Australian Chief Lashes US on Iraq
AUSTRALIA’S Chief of Army, Lieutenant General Peter Leahy, has taken a swipe at the US military’s strategy at the outset of the Iraq war, expressing disbelief that it has taken so long for commanders to realize the merits of engaging with the local population and winning their trust.
Visiting a counter-insurgency center for excellence at Taji, just outside Baghdad, General Leahy was briefed by a US Army colonel, Manuel Diemer, on the new US strategy of schooling all unit commanders in the importance of developing a deep understanding of the culture of the communities in which they are conducting operations.
Colonel Diemer said the strategy meant combat units were now living among the population, doing more foot patrols, talking and interacting with the population well before they undertook any offensive operations.
This contrasts with the previous US practice of sending in forces with overwhelming firepower into trouble spots and then returning home to the relative comforts and security of a military base after blasting their way out of, or into, trouble.
The tactics have created huge resentment among ordinary Iraqis and helped fuel the insurgency. General Leahy expressed his strong support for the new strategy, but with an important, and thrice repeated, caveat. “I can’t believe you guys weren’t doing this two or three years ago,” he said. Colonel Diemer concurred.
As he has travelled around the Middle East, General Leahy has emphasised to his troops how the nature of warfare has progressed from the Cold War principles of conventional warfare.
Rather than pitched battles between large militaries, soldiers were now working within and for communities.
“It’s about protecting, supporting and persuading … and paving the way for reconstruction,” he said.
Among soldiers anxious to be at the sharp end of a conflict such a message was not always warmly received, he said.
“Some of them think I’m a mongrel because I won’t let them shoot the shit out of them [the insurgents],” he told Colonel Diemer.
In the two southern Iraqi provinces where Australians have been operating, they have achieved considerable success in developing links with tribal leaders and consulting widely before they undertake operations or reconstruction projects.
In Iraqi society, tribal affiliations are paramount, often trumping any loyalty to nation and even religious sect.
For Australian units patrolling in Iraq’s south, a meeting with each village leader is essential.
Their efforts to reach out are usually met with traditional Iraqi hospitality, the slaughter of a goat and a long feast for the soldiers.
The only drawback, said the Australian commander in Iraq, Brigadier Gerard Fogarty, were the resulting bouts of diarrhoea many soldiers suffered.
Four Australians have been working with Colonel Diemer at the counter-insurgency centre since its inception eight months ago, a reflection that such policies have been an integral part of the Australian Army’s doctrine for years, certainly well before the East Timor intervention in 1999.
Copyright © 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald.
WTF is wrong with the US Commander In Chief not to have had this all figured out? Letting nimrods with cowboy boots be the supreme commander does not seem to be the best idea obviously. I guess the US Commander in Chief fantasy is a cavalry that rides into Iraqi villages, guns blazing and a hasty trip back to the base after the shooting session to resupply the ammo and to sleep in a good cot and send home emails.!!!
Clear, hold, retreat. US military strategy has not changed since Vietnam.
US military strategy is to win battles and destroy the enemy’s armies. That’s how WWII was won and the strategy hasn’t changed much since then.
US strategy is based on Clausewitz, instead of on Sun Tzu, which would be a great improvement.
US strategy is on the level of a 10 year old playing Risk.
Getting training in counterinsurgency tactics from the Israeli Army before the invasion of Iraq was pretty dumb, too - both politically and militarily.
Joining in with Deborah Kerr in singing to the children, “Getting to know you,” isn’t going to do much good after we have killed about a million of their friends, families and neighbors, laid waste to their mosques and shrines, destroyed their culture and their history and reduced them to utter poverty.
We’re about four years too late.
To add just bit to what locust said above: The US did not “win” WWII when Karl Doenitz signed the surrender imposed on the Nazi nation, any more than Japan lost WWII at the signing ceremony on the battleship Missouri in Tokyo Bay.
WWII was “won” by things like the Berlin airlift and the Marshall Plan and the amazing 5 year occupation led by General MacArthur during which time that feudal and backward nation of Japan with 15th century society and modern armaments wws socially brought kicking and screaming 500 years forward into the 20th century.
The reason these actions were what “won” the war was that they convinced the defeated peoples they were better off now than previously (Ronald Reagan’s famous slogan).
