier optimism, from ISAF's commander; I suspect a dash of salt may be needed.

A lack of transparency, and crappy public communications?

No shit, Sherlock.

(Still, good on Manley for trying to shine a light on it.)

Afstan overview: US doing well in east but country's future still murky

Excerpts from a good (long) piece in The Economist:

...events at Charbaran were important in one respect: in a counter-insurgency strategy that is summed up by the catchphrase “clear-hold-build”, Afghan security forces, backed up by American power, are showing that they can hold areas cleared by the Americans. In a war that has often gone from bad to worse, this is good news for NATO...

General Dan McNeill, the American commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), notes that his mission is seriously “under-resourced”. Yet he suggests that the Afghan army and police will become strong enough by 2011 to take the lead in most areas, allowing NATO to start reducing its forces and to take more of an advisory and support role—providing, for example, embedded advisers who can organise air support and medical evacuations.

The Afghan army is the most respected institution in the country. Western trainers say that, in contrast with Iraqi forces, Afghan soldiers have little fear of closing with the enemy; if anything, the problem is holding them back so that Western aircraft can have a clear shot at insurgents. Thanks to a beefed-up training programme, paid for largely by America, the Afghan army has grown to more than 50,000 troops; it has started conducting large-scale operations alone and is building up an air force. By 2010 it is due to expand to 80,000 men. The often corrupt Afghan police are being retrained en masse.

Nobody thinks these forces, even at full strength, will be anywhere near large enough. Afghanistan, though bigger than Iraq geographically and with a roughly comparable population, has less than a third as many security forces employed, whether Western or indigenous. Still, Afghan forces are due to take charge of the capital, Kabul, in the coming months. In Nangarhar province, the gateway to Pakistan, where al-Qaeda had several camps in Taliban times, the Afghan army and police are doing most of the security work in Jalalabad and other main towns, while American forces try to secure the borders...

American commanders feel Nangarhar is ripe for investment in roads, airports and electricity generation. Their confidence contrasts sharply with the pleas for help from the embattled Canadians in Kandahar and the defensiveness of the British in Helmand [emphasis added]. Perhaps the most striking evidence of the pacification of Jalalabad is the sight of American Humvees waiting patiently at traffic lights.

Green fields, and purple

Detailed data on security are hard to come by in Afghanistan. Even the UN declines formally to release its “accessibility map”, which these days depicts a country in two halves: a relatively quiet north and west and a restive south and east where, with few exceptions, the risk to humanitarian workers is deemed to be either “high” or “extreme”.

Few dispute that the American-controlled east of the country is faring better than the south [emphasis added], where other NATO allies are in charge. Although America accounts for more than half the foreign forces in Afghanistan (divided roughly evenly between ISAF and its own counter-terrorist mission, Operation Enduring Freedom), it has suffered fewer deaths than its allies this year.

The differences between the east and the south are most apparent from the military helicopters that skim the treetops at breakneck speed. This year the fields in Nangarhar and Kunar are green with wheat. Helmand and Kandahar, though, show the pink and purple patchwork of illegal opium poppies. Insecure areas provide the most fertile ground for poppies, and southern Afghanistan is the most insecure. The opium and heroin trade, in turn, finances the insurgency and corrupts the government.

Since Europeans cannot or will not commit more troops against the Taliban, the war effort in the south shows signs of being re-Americanised. Last year saw a mini-surge, with an extra American brigade deployed to Afghanistan when five more were sent to Iraq. This year an additional marine expeditionary unit—a 2,400-strong force with more air power than the whole 7,500-strong British task-force—has been deployed to the south for seven months to disrupt arms- and drugs-smuggling routes in Taliban strongholds.

There is talk of sending two more American brigades, about 7,000 soldiers, and of placing the southern region under permanent American command [not happening]. This might improve things. At present, each national command has different priorities and allied units are rotated every six months, compared with 15 for the Americans (to be reduced to 12 months later this year). General McNeill, who took over as ISAF commander in February last year, says he is “on my fourth commander in the north, the second in the east, the third in the capital, the third in the south and the third in the west.” The military effort, he says, needs more consistency...

There are underlying reasons why the south is more troublesome than the east: its tribal structures are weaker, making it harder for elders to make deals stick; it is more remote from Kabul and the main trade routes; the population is less educated and more xenophobic; and it is the ideological heartland of the Taliban. That said, a growing number of British officers grudgingly recognise that America is learning the lessons of irregular warfare, drawn mainly from British colonial experience, better than the modern British army.

