The Progress of War

 This is something that came up in class today which got me thinking. During lecture, the Professor (YOU) posed the question of how one measures progress in an unconventional war. The comparison was made to that of a conventional war where you may have a clearly defined front or some position you wish to advance on (a city, a bridge, a hilltop) and progress is measured literally in yards and movement of the front.

In an unconventional war, the argument was made, goals are not always so clearly defined and there is no defined "front". Winning a battle may mean very little, and result in no gain, save perhaps your side killed more than their side did. So can one measure "progress" in a war where goals are at times ambiguous and in a country which has experienced thirty years of continuous warfare? Well I think you can, however even the best "measurements" of progress under such circumstances are only really indicators of progress. Still, I think its necessary to evaluate progress in somehow, because how else can you plan for the future if you don't know where you stand now?

First in order to measure progress, one has to know what they are supposed to be progressing towards. In Afghanistan, I think one can state our main goal there fairly simply as such:

To establish a stable, democratic and pro-American government capable of running the countries affairs and maintaining internal stability. 

Those are my own words, not the military's, but I think that's a pretty fair assessment. No doubt there are other goals and agendas, but I think the above is the main overarching goal in Afghanistan. If that's the case, then one needs to consider how is such a goal achieved or how is it prevented. To establish a stable state, this generally requires there aren't large numbers of insurgents who are actively fighting the government. This is itself a complex issue - who exactly is an insurgent, how do you combat insurgency effectively and prevent it from re-emerging? The latter is a clearly part of the larger goal, and I think that is where progress is made and measured.

First though, allow me to give my answer to the question "who is an insurgent?". I think an insurgent is quite simply anyone who is willing to pick up a gun and fight against the government or the U.S. military. There may be complex and important social factors that play into why that person chooses to fight, but as far as the issue from an American perspective is concerned, if you are willing to take up arms against the Afghan forces then you are an insurgent. As mentioned above, progress will only come when the insurgency dies down, however that may happen. So a measure of the progress of the War in Afghanistan I think (and this may be simplifying things greatly) is a measure of the status of the insurgency. If there was no one to fight, we'd have no reason to continue staying there.

In this regard, I think progress is measurable. One can talk about the success of "reintegration" programs - programs that are designed to get young men to put down their Kalashnikovs and rejoin society (and one can debate what "Afghan society" actually means, but that's another blog post). I think it's much more tempting to give up the resistance and go home when you aren't facing arrest for doing so. The fact that these programs even exist is surely a sign of progress, and the expansion and spread of these programs will indicate progress.

Relations with influential groups is another important indication of progress I believe. Negotiations and ultimately a political settlement with the Taliban is admittedly how the war is likely to end, and so any kind of talk or debate or building of a dialogue is progress. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be happening yet, but when and if it does it will surely be a step towards ending this conflict. The trickiest aspect of all this, however, is how to prevent the insurgency from returning. There is an ebb and flow to these things, and while one might be able to stamp out resisitance for a period of time and declare "Mission Accomplished", if the insurgency re-emerges then you are back to square one. Preventing further fighting and insurgency is a huge part of achieving our goals, and is probably the true step toward progress.

I think even here though one can make some generalizations. Economic opportunity is a huge problem in Afghanistan - that is the lack thereof. It's tempting to go off and fight when you're frustrated with your situation in life and have no job prospects or really any hope of improving your life. When you have a good job though and are able to make money and raise a healthy family, suddenly running off to the hill to wage jihad doesn't seem so appealing. I think the ultimate progress in the war will come from economic progress - and that won't be easy. In my opinion, America is going to have to do some nation building if its ever going to give these men some incentive to support the government. It's one thing to support a government who is providing jobs and a chance to earn a living, it's entirely something else to support a government who seems to do nothing for you and which you view as an affront on your freedom and way of life.

So while even at best, the situation is not black and white, I feel that one can draw conclusions about the progress we're making in Afghanistan and if you examine things closely you'd probably be forced to conclude that so far, it ain't much.