Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    So I'm reading David Kilcullen's The Accidental Guerrilla and in it he uses his experience in Indonesia, East Timor, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, along with knowledge of Southern Thailand, to establish the idea of the Accidental Guerrilla Syndrome.

    Its a complex idea which I'll get into more detail if prompted, but basically he states that the majority of those who form the rank and file of an insurgency are not ideological believers but rather join for situational reasons, such as revenge, boredom (no joke, in one battle a few hundred Afghans joined an attack against a SF group, they had no connection with the Taliban, and liked the US, they were just bored and thought the battle would be fun, and thought it would be dishonorable to ignore a battle going on), tribal loyalty, or simply fighting foreigners (he states the term foreigners is subjective, for example Punjabis are considered foreigners in Waziristan, but Australians were considered less foreign by East Timorese than Indonesians), IE many those that fight for the Taliban may not have a problem with America per se, but rather the idea of the America being there or the loss of family may have driven them to join the Taliban. On the same note many of those fighting with the Taliban don't agree with the idea of the Taliban, but are fighting for them do to other situations.

    The logical conclusion he brings to this is the concept that you must avoid civilian losses to avoid creating accidental guerrillas, along with working on non military aspects to win them over (as they are not ideologically opposed to you they are more easily reconcilable than the other category of insurgent, which is, for a lack of a better term, the true guerrilla) in order to deplete your enemy of numbers and build your side's support. An example he uses to good measure is the Sahawa Councils. Doing so requires that the counterinsurgent build a sovereign local government, work on governmental and national development, avoid civilian losses, create population-centric security, and know and work with local customs.

    What is your opinion of all this?
    Last edited by Farnan; July 20, 2009 at 11:20 PM.
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  2. #2
    manofarms89's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    La Puente, California, United States of America
    Posts
    1,325

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    wow, that's a very interesting theory. it makes some sense. maybe what we need to do is build amusement parks so these kids aren't so bored.

  3. #3
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Boredom is only one part, vengeance, dislike of foreign meddling, and tribal politics is more important in Afghanistan than boredom, but boredom is there.
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  4. #4
    mrmouth's Avatar flaxen haired argonaut
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    10,741

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by Farnan View Post
    Boredom is only one part, vengeance, dislike of foreign meddling, and tribal politics is more important in Afghanistan than boredom, but boredom is there.

    When we talk of preventing casualties, we talk of ROE that are utterly ridiculous. And honestly, in my experience, unrealistic ROE restrictions are the #1morale killer. Not to mention the threat to our people it creates. To sacrafice our people, our morale, and often, the tempo, to cater to the idea that an incredibly small amount of people will join the insurgency, because of civilian casualties, doesn't make sense to me.

    I am in favor of dictating the war, on our terms. And yes, when your enemy fights among the populace, you will kill civilians, but you cannot shy away from that. Make the joining of the insurgency such a dangerous proposition, that it simply doesn't make sense to the person who would join, as some sort of casual guerrilla.


    Having met the Afghan people specifically, the civilian casualty aspect, is far overblown. As I have said before, these people are not Arab. They are far more easy to reason with.
    Last edited by mrmouth; July 23, 2009 at 09:24 PM.
    The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity

  5. #5
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by BarnabyJones View Post
    When we talk of preventing casualties, we talk of ROE that are utterly ridiculous. And honestly, in my experience, unrealistic ROE restrictions are the #1morale killer. Not to mention the threat to our people it creates. To sacrafice our people, our morale, and often, the tempo, to cater to the idea that an incredibly small amount of people will join the insurgency, because of civilian casualties, doesn't make sense to me.

    I am in favor of dictating the war, on our terms. And yes, when your enemy fights among the populace, you will kill civilians, but you cannot shy away from that. Make the joining of the insurgency such a dangerous proposition, that it simply doesn't make sense to the person who would join, as some sort of casual guerrilla.
    Incredibly small numbers?

