Unconventional Warfare: The Mujahidin of Afghanistan
Resistance is not futile. It was one of the lessons learned from the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan: that any resistance force can counter effectively against a powerful aggressor. Resistance - with the proper tools, strategy, and determination - can countermeasure any unwanted entity. The anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan not only pushed the invaders out of their country, but it helped precipitated the eventual fall of the U.S.S.R. As a world power. The question on the table is: what happened in that poor Southwest Asian country? How did the Soviets lose that war, or how did the mujahidin - the soldiers of God - win? First and foremost, the Soviet political and military leaders made strategic and tactical errors. The Afghan rebels employed unconventional warfare in Afghanistan: it was their only possible means in defeating the Soviets. Eventually, though too late, the Russian troops switched some of their battle tactics to rout out all resistance; however, due to the rebels ability to stage their attacks from the natural rugged and fortified terrain of that country, reinforced with American and Chinese-made weapons and cross the border into Pakistani sanctuaries, they were able to sustain a protracted war that eventually demoralized and defeated the Soviet Armed Forces. It was unconventional warfare that helped the American colonials defeat the British forces in the War for Independence, it was unconventional warfare that helped defeat French then American forces in Vietnam, and it was unconventional warfare that helped the Israelis gain a homeland from the Arabs in the Middle East. We mustn't ever forget that unconventional warfare is effective if the individuals engaged in the activity are determined to think and act outside the box: to toss away the standards and norms of conventional fighting, to harass and frustrate the enemy through useful tactics that are brutal and inflicts pain upon the body and the mind.
When the Soviet forces entered Afghanistan on Christmas Day, 1979, they were unprepared for they were about to encounter. The U.S.S.R.'s political and military leadership had been pursing an invasion since 1973 when the King of Afghanistan was deposed and the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) assumed power. The PDPA was a union of two parties, one primarily Islamic and the other pro-Soviet. Eventually, unrest and civil war erupted. The U.S.S.R. used the internal engagement as an excuse to enter Afghanistan militarily and prop-up their supporters into power. The opponents were forced into the hills and the full-scale Soviet invasion commenced with troops entering the country in armored vehicles or heavy-armed aircraft. The Russians had used this strategy in Hungary and Czechoslovakia in Fifties, and successfully squashed any resistance in a short-amount of time. But things were horribly miscalculated. Soviet troops "in Afghanistan were made up of the following formations: three motor rile divisions, an airborne division, two supply and support brigades, and several separate regiments....These formations were under the command and control of the Fortieth Army....[which] was formed in the Turkestan and Central Asian Military Districts, the number of...Moslem religion was significant" (Sarin and Dvorestky, 87-88). With the added Soviet air force personnel, more than 110,000 troops were posted in Afghanistan. And despite their training to prepare for the conditions within that country, it was still inadequate to the challenges the Soviet troops faced, despite their superiority in firepower and manpower that was deployed in that rugged terrain country. The mujahidin - the anti-Soviet fighters - were " a movement without rhetoric or ideology or a supreme leader....The guerillas had no complexes, no chips on their shoulders regarding the modern world, since they had never clashed with it until the Soviets came" (Kaplan, 17). It was this lack of reference, this inexperience with the outside world that the mujahidin were able to capitalize during the resistance war. Upon appearance, any resistance force seemed doom toward failure to confront one of the world's superpowers but the Afghans have had a heritage in fighting a guerilla-style, unconventional war. A 17th century Afghan epic story, Dasornama by Khushal Khan Khattak, talks about " 'the...guerrilla method of warfare is more effective than a pitched battle. There are two prerequisites for this kind of warfare; good horses (mobility) and good archers (fire power). These two can help a small force to defeat a large enemy....When you fight a smaller enemy detachment you should decisively attack with surprise. But if the enemy receives reinforcement and when you encounter a stronger enemy force, avoid decisive engagement and swiftly...
Changing Nature of Warfare According to generals like Rupert Smith and David Petraeus, postmodern conflict is radically different from warfare between industrialized states, such as the American Civil War and the world wars of the 20th Century. It does not begin with a condition of peace or return to it after the total defeat of the enemy, but rather is a "continuous crisscrossing between confrontation and conflict," often with indecisive results
Fundamentally, the insurgents are fighting an enemy with superior weaponry, technology, and resources, so therefore, must seek avenues to mitigate these disadvantages. In other words, insurgent forces out vastly outdone in the traditional aspects of warfare, so they are forced to resort to unconventional modes of attack. Early in his book, the Army and Vietnam, Krepinevich provides the broad game plan an insurgent force must follow to achieve final victory: As
There is a little known revolution being conducted along the French and Spanish borders, where, until just before World War II, in 1937, Basque people lived in what was referred to as "Basque Country," perceived by them to be their country (Nunez Astrain, Louis and Stephens, Meic, 1997, p. 1). While the Basque movement probably is one of the least known and reported on movements, it does occasionally make it
Intelligence Failures In an ever increasingly complex governmental infrastructure, the importance of communication, mission and strategy are of the utmost importance. The Department of Defense (DOD) and all of its law enforcement agencies are in a pervasive struggle to attain both accurate and actionable intelligence in order to perform their duties to the best of their capabilities and intentions. The purpose of this research paper is to explore the failure of the
Rational choices are limited in this setting, and may merely consist of making the best of the worst available alternatives. The American public is becoming increasingly frustrated with national policymakers who seem to be firing global broadsides but are not able to hit anything. In fact, Butler even questions whether the war on terrorism is a struggle against Osama bin Laden, his Al Qaeda network, and a few similarly minded
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now