Author
|
Topic: Guerrillas' lessons lost (Read 580 times)
|
Jesse Reed
Veteran 100+ Member
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 144
|
In the category of "better late than never," the Canadian army is publishing a 250-page manual to instruct troops on how to fight guerrilla and counter-insurgency operations.
According to the National Post, this is the first time an effort has been made to familiarize soldiers with this form of warfare presently being fought in Afghanistan.
The fact such a manual is only now being published in this first decade of the 21st Century, persuasively supports Gen. Rick Hillier's controversial view that for our military, the 1990s was a "decade of darkness." Hillier's bluntness has the Liberals in a tizzy, claiming he's parroting the Tory government's line.
What nonsense! As one who has paid some attention to the goings-on of our military, I'd argue that Hillier's "decade of darkness" is overly generous: Our military has been in a progressively darkening twilight zone since Pierre Trudeau became PM in 1968.
Since then, beginning with Vietnam, unconventional or guerrilla-style warfare has been on the rise -- yet our military steadfastly refused to adjust or contemplate any sort of fighting, much less guerrilla war against barefoot armies. Not our soldiers fault, but "peacekeeping" policies imposed by government.
All that has since changed.
We had battle-trained (from Korea) soldiers on the International Control Commission (ICC) checking violations during the Vietnam war -- but with no eye to the Canadian military learning this old/new warfare.
In fact, the powers that rule and guide our military have adamantly resisted learning anything about, the barefoot armies of Africa that have waged successful war against mechanized, conventional armies of the European mode.
A prime example that could have taught military observers plenty, was the civil war in Angola when Jonas Savimbi's UNITA fought the Soviet/Cuba-backed MPLA regime to a standstill. By the time Savimbi was abandoned by the West, UNITA controlled most of Angola except for major cities.
At Cazumbo, in the interior, barefoot soldiers lighting small fires to attract Soviet/Cuban air strikes, so they could use Stinger missiles and small arms to shoot them down. When the U.S. supplied Savimbi with Stinger missiles, conventional U.S. military thinking was Stingers were too complex for wide use. To their surprise, UNITA fighters quickly adapted, shooting down half a dozen Cuban planes while testing the weapons.
No Canadian army officer ever went near Angola or UNITA.
Its 28-year war against Ethiopian dominance, Eritrean fighters with no foreign help, eventually routed the most modern and mechanized army in black Africa. Again, no Canadian military observers to study this warfare, where 30% of Eritrea's fighters were women, and tanks captured on the battlefield were turned around and used against the Ethiopians.
The world ignored Eritrea's war for independence. Even the International Red Cross refused to investigate prisoner and refugee camps, for fear of displeasing Ethiopia's Marxist regime.
By sending observers, the Canadian military could have learned much about the use of women in fighting roles, and about unconventional warfare. Canadian soldiers eventually went to Eritrea after the 1998 border war, but as peacekeepers -- useless for learning much.
The best way to learn guerrilla war and counter-insurgency is to experience it -- as our troops in Afghanistan are effectively doing.
Now that ours is once again a "fighting" military, a new manual may help, but it's a pity so much was lost during the "decades of darkness" that preceded the present.
|
Jesse Reed
reedj@rogers.com
1-866-808-9066
(Toll free North America)
|
|
|
|
|
Garbett D.K.
Hero Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 31
Pro Patria
|
Hello Jesse, Greetings, and thanks for posting this article. I find it strange that the powers that be now seek to redefine tactic regarding counter insurgency and guerrilla warfare OPs.
I seem to recall a number of section commanders I had during the late 70s and 80s packing a well worn, dog eared copy of
"The handbook on guerrilla warefare".
It was touted as the difinitive work and last word on the subject.
In fact, just prior too the US invasion of Iraq, CNN reported that Saddam had ordered several thousand copies in Arabic in the months of build up leading to hostilities.
I could be mistaken.... but was this not manditory reading?
|
|
|
|
|
terry hanna sgt ret'd
Guest
|
LONDON,ONT. JRC'S 1981. maj gen baker visited and threw the floor open to general discussion, a young corporal asked him about what cda was doing about countering terrorism as this would be cda's war in the future, the young cpl was ridiculed by this maj.gen. laughing at the suggestion of cda having a s.a.s type unit, he said the rcmp take care of that stuff, sam lavoie tried to back this cpl up, guerrilla warfare/counter insurgency ops was the obvious trg all should receive as this was the war of the future...........now in 2007 it is very obvious that this young cpl was right....all who were in the jrc's will remember me saying that to this maj.gen.
|
|
|
|
|
ranrad
Ron [Andy] Andrews
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 2239
|
Good stuff here, and congrats to you for bringing that up way back in 81...i believe gurrilae warfare began for Cdns in WW2, not so much, but still used...more in Korea and of course in Vietnam for the Americans that became a way of life...it makes one wonder why a Maj Gen would not be better informedthan he was...shocking actually...ranrad
|
RCAF,CAF, converted RCR?,1RCR 74-77 CD: SSM (Nato);CPSM,;UN-Cyp.; UN- Golan
|
|
|
Garbett D.K.
Hero Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 31
Pro Patria
|
Hello Terry, been a long time! The question you asked was deserving of a great deal of thought and a studied answer. Perhaps you caught him flatfooted. At this point in time after all we all thought in terms of section, platoon, company and battalion. This in prep for the main event with the Warsaw pact.
The fact that an Infantry corporal was asking a question that was most likely being wrestled with in a darkened Ottawa think-tank most likely shook him up a little. Wouldn't be expecting that entirely.