    Killing one person in a tribe makes that tribe honor bound to get vengeance on you. We are talking hundreds of fighters. And in Afghanistan making something dangerous does not deter the Pushtans...
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  6. #6

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by BarnabyJones View Post
    When we talk of preventing casualties, we talk of ROE that are utterly ridiculous. And honestly, in my experience, unrealistic ROE restrictions are the #1morale killer. Not to mention the threat to our people it creates. To sacrafice our people, our morale, and often, the tempo, to cater to the idea that an incredibly small amount of people will join the insurgency, because of civilian casualties, doesn't make sense to me.

    I am in favor of dictating the war, on our terms. And yes, when your enemy fights among the populace, you will kill civilians, but you cannot shy away from that. Make the joining of the insurgency such a dangerous proposition, that it simply doesn't make sense to the person who would join, as some sort of casual guerrilla.


    Having met the Afghan people specifically, the civilian casualty aspect, is far overblown. As I have said before, these people are not Arab. They are far more easy to reason with.
    QFT. Especially the second paragraph. If joining the insurgency equates more with a sudden violent death than with easy supplementary income, it makes other options appeal more. A lot of the civil side of the counterinsurgency in Iraq, (Afghanistan is outside my lane), is providing SWEATMS; Sewage, Water, Electricity, Academics/education, Trash removal, Medical aid and Security to the populace, starting in the major densely populated urban centers, and then letting it ripple out like a drop of water on a piece of cloth. As this infrastructure is emplaced, it drastically reduces the size of the recruit pool for AQI and other groups, i.e. your accidental or incidental guerrilas have less motivation to be gunmen, since they have a stake in the system. There's plenty of studies showing that areas of high volume violence are areas with low or nonexistent SWEATMS. While there will remain a small group that will take up arms to avenge a personal wrong, the proportion of those that do to the number of people who have actually been wronged, is way overblown. If the blood debt was so rigidly followed, there would still be contact made by just about every patrol that leaves the wire, as by this point pretty much every civilian would have some reason to be up in arms. This is simply not the case, as the SOI and other examples demonstrate.

    As for ROE, I agree that the extremely stringent ROE's in use today are more likely to cause friendly casualties through hesitation and second-guessing, than spare civilian lives. It's the split second decision to engage by an e-4 in a turret that prevents a spectacular attack like an S-Vest detonation, and thus the ROE hampers his decision making process. That sort of engagement needs to be ended before it starts, while a troops in contact situation realistically will have the ROE followed as a guideline. Basically, it's intended purpose, i.e. limit civilian casualties in a force on force engagement, fails, while it's unintended purpose, i.e. increasing the likelihood of a Vbied or S-Vest attack on civilians or friendly forces through hesitation at the crucial moment, far outweighs it's positives.

  7. #7
    mrmouth's Avatar flaxen haired argonaut
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    10,741

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by Ateup View Post
    As for ROE, I agree that the extremely stringent ROE's in use today are more likely to cause friendly casualties through hesitation and second-guessing, than spare civilian lives.
    They absolutely do, and they absolutely have.

    The issue is that we have created unrealistic goals when it comes to civilian casualties. We tend to subscribe the ideas about civilian casualties, in relation to insurgencies in the past, without really looking hard, as to how it applies in each specific case. In all reality, the civilian casualties are very low. Problem is, some are comparing this to the number of NATO/ISAF casultaies, and they take issue that we are losing less men, than civilians who are accidentally killed. Then you have smart people, some of which have traveled extensively within Afghanistan and Pakistan, that reinforce the idea. Or even politicians in Washington hop on board.

    I think a lot of these things apply in the Arab world, but not in Afghanistan. As Mordred points out, the Afghan people truly do want peace. And they understand the situation for the most part, and what a mistake is. It doesn't mean they are free of anger and frustrations towards us, but it doesnt equate to a loss of support you would see in Iraq. And now, after the Sunni insurgency and subsequent ethnic violence, that might not apply in Iraq anymore, either.


    I think the best representation of how the Afghans actually think, is the incident in Farah earlier this year. While there was a day of non violent demonstrations, the tribal leaders were easy to reason with, and quickly squashed the anger. In the end, the people understood the complexities. The Taliban moved into the area, and began executing men, and demanding food. The bulk of the initial anger wasn't even directed towards the US, but the Afghan police who they believed, let the Taliban move in, unmolested.