After much trial and error, the allies more or less agree on the tenets of counter-insurgency. The objective is not so much to kill the enemy as to protect the population and extend the authority of the Afghan government; development, dialogue, amnesties and reconciliation are important tools for weakening the insurgents...

...The Americans, say the British, have the advantage of time and resources: they have been in the east ever since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, whereas the British only got to Helmand in 2006. More important, the Americans have more forces at their disposal. They have been able to deploy right up to the border with Pakistan, whereas the British and Canadians are more thinly spread and have surrendered the southern frontier, and much of the countryside as well, to the insurgents [emphasis added].

America's slush fund

Probably the most striking difference between the Americans and the British is in their use of money. Britain channels most of its economic aid through the government in Kabul in the hope of building up the bureaucracy there, whereas America finances private contractors to carry out big projects, such as road construction and power stations.

For American commanders, “money is bullets.” They have at their disposal a slush fund, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, known as the Commander's Emergency Response Programme (CERP)...

In Kunar province, one of the most turbulent in the American sector, valleys that last year proved deadly to American forces are being pacified. Troops will clear an area of insurgents and seek to stabilise it by bringing in a new road in consultation with village elders, who are expected to do their bit to keep bad elements out. Sometimes a new school will be set up in a hostile village as the precursor to the arrival of American and Afghan government forces.

Roads are especially favoured [emphasis added], because they allow remote villages to sell their produce and enable Afghan forces to move quickly to trouble spots. The recent opening of a new road linking the Pech valley to the provincial capital, Asadabad, resulted in a quadrupling of live births in the town's hospital as villagers were able to get medical help. The Americans unashamedly outbid the insurgents: if the rebels pay $5 a day for a fighter, the Americans will offer $5.50 a day for road labourers. “Where the road ends the insurgents begin,” says one American officer [we're paying attention to roads too]...

...The Americans are more deeply committed to winning in Afghanistan—militarily, economically and in terms of mental effort—than any of their allies [emphasis added]. They have rewritten their counter-insurgency doctrine, and incorporated all manner of civilian functions—anthropologists, political scientists and agricultural experts—into their ranks. By serving the longest tours, Americans learn faster. Their soldiers may yet end up paying the cost in terms of mental health. But for the moment America sees itself at war, while Britain is still engaged in an optional operation.

The enemy within

The most serious problem in Afghanistan, however, will not be solved by new military tactics or command structures. It is the weakness of the Afghan government. Corruption is rampant, from the lowly airport security guard demanding bribes from foreign travellers to government officials who occupy gaudy houses known as “narcotechture”...

Allied soldiers will continue to fight, build roads and host meetings with tribal elders in the hope of isolating the insurgents. But in the longer term, unless the Kabul government can be made to work more effectively, their efforts and sacrifices may be in vain. As Ibn Qutayba put it a millennium ago, there can be no lasting government without “justice and good administration”. Even American money and power will struggle to achieve that.

Afstan: CF's last command in the South?/ Big US "Oops"

Next commands in Regional Command South to be twelve months each instead of nine (but see the end of the post). Since we're scheduled out in 2011 this will be our last time in charge. But it looks like the diplomacy to get US permanent command in RC South did not succeed:

WASHINGTON -- The Defense Department said Wednesday [May 21] it has shelved a plan to take greater control in parts of Afghanistan where NATO is in charge after the Dutch and British agreed to extend their commands.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said the Netherlands and Britain will stay in control in southern Afghanistan for a full year, rather than in months, as the military alliance fights a stubborn Taliban insurgency.

The European allies agreed to the new arrangement in recent conversations with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Morrell said.

"I think we're trying to create a situation in which ... by the command serving longer, there'll be greater stability and continuity to our operations" in southern Afghanistan, Morrell said. The U.S. raised the idea and allies signed on, he said.

The U.S. has complained that changing commands every nine months and rotating troops even more frequently do not provide the necessary continuity for an effective fight against the insurgency, particularly in Afghanistan's volatile south.

In recent months, the Pentagon suggested giving the U.S. military more authority in those areas now under NATO command. U.S. control is now limited to eastern Afghanistan...