JTF2 and CISIS do an excellent job. The RCMP and the anti terrorism int. net they have in place do a fine job also.
But this was no answer too the question.... since the effect of the guerrilla tactics employed by terrorists, here and in theatre, effect organized units directly.
While I was in the Bn. Int. section at London, I kept a close eye too the Mujahadeen and the tactics they employed to pull the wings off of the Soviet machine. During that time, four years, they demonstrated a remarkable grasp of Soviet tactic and organization... learning and adapting as time wore on.... until the Soviets were virtually retricted to fortified patrol bases.
The Taliban are not the Mujahadeen. But they seem to learn from contact and posess an abundance of patience.
The development of some kind of SOP regarding counter measures should have been honed from the observation of this conflict.
In this respect Terry, your question showed remarkable fore thought.
OK. So who wrote "The handbook to Guerrilla warfare"? Hochemin? Mao?
Cheers Terry, Hope you are well man!
|
|
|
|
|
ranrad
Ron [Andy] Andrews
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 2239
|
Hi DK, and good one here, i follow your thoughts and agree that all of these insurgents, terrorists.. rebels really have one thing in common today...patience.. patience that adds to their own beliefs..even tho we in the western world do not believe in the tactics, the bottom line is that THEY DO.. and are content to wait until hell freezes over to get one effective attack after another...is the world approaching this problem in a whole wrong way??? What do you think?? ranrad
|
RCAF,CAF, converted RCR?,1RCR 74-77 CD: SSM (Nato);CPSM,;UN-Cyp.; UN- Golan
|
|
|
terry hanna
Guest
|
the world is approaching this global battle the wrong way,that's for sure,first and foremost the world has got to 'sing from the same hymn sheet'', thats with ALL of nato etc participating as one, no one country can opt to pick and choose because this form of warfare affects all sooner or later.the french in particuliar should know this. I for one are glad that canada is evolving faster than most in this battle,but hten again wh would expect anything less
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Brydon
Veteran 100+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 193
|
Hi Dalton,
Just a quick note regarding your comments; the Mujahadeen, without doubt were fierce fighters, but let’s not forget who trained them… The US, via the CIA, poured billions into that conflict, and trained the Mujahadeen, and Bin Laden himself to beat the Russians; money well spent. An interesting book on this conflict from the money and CIA side is called “Charlie Wilson’s War”, about the US Senator who orchestrated most of the money and weapons in support of the Mujahadeen.
Additionally, we should not forget that it was the Americans who gave money, weapons, and equipment to Saddam H, to beat the Iranians. In fact, Rumsfeld had several high profile meetings with Saddam in this regard.
Funny how things can come back to bite you…
I firmly believe that the US Government has lost it’s way, and has placed all of the Western powers in very difficult situations. There is little doubt that going into Afghanistan after 911 was the right thing to do; however, going into Iraq, was clearly wrong. The US Government mislead the world, and that is becoming more and more evident, as additional information is coming forward, and discovered. Regardless, that action has sparked a flame, which may be very difficult to put out, and will have dire consequences if we continue to mismanage how we deal with the issue of terrorism.
I believe we [Cdn Govnt] need to step back, and reevaluate why this is all happening, and how we may be able to approach it from a more focused Canadian angle. This all needs to be done in conjunction with other world powers. The US should not necessarily be allowed to manage such talks, but certainly participate…once bitten, twice shy. This is every more prevalent after watching the democratic presidential debates, as some candidates, would have little trouble, diving into a conflict with Iran, and/or N. Korea, or both.
Anyway…we just need to be careful!
|
"I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom."
-George Patton
Pro Patria
|
|
|
ranrad
Ron [Andy] Andrews
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 2239
|
Good ideas Dave, i wonder if any of those in authority will be willing to take that good advice?? Or is all this orchestrated to provide big money to a few, mongers, who just happen to be at the top..is it the struggle to stay there or are they really that greedy...either way it costs other good humans their lives....someone better get a grip or i fear WW3 is their next step to more riches for them....ranrad
|
RCAF,CAF, converted RCR?,1RCR 74-77 CD: SSM (Nato);CPSM,;UN-Cyp.; UN- Golan
|
|
|
Garbett D.K.
Hero Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 31
Pro Patria
|
You could say that the CIA "equipt" them. You coud say that the CIA "armed" them to a modern standard. You could also say that the CIA provided "command and control", "communications" and "supply".....
Several hundred years of warfare, off and on, mostly on, will tend to hone your skills.
But then..... one can hardly argue with the CIA slant. They did, after all, win TWO WORLD WARS single handedly.
Just mentioned the Mujahadeen because they were pissed at the Taliban in a very large way a few years ago.... and I have yet to see anything that says they have taken the side of the Taliban in any way.
The Taliban,who are not the government but a goup of enforcers enableing a councel of Mullah to govern, were in fear of the Mujahadeen. The only armed potential dissention in the country.
They reccomended to the councel that the Mujahadeen be first disarmed and the outlawed back in the late 90s.
If they are not active with the insurgency ..... would it not make sense to attempt to make use of them in service of their own interest? No other body of individuals could shut down the border as quickly.
Charlie Wilson is an interesting guy. A wee bit arms broker, a wee bit involved on the financial side and a company man.
I've seen him on 20/20 and heard him on the radio during interviews. I found it fascinating how cleverly he used third party transactions to move Blowpipe into Afganistan from Egypt..... and cover all the moves.... virtually undetectable... clever.
A likeable sort. But a dyed in the wool company man to be sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
