Top Colonel: It will take time for Afghans to begin solving problems without weapons
- By defencematters
The former Land Forces Brigade Commander of the National Armed Forces, Colonel Mārtiņš Liberts, who has previously served in Afghanistan, points out that “the Taliban cannot be overlooked and in order to defeat them, we must understand how they think”
By Gatis Kristovskis
Afghanistan’s leaders are motivated to lead their people, who for the past 30 years have only known war. However, it will take some time for Afghans to figure out how to solve their problems without the help of weapons. In an interview to LETA the former Land Forces Brigade Commander of the National Armed Forces, Colonel Mārtiņš Liberts, who has previously served in Afghanistan, points out that "the Taliban cannot be overlooked and in order to defeat them, we must understand how they think".
What were your main duties while serving in Afghanistan?
I served as the commander of the ISAF’s Regional Command North in Afghanistan from September 2011 to March of 2012. I was responsible for all of the operations in Afghanistan’s northern regions, which is about the size of all three Baltic countries combined. At the time, all of the operations were led by NATO, and there were approximately 12,000 international coalition soldiers and 28,000 Afghan security force soldiers serving in the region. It was my responsibility to plan all types of operations, including battle and rescue operations in the mountains.
What were the main challenges you faced during your time in Afghanistan?
The time I was in Afghanistan coincided with the unrest connected to the Quran-burning controversy. The unrest broke out after copies of the Quran were burned at an American controlled prison. The week following the controversy was the most difficult in my military service, as the Taliban were successful in getting civilians out to protest against NATO, where the more aggressive ones used weapons. There were many casualties that week. Our Afghan colleagues were on the front line attempting to handle the situation, and this was a very serious test for them. We, of course, were also involved in handling the unrest, as the resources available to the coalition allow us to better control the situation.
How do you assess the level of readiness of the local Afghan forces, where Latvian soldiers are currently involved in training them?
Modern technologies allow me to assess the situation without actually physically being there. Observing how the Afghan security services attempted to solve situations by themselves, I every once in a while wanted to interfere and solve the problem more effectively. But we had to allow them to solve their own problems, as this is the best way for them to learn. This is their war. If they themselves are not capable of managing their own problems, then there is no point in our international operation. We can only help develop their capabilities, so that they can completely take over responsibility for security in their country. The alliance advised the Afghan security forces, and cooperation already back in 2011 was very good. The Afghans truly wished to take over security responsibilities in their country.
The specifics of the situation was that they did not have any traditions of a national army. Common problems included their perception of arriving for work. For example, when large religious holidays like Ramadan were taking place, many Afghan soldiers returned to their families despite receiving orders from their commanders to remain at their posts.
Even though religion has much importance in the daily lives of Afghan soldiers, they do have experience in balancing fulfilling their duties and their religious feelings. Of course this could always be better, they are trying and I am optimistic about this. I also keep receiving positive reports from Latvian soldiers currently in Afghanistan in regard to this situation.
Much is dependent on local governors, but I believe that Afghan leaders are motivated to lead their people, who for the past 30 years have only known war. However, I also believe it will take some time for Afghans to figure out how to solve their problems without the help of weapons.
Were the local security forces ready for such a drastic reduction in coalition soldiers in 2014?
The decision on reducing the number of soldiers on the ground was based on analysis, and I am confident nobody wished to leave the Afghans to fend for themselves without carefully evaluating the situation. I believe that the line had to be drawn sometime to make the Afghan government understand that the coalition will eventually leave the country. We already from the beginning said that this is not our war, and that we are only helping to straighten out the country. At the moment, of course, incidents continue in Afghanistan, but the situation is not like it was five years ago.
Do you agree what some experts have said, that the war in Afghanistan has shown the limitations of the use of military force?
I do not agree with this. NATO, unlike the Soviet Union, took civilians into consideration very seriously and attempted to cause as little damage to civilian infrastructure as possible. In order to achieve this, tough decisions had to be made, like, for example, how better to use artillery or aviation, so that there would be as little damage as possible to civilian infrastructure. There were even times when we called off the use of weapons only because they could threaten a village or an important infrastructure object. I believe that the alliance demonstrated a high level of professionalism in Afghanistan, as well as the ability to avoid large human casualties, and because of this we were able to avoid the population turning against us, like they did during the Soviet invasion. However, in any case, the international operation in Afghanistan raised the bar of military professionalism to a whole new level.
What were the tactical military differences when compared to the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan?
The Soviet Union’s experience in Afghanistan was carefully analyzed. We also analyzed the Soviet experience in reducing the presence of coalition soldiers. I will not deny that we also drew conclusions on how anti-air weapons and helicopters were used.
Modern military conflicts involve many different nations. The experience which we gained in working together with our partners is something we will try to retain for the future.
We right from the beginning emphasized that we are in Afghanistan to help the people, and not to impose our ideologies or governing systems. Due to actions taken by the coalition, we can finally speak about a much more peaceful country, where civilians are not killed in mass anymore.
Do you agree to the notion that it would have been much tougher for the NATO coalition if the Taliban were better in combat?
Of course it would have been much tougher. It is always tougher to combat a strong enemy, but we should not judge the Taliban too low. In no way can I say we were opposing a weak or foolish enemy. They have their stronger qualities, and think differently than in the West. In order to defeat them, we must understand how they think.
Of course the skills, knowledge and equipment of Western soldiers are at a much higher level than that of the Taliban.
It is no secret that tactical mistakes were made during the international operation. What is your opinion – will this war historically be seen in a positive light?
Those who do not make mistakes are the ones who do not try. Of course after we have carried out something, there will be opinions on whether or not it was the right decision. I think we can be proud of what we have accomplished in Afghanistan. Western soldiers carried out their duties to the best of their abilities, so that the international operation would be successful and the Afghan people would be able to have a nation of their own. Now, much is dependent on Afghans themselves, and their desire to maintain what we have given them. Already now we can see the fruits of our contribution.
The mission in Afghanistan was not without losses. How important was the experience Latvian and coalition soldiers gained during this operation?
I will quote a NATO general: peace-keeping operations are not meant for soldiers, but only soldiers can do this job. This means that we, as soldiers, are trained to defeat our enemies and protect our countries. Meanwhile, during peace-keeping operations, we are tasked to refrain from using lethal force and are basically intermediaries, who try not to cause damage to infrastructure and attempt to get the warring sides to make peace. Western soldiers were able to gain real battle experience. Such an experience cannot be gained at any military training-base. When we see how a soldier works in an emergency situation, then we know how he will act in a similar stress situation. When looking in the context of military tactics, Latvian soldiers, thanks to the experience they gained in Afghanistan, have gained knowledge and experience in coordinating air support. This is one of the abilities which Latvian soldiers have developed at a high level.
Photo Credit: Sgt Matthew Moeller, US Army - Soldiers from the Michigan National Guard and the Latvian army patrol through the village of Nishagam, in Konar province, Afghanistan alongside members of the Afghan national army