Asked if the new agreement ends discussion that one country -- likely the U.S. -- take charge of operations in the south, Morrell said it addresses the issue there for at least the next two and a half years.

A NATO official said Wednesday that while the U.S. floated the idea of controlling the south, the Pentagon did not press hard for the plan. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not involved in the Pentagon's announcement, said there were no real disputes over the plan...

Morrell dismissed the suggestion that the new agreement for longer European commands was a compromise. But, he added, "We work with allies in (southern Afghanistan) and throughout the country, and we take their considerations into account."

One unresolved issue, Morrell said, is that two U.S. commanders will continue to control troops in Afghanistan. U.S. Central Command is responsible for operations in Afghanistan, but Gen. John Craddock is the head of U.S. European Command and is NATO's top military commander.

The agreement also does not extend the tours of allied troops serving in Afghanistan [emphasis added]. Morrell said the allies will likely still serve three- to six-month tours -- a practice that U.S. commanders have suggested can be disruptive.

Under the new agreement, the Canadians, who now control the south, will leave in November and the Dutch will assume command. In November 2009 the British would take over, and the U.S. is on tap to take command of the region in November 2010 [emphasis added]...

More on the vexed question of mixed command chains for US forces:

...
Q But it doesn't get to what General McNeill and General Craddock are talking about, which is getting one nation in charge and remaining in charge, as you have in the North and in other areas.

MR. MORRELL: Well, General McNeill and General Craddock are certainly entitled to their opinions in this. But we work with allies in RC South and throughout the country. And we take their considerations into account.

Yeah.

Q But this does mean or -- does this mean that for at least the first two years of General Petraeus's expected tenure at CENTCOM, that he won't have command of this key region of Afghanistan, that that will be under EUCOM-NATO-ISAF, or NATO-ISAF?[emphasis added]

MR. MORRELL: I think it is as I've just explained it. It -- for the next two and a half years, the Canadians, the Dutch and the British will share command of RC South and that the latter two nations, the Dutch and the Brits -- and the British, will have that command for a year instead of nine months. And they will be followed in that command by the United States. That's all I can share with you on that...[emphasis added]

As far as I can see our media have ignored this significant development. Maybe they'll notice this rather large "Oops!" of a mis-speak:

The Pentagon says the agreement on command of NATO operations in southern Afghanistan, which it announced Wednesday, is not finalized. But officials still hope the plan will be approved. VOA's Al Pessin reports from the Pentagon.

Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell says he was "too emphatic" when he announced the agreement Wednesday. He had said the United States reached agreement with the Netherlands and Britain for those countries to each command the southern Afghanistan effort for a year, starting in November when Canada ends its rotation.

On Thursday [May 22], he told reporters it is not "a done deal." Rather, Morrell says Defense Secretary Robert Gates and his British and Dutch counterparts have agreed on the plan, but "it still needs to be approved by the Dutch and British governments," and by the NATO alliance [emphasis added]. He said he does not see any reason for the plan not to be approved...

...the United States will not be in command in the key area until more than two years into the expected tenure of General David Petraeus as the head of U.S. Central Command. The command oversees all U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, except for the part of the Afghan operation that is run by NATO. Some analysts had hoped General Petraeus might be given more authority in Afghanistan, in order to apply the counterinsurgency experience he gained as commander in Iraq...

Golden Hawk Sabre to fly again

How times change (bloody link no longer works and hasn't been replacd-- MC, Aug. 15, 2009]:

The Sabre was the RCAF's last fighter armed with guns alone. 1184 Sabres [emphasis added!!!] flew with various units from 1950 until 1970, in Canada and Europe...

[Update: Photos added]










Now we'll have this one:

Aviation took off in Canada almost 100 years ago when the Silver Dart rose from frozen Bras d'Or Lake near Baddeck, N.S.

The Feb. 23, 1909, flight was the first controlled, powered flight by a heavier- than-air machine in Canada.

The kite-like craft was built by the Aerial Experiment Association, led by Alexander Graham Bell, who maintained a summer home in Baddeck.

Fifty years later, an aerobatic team known as the Golden Hawks was formed to celebrate the anniversary of the first flight, along with the 35th anniversary of the Royal Canadian Air Force.

The team flew gold-coloured F-86 Sabre jets [more here from the Canada Aviation Museum] and from 1959 to 1963, they were a fixture at airshows. The team was supposed to fly for only one year, but its popularity kept it going for three more, until budget cuts sealed its fate.