    That said, I don't think we can count ont hem being this understnading forever. But multiple things come into play as to whether that changes. If the Taliban continues its tactics, that are increasingly more radical, the people of Afghanistan are likely to remain on our side. Its a tough situation to ask them to endure, after everything else they have been through. But it is, what it is.
    The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity

  8. #8

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    So how about the forces in Afghanistan focusing all of their energy on specifically, going after Taliban hierarchy and limit the ground fighting? This should cause less collateral damage and not create accidental guerrillas, plus it removes the chain of command. It's probably to late for this now though.

    Also, why not hire native people to fight if they're bored? I was watching an interview on Al Jazeera a while ago in which an Afghan prince was on and he said that he had people willing to fight the Taliban but NATO wouldn't provide them with weapons and equipment. Isn't it as much their fight as it is the foreign forces? It's their country and if they want to help rid the Taliban then by all means help them do it, otherwise the situation might quickly change because of any of the above reasons you mentioned as to creating accidental guerrillas and they might end up on the side of the Taliban.

  9. #9
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by RJcfc View Post
    So how about the forces in Afghanistan focusing all of their energy on specifically, going after Taliban hierarchy and limit the ground fighting? This should cause less collateral damage and not create accidental guerrillas, plus it removes the chain of command. It's probably to late for this now though.
    I forgot intimidation as a cause of Accidental Guerrillas, but the Taliban leadership live among the people. Air attacks would kill as many civilians as Taliban. Along with that securing the population is necessary to win the war, as much taking ground is necessary in winning a conventional war. The opposite suggestion of limiting air strikes is actually given by more exports.

    Also, why not hire native people to fight if they're bored?
    Actually a program like this is beginning in some limited capacity.

    I was watching an interview on Al Jazeera a while ago in which an Afghan prince was on and he said that he had people willing to fight the Taliban but NATO wouldn't provide them with weapons and equipment. Isn't it as much their fight as it is the foreign forces? It's their country and if they want to help rid the Taliban then by all means help them do it, otherwise the situation might quickly change because of any of the above reasons you mentioned as to creating accidental guerrillas and they might end up on the side of the Taliban.
    The Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police are a major part of the war in Afghanistan. However, the prince you are talking about is Dostrum who is a sadistic murderer and war criminal. And we can't arm these princes or it will create a return towards Warlordism witch is nearly as bad as the Taliban.
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  10. #10

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by Farnan View Post
    I forgot intimidation as a cause of Accidental Guerrillas, but the Taliban leadership live among the people. Air attacks would kill as many civilians as Taliban. Along with that securing the population is necessary to win the war, as much taking ground is necessary in winning a conventional war. The opposite suggestion of limiting air strikes is actually given by more exports.
    I wasn't exactly meaning air strikes. More along the lines of capture and extract, although I accept this is easier said than done.



    Quote Originally Posted by Farnan View Post
    The Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police are a major part of the war in Afghanistan. However, the prince you are talking about is Dostrum who is a sadistic murderer and war criminal. And we can't arm these princes or it will create a return towards Warlordism witch is nearly as bad as the Taliban.
    No it wasn't him. I can't remember his name, he looks totally different to him anyway.

  11. #11
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by RJcfc View Post
    I wasn't exactly meaning air strikes. More along the lines of capture and extract, although I accept this is easier said than done.
    To do so you need human intel, and to get that intel you need to get support from the people, and the Pushtan tribes have a long history of choosing the side that they believe will win, which requires ground troops in the area.



    No it wasn't him. I can't remember his name, he looks totally different to him anyway.
    Sorry for the mistake, only one I heard of who made that claim was Dostum.
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  12. #12

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by Farnan View Post
    To do so you need human intel, and to get that intel you need to get support from the people, and the Pushtan tribes have a long history of choosing the side that they believe will win, which requires ground troops in the area.
    True, although if there is heavy collateral damage in the area in which troops are occupying then you won't get much support.




    Quote Originally Posted by Farnan View Post
    Sorry for the mistake, only one I heard of who made that claim was Dostum.
    Ah I found it...The prince was called Ali Seraj. I don't know anything about him but he was basically saying that he had alot of influence over the tribal people in the south and that he requested arms for the men who wanted to fight the Taliban, but was denied.