The Army Air Force restrained itself from blasting the emporers palace grounds and many other ancient cultural sites in Japan to oblivion because they realized it would make keepiong the peace easier. In Europe the Nurmberg trials were held instead of just summarily exeuting war criminals so that the rights they took from their victims would not be taken from them–war criminals though they were.
Compare that to the disorgaized violence and war profiteering going on in the Middle East today and you will quickly realize how far the US has strayed from its stated values.
This is also why (if they keep on screwing up the way they are now) the US will never “win” anything in Iraq and Afghanistan except the contempt and revulsion of the rest of the world.
This Aussie guy is a fox. His objective and strategy are the same as those of the Americans; he only differs in tactics. Think Iraqis will fall for that? Think again.
I have a REAL problem with the entire concept “winning” the ongoing “war” in Iraq.
Originally, Bush and Blair kicked out the UN weapons inspectors, and illegally invaded based on bald faced lies, without UNSC approval, on the sole basis of removing Saddam and his fictional WMD’s.
However false the original objectives, once the WMD were found to be imaginary, and Saddam captured, the objectives were met, and the war should have been over, and the military brought home.
It is now appearant the the REAL objective of the war in to pummel the Iraqis into turning their oil resourses over the Bush;s Big Oil buddies.
this has turned from a war to liberate Iraqis, to a war AGAINST the Iraqis
multiguy; The cowboy is the coward-in-chief, an angry man filled with morbid thoughts. And just as bad but much smarter in an evil way is diabolical dick. Worse than these two are the millions voting for them the second time around. The Iraqi Resistance will win, in due time. It belongs to the Iraqis, not the U.S. or Israel.
Poet: You are right. Kindness and Love are more powerful than an atomic bomb. We have gone astray!
canuckchuck: It never was a war to liberate Iraqis, only the first step in the Project For A New American Century agenda for world domination. Or maybe 9/11 was first.
This Aussie general is so very much like the kid , who goes to a friend’s birthday party , speaks completely out of turn -and embarrasses the hell out of his parents .
It shouldn’t surprise me if ,when he returns to OZ , Papa Howard-absolutely beside himself with rage-rips his belt off and flays the hide off Gen. Leahy.( For the ‘crime’ of having strayed so very far from the noblest (America’s )c**k-sucking traditions of the Aussies.)
All will not be forgiven.It should come as no surprise if Gen.Leahy is stripped of his stars and drummed out of the army. And spends the rest of his days drifting through the Outback , perennially high on grog.
A pity -if only he had bit back those comments - he might well have gone on to ever greater glory ( a Governor-Generalship perhaps) .And lived out his eventual retirement in a plush mansion overlooking Bondi Beach , cavorting with the perfunctorily-clad beach babes.
The 2 nations that were invaded are not going to be resolved since they are simply staging areas to assemble forces and equipment to attack 2 more nations. They for 5 years have been training nationals from one nation and keep stating that they are not ready. Do you buy that? In my opinion they have created a VAST army to invade the surrounding nations.
Here we sit and the nation to our south now has a million man army and the leaders intend to allow vast amounts of illegal aliens to have social security cards while the actual citizens suffer more and more! There are more than a million soldiers to our south armed with our equipment.
poet still seems to be carrying the white man’s burden. WWII got over a long time time back.
The big mistake was going in in the first place. A sovereign nation that had done us no harm. The presence of our soldiers in their country is the problem. What they are trying to do is kill everybody who objects to their presence so they can control their oil reserves.
There is no way to spin this things that will make it acceptible to me. The whole thing is a war crime, period.
willo July 23rd, 2007 12:02 am
It was not a mistake. They planned it and did it and it was intentional as is the continued presence there.
RJKT, what are you talking about? Howard may be fair square up Bush’s arse, but he’s no idiot, and neither are the Australian force commanders. You see, they know how to actually win the hearts and minds battle, just a pity the US wouldn’t start it that way, instead fumbling the whole bloody thing from the beginning.
Check out the Aussie fatalities compared to the US, true, the US has more troops there, but the SAS troops are carrying out the most dangerous missions. Why? Because the 19 year old private grunt will just fumble it, and blow away half a family while he is doing it. Think about it, if you were a suicide bomber (remembering you only get one shot at it, no do-overs!) who would you try to kill first, the guys who come and talk your language, get to know the elders, or the guys who shoot first and ask questions later?