Now, Canadian aviation history is being revisited in the Vintage Wings of Canada hangar at the Gatineau airport.

To mark Canada's centenary of flight, along with the 50th anniversary of the Golden Hawks, Vintage Wings technicians and volunteers are re-creating a Golden Hawk F-86.

The fighter, christened Hawk One, like the organization formed to bring it to life, will be a part of air shows and flying demonstrations across Canada throughout 2009.

Project leader Lt.-Col. Steve Will, former leader of the Snowbirds aerobatic team and a CF-18 squadron commander, credits Tim Leslie with the idea of resurrecting a Sabre as a centennial project.

Mr. Leslie is a former military pilot and now a test pilot with the National Research Council. He is also vice-president and chief of operations at Vintage Wings, which was created by entrepreneur and aviation enthusiast Michael Potter to help educate Canadians about the country's flying heritage.

Mr. Leslie and Lt.-Col. Will discussed the idea for months as the concept evolved.

"Once plans were firmed up, I broached the idea to Mike during a dinner and we reached a handshake agreement over a bowl of mushroom soup," said Lt.-Col. Will.

Mr. Potter, who never envisioned adding a jet to his collection, said Hawk One "is a very special mission, a very specific mission."

"The idea was first brought to me to mark the centenary of flight in Canada and, as well, to pay tribute to the Canadians who flew Sabres -- while they are still with us," he said.

Vintage Wings became the lead sponsor of Hawk One.

"We are providing the aircraft and it will fly as a Vintage Wings aircraft, but will be leased to Hawk One for $1," Mr. Potter said.

He said the Vintage Wings technical team, headed by maintenance manager Andrej Janik, is still looking for volunteers with experience working on Sabres.

Those interested can check the volunteer page at www.vintagewings.ca

The Sabre was acquired in 2007 from an owner in the United States. After it was flown to the Gatineau airport, the jet was taken apart to begin its reincarnation as a Golden Hawk.

Hawk One will come together as the type of Sabre built by Canadair of Montreal -- long since absorbed by transportation giant Bombardier.

The fuselage and engine are Canadian, but the wings are from a U.S. F-86-F, because they were used to replace the original wings, which were damaged in an accident.

Civilian and military personnel have donated hundreds of hours to rebuilding the aircraft, Mr. Potter said.

Military experts have helped with such things as the ejection seat system, because only they have the expertise, he said, stressing that the work is done on the individuals' own time.

Mr. Potter said he expects the Sabre to be test flown by late summer or early fall.

On Feb. 23, 2009, Hawk One is to fly over Baddeck to mark the anniversary of the first flight and the beginning of centennial observances.

Canadian astronaut Chris Hadfield, one of five pilots who will fly Hawk One, hopes to be at the controls.

He also intends to fly the Sabre during Canada Day celebrations in Ottawa and at the Canadian National Exhibition airshow in Toronto...

The project has a proposed budget of $2.5 million, in cash and donated services. The task of raising the funds is in the hands of a team led by Bill Coyle, who can be reached at coyleb@rogers.com.

Flying a jet fighter is expensive. The fuel bill alone for 2009's estimated 200 hours of flying will be at least $300,000.

"We're more than half way to our fundraising goal, thanks to the efforts of Bill and his team," Lt.-Col. Will said.

"(The year) 2009 is an extremely significant year for Canadian aviation," Mr. Leslie said.

"It will take a lot of time, money, and effort to properly recognize the importance of the first powered flight in Canada ... as well as to recognize the many successes Canada has enjoyed in aviation during the past 100 years," he said.

"I certainly hope others will share in Michael Potter's passion to recognize this historic event and support this endeavour."

Hawk One will make several appearances with the Snowbirds.

"We hope to have a heritage flight -- with the Snowbirds, Hawk One, the demonstration F-18 Hornet and a Tutor painted in Centennaires colours," Lt.-Col. Will said. The Golden Centennaires team was formed in 1967 to mark Canada's centennial.

Hawk One also will make solo appearances between big airshows...

Disclosure: I was born on the day the Sabre first flew (as the XP-86); been a fan ever since :).

Update: CL-13 Sabre Mk. V in Golden Hawk livery at the Atlantic Canada Aviation Museum (h/t to Jack MacLeod).