  13. #13

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    This reminds me of a person picking a side to cheer for in a sporting contest. They will pick a side for the most trivial of reasons or use a tortured logic of association.

  14. #14

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Ali Serja is an exile, no chance at all. Fantasy.


    Kilcullen is correct about his theory about people joining insurgencies or joining the military for that matter. Ideology is only for a small minority.

  15. #15

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by Mordred View Post
    Ali Serja is an exile, no chance at all. Fantasy.
    Why was he exiled? According to him, he still has alot of influence in southern Afghanistan.

  16. #16

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Story of the only surviving Mumbai killer confirms his theory.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/21/wo...a.html?_r=1&em

    For the better part of a day he held the courtroom spellbound: he portrayed himself as a poor Pakistani who joined the militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba only for money. But in the end, the mission was martyrdom, inflicting the greatest amount of death and chaos along the way. He told the court how he and his partner had assembled a bomb in a public bathroom at a train station, then planted another bomb in a taxi.

    “I was firing, and Abu was hurling hand grenades,” he told the court, referring to his partner and to the assault on the train station, where more than 50 people were killed. “I fired at a policeman, after which there was no firing from the police side.”

    His journey to Mumbai was at once banal and strange.

    He told Judge M. L. Tahilyani that he was broke and tired of his job working for decorator in Jhelum, a small town in Pakistan, and making a pittance. He and a friend had hatched a plan. They would earn cash by robbing people. And to improve their banditry skills they would seek out military training from the easiest source available to a young Pakistani man: Islamic militants.

    Mr. Kasab and his friend went to Rawalpindi, he said, and asked in the market where they might find mujahedeen. They were directed to the office of Lashkar-e-Taiba. Indian and American investigators say that Lashkar-e-Taiba planned the attacks in Pakistan. Although Pakistan initially denied that any of its citizens had been involved, it has now charged five men believed to be Pakistan-based Lashkar operatives with involvement. The organization’s founder, Hafez Saeed, has not been charged.

    In the months before the attack, Mr. Kasab said in court, he and the other attackers were taken to a safe house in Karachi, the coastal city that is the commercial capital of Pakistan and is a world away from the Punjabi village where his family lived.

    There the young men were cut off from the world. He said they and their trainers were not told where they would go next nor were they given any details about their mission, though it was clear that it would involve lethal weapons and deadly force.

    “They told us we were to wait for some time,” Mr. Kasab said in court. “There was some problem.” They were warned sternly that “nobody will disobey” their orders.

    In a month and a half, they were allowed out of the house only once for a training exercise when they were taught how to navigate the inflatable boats that they would use to leave Pakistani waters.

    On Nov. 26, Mr. Kasab and nine other Pakistani men headed toward Mumbai in an inflatable dinghy, each of them armed with a Kalashnikov, a 9 millimeter, ammunition, hand grenades and a bomb containing explosives, steel ball bearings and a timer.

    It is clear from the electronic record that the attackers seemed unworldly tools of their handlers.

    In one video clip, the attackers wander through the Taj Mahal Palace & Tower hotel, seemingly dazed by the opulence of their surroundings. The 30-inch computer screens, huge windows, bathrooms and kitchens stunned the gunmen, most of them in their early 20s.

    But they quickly snapped out of it, and the videos captured the muzzle flashes of the attackers’ Kalashnikovs as they opened fire in marbled hallways, kicking in hotel room doors and mowing down those hiding behind them.

    A handler instructed a gunman, “For your mission to end successfully you must be killed.”

    Why was he exiled? According to him, he still has alot of influence in southern Afghanistan.
    He is part of the royal family, has been living outside of Afghanistan most of his life I think. Though he might have some influence, he is too long out touch with Afghanistan to have some real power. The Afghan returnees from abroad are looked upon with suspicion and rightly so.

  17. #17
    spartan117's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    707

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    wait.....there were people who didnt know/realize this?

    This was a part of the whole war discussion a few years back besides it being damn near logical. Probably was mentioned in a number of threads regarding the iraq/afghanistan wars a few years ago.