As for talking out of turn, Leahy is WELL respected throughout the Australian services and parliament, and is quite close to Howard himself, having served his country for many years. Not to mention Howard himself has expressed doubts on how Bush and, almost more importantly, Rummy handled the whole debacle.
Either way, they’re allies, and trust me, I’d rather his opinion than the wonderful General Pace.
kalia July 22nd, 2007 11:11 pm
poet still seems to be carrying the white man’s burden. WWII got over a long time time back.
*****************
Touche’–My own opinion of the Iraqi and Afghan invasion and attempted occuaptions were that they were completely unnecessary. However, as non-white man Colin Powell has remarked, “once you break it you’ve bought it” which means that teh US has a moral obligation to fix the mess it has made (unnecessarily as it turns out).
People, don’t you get it. The Pentagon doesn’t want to leave Iraq. They want that 600 Billion per year to keep coming for their budget so the generals and their friends can skim every contract and steal as much of that money as possible. Why do you think they don’t keep records of accountability. Plus they get an additional 200 billion a year for their wars that they are fighting. In fact, I predict they will start a war with Iran, Syria and any other country that has can’t fight back. They don’t care if they win or not, as long as that money keeps coming in. Bush, Cheney and Company are reeping billions from this supposedly war on terrorism. They may even invade Russia and or China if they think Americans will go along with it. Rumsfeld tried to start a war with China when Bush first was selected to President. Remember when the Recon aircraft supposedly flew into Chinese territory and took control of the aircraft. Rumsfeld was so upset and angry at what had transpired that he ordered the Pentagon to draw up plans to invade China to get the plane back but was put off by his subordinates in the Pentagon. However, Bush and Cheney agreed with Rumsfeld but couldn’t talk the military to come aboard. So we will be in Iraq for many years to come and probably never leave, as long as we keep the Iraqi people who we selected in power. And as long as we’re in the area, we might as well have a regime change in Iran and Syria as long as we have the troops and weapon already there. Hell, we might even start WWIII. In order to control the muslims we must have another crusades and wipe them off the map. And believe me, the Pentagon has already planned for that day. I wonder if god has given the go ahead for Bush and Co. to invade those countries i’ve mentioned, as Bush speaks to god daily and vice-versa. Amen.
It may not be a coincidence that Leahy is making noises in Iraq at a time when ‘Deputy Sheriff’ Aussie Premier Howard is en route to losing the next general election. He has probably ordered the general to make anti-American noises in order to make it appear to the Aussie electorate as if the Deputy Sheriff’s has some backbone after all to stand up to the Sheriff in Washington. Fool me once…but the Aussies have been fooled many times.
In fairness to our antipodean pals, we probably should have listened to the likes of Andrew Wilkie, a member of their intelligence service who RESIGNED IN PROTEST BEFORE THE WAR, and went public with it.
Five days before the war, he was on the Australian Broadcasting Corp. saying, “Iraq does not pose a security threat to any other country at this point in time. Its military is very weak, it’s a fraction of the size of the military at the time of the invasion of Kuwait. Its weapons of mass destruction program is very disjointed and contained by the regime that’s been in place since the last Gulf War. And there is no hard intelligence linking the Iraqi regime to al-Qaeda in any substantial or worrisome way.”
Let’s be fair these military geniuses only get Steak and Lobster 2 or 3 times a week. Which we pay KBR (the Halliburton spin-off) $200.00 per meal. After all they have come up with a brilliant strategy. Hold the ground they have taken.
This is the strategy it took our military leaders 4 years to come up with?
Gee I wonder why we are losing the war??
Prime Minister John Howard is losing his vice like grip on Australia. He might even lose his own seat at the next election. He has spouted the same lies about Iraq and is playing the terrorism card for all its worth to keep people afraid so that they wont risk voting for the opposition who he claims will not be as strong on matters of security.
Alongside our Defence Minister Brendan Nelson, Howard has overseen large purchases of equipment that are unsuitable or second rate. This has not endeared him with many in the forces.
That said, when it comes down to it you couldn’t get better support than an Aussie digger when the excrement hits the fan. Its a pity they are being ordered around by incompetent politicians.