    But yeah which is why the extensive early bombing campaigns that damaged infrastructure were particularly damaging regarding US objectives in the region. Although money was then allocated for reconstructing iraq much of the money was either used inefficiently, loss through corruption, and/or lost through the inability of some constructors to actually build things due to the instability at the time. But this is all too well known as I thought the 'accidental guerrilla syndrome' was.

    In afghanistan, from what I recall, there was little infrastructure to begin with and I dont think the bombing campaigns were as extensive. But the general lack of infrastructure results in high unemployment rates with many males in particular not doing much can result in increased membership in taliban ranks or other smaller militant ranks. I was reading an interesting article about how the taliban employ smaller regional militant groups to some success.

    Although hypothetically there can be a society that this 'guerrilla syndrome' may not occur because of different values in that given society.

  18. #18
    Farnan's Avatar Saviors of the Japanese
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Right behind you starring over your shoulder.
    Posts
    31,638

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    Quote Originally Posted by spartan117 View Post
    wait.....there were people who didnt know/realize this?

    This was a part of the whole war discussion a few years back besides it being damn near logical. Probably was mentioned in a number of threads regarding the iraq/afghanistan wars a few years ago.
    Parts of it are known though his theory is more complex than what I mentioned, just don't want to write a 5 page post on it. But his theory goes farther than the conventional theory. The conventional theory is that the revenge drives people to support and become insurgents and share their beliefs, while Kilcullen suggest many don't share the beliefs of the group and further many in the insurgent groups oppose the ideological beliefs but join them out of belief that it is necessary for honor, relief of boredom, revenge, nationalism or intimidation. An imperfect example in US history is that of Robert E. Lee (though he wasn't a guerrilla he joined an insurgent group). Robert E. Lee opposed the ideals of the Confederacy but believed that he had to protect his state from foreigners (foreigners is a subjective term as I stated before).

    But yeah which is why the extensive early bombing campaigns that damaged infrastructure were particularly damaging regarding US objectives in the region. Although money was then allocated for reconstructing iraq much of the money was either used inefficiently, loss through corruption, and/or lost through the inability of some constructors to actually build things due to the instability at the time. But this is all too well known as I thought the 'accidental guerrilla syndrome' was.
    Accidental Guerrilla basics are well known, Kilcullen just expanded the idea a bit (the expansion is explained partially above, and he talks of the Infection-Contagion-Intervention-Rejection cycle too which I'll explain if you want but I don't feel like typing it all if no one reads it) and added policy recommendations. But your right in the above.
    In afghanistan, from what I recall, there was little infrastructure to begin with and I dont think the bombing campaigns were as extensive. But the general lack of infrastructure results in high unemployment rates with many males in particular not doing much can result in increased membership in taliban ranks or other smaller militant ranks. I was reading an interesting article about how the taliban employ smaller regional militant groups to some success.
    The Taliban is pretty decentralized itself.

    Although hypothetically there can be a society that this 'guerrilla syndrome' may not occur because of different values in that given society.
    I don't think so. East Timor had this happen and its a Catholic nation, and Western Culture is full of Accidental Guerrillas such as Han Solo.
    “The nation that will insist upon drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to find its fighting done by fools and its thinking by cowards.”

    —Sir William Francis Butler

  19. #19
    Last Roman's Avatar ron :wub:in swanson
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Minnesota, US
    Posts
    16,270

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    well, it makes perfect sense to me.
    house of Rububula, under the patronage of Nihil, patron of Hotspur, David Deas, Freddie, Askthepizzaguy and Ketchfoop
    Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company
    -Mark Twain

  20. #20
    spartan117's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    707

    Default Re: The Accidental Guerillia Syndrome

    I thought that was the accepted theory, there are factors that drive people into the ranks of groups like the taliban that otherwise do not share the same beliefs. In that context, I had assumed this 'theory' was common knowledge as evident from discussions that occurred years ago and hell, by merely reading about history.

    I meant theoretically...which could involve any possible society and possible values. Societies that dont stress honor per se may not have the same effect as one who does. However in the world today, through centuries of cultural diffusion from globalization, many societies will have some similar values. I was merely speaking theoretically though.

    Oh and regarding the book, it seems like an interesting read, and I plan on reading it.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •