Afghanistan: Who’s stupid now?

Wed, 09/16/2009 - 10:02am

Stories like this from the Associated Press drive me nuts. The Afghan army is "hard to train." Why? Because the soldiers are illiterate. Pop quiz: How many of the Spartans at Thermopalye were literate? One reason armies have had officers is to ensure that for every 100 or so soldiers, there  is someone who can decipher a map and read orders.

U.S. Maj. Gen. Richard Formica, who is in charge of training both soldiers and police, says the high illiteracy rate is not a "show-stopper."

However, he added that illiteracy "particularly becomes a challenge for those recruits that we want to advance to become noncommissioned officers, because the higher you get in rank and responsibility, the more expectation there is that you can read and write at some basic level."

... To overcome the problem for the Afghan army, a private company, Pulau Electronics of Orlando, Fla., has been hired to run a program that aims to make 50 percent of the troops "functionally literate," within the first year of the program.

"The target is for them to be able to write their name and their weapon's serial number," said Joe Meglan, 39, of Savannah, Ga., who works for Pulau.

The average private soldier in Afghanistan does not need to be literate. Nor does he need diversity training, by the way. (FWIW, he probably has a lot more liberated attitude toward gays than does the average Marine recruit.)

He only needs the sort of literacy classes described in the AP article if his American trainers lack the imagination and historical knowledge to train him to be an Afghan, instead of an imitation American, soldier. If we are going to make any progress in dealing with failed states, we are going to have to learn to train across cultures. I mean, Gurkhas became one of the most feared entities in the British military establishment.

I suspect that Americans tend to think people who are illiterate are stupid. They are not, especially in a country like Afghanistan. 

MASSOUD HOSSAINI/AFP/Getty Images

Thomas E. Ricks | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

It's worth nothing, IMHO

by Norwegian Shooter on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 12:00pm

Read this from The Sandbox

different senses of gay, i think

by tom ricks on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 3:43pm

From my knowledge of Afghanistan, I would bet the American and the Afghan were talking at cross purposes. I would bet that the Afghan meant by gay being the receiver. I remember an Iraqi telling me that it isn't gay if you are pitching.

That's a pretty weak response

by Norwegian Shooter on Thu, 09/17/2009 - 12:11pm

"I would bet that the Afghan meant" and "I remember an Iraqi telling me." Such support doesn't even merit a parenthetical sentence.

The point of my link was that some Afghans deny that a Muslim could be gay - it would never happen. Do any Marines deny that gays exist in America?

liberated marines

by pcde on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 11:58am

If our marines held more liberated views towards gays our country would be more safe. Ricks should lead a purge movement for our military ... and since Pete Pace retired his job will be much easier.

Ethnic Catholics like Pace and bible thumpin Christians make poor soldiers anyway, who needs them? Our military needs more men that are comfortable wearing assless leather chaps to democratize and pacify the 3rd world.

Ricks should join with Mikey Weinstein, he already has a list made up for the purge.

Grow up.

by Grant on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 5:48pm

Grow up.

Don't wanna.

by Charlieford on Thu, 09/17/2009 - 1:22pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo4Y0TxW41g

A rifleman probably doesn't

by F on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 12:40pm

A rifleman probably doesn't need any more literacy than a Spartan. But in addition to having someone who could read a map, the Spartans had someone who could track and distribute rations, spare spearheads, breastplate buckles, shield bosses, wagon spokes, harnesses, hammers, spades, canvas etc. Accounting for vehicle parts, fuel, ammunition, and so on is a more challenging prospect, and requires accountability pushed to a lower level. The Spartans didn't have to worry about working out ballistic firing solutions for artillery, or how to call in indirect fire. The Spartans at Thermopylae also didn't have to worry about evidence collection to enforce rule of law.

What isn't really covered here is the challenge of Afghans working in the same area as western forces. In order to prevent blue on blue we need to know where they are - especially if (as the police tend to) they prefer to wear civilian clothes rather than ill-fitting winter-weight wool uniforms. That means someone has to be able to read a map, work a radio, and communicate with western forces. Are we going to put a mentor in every rifle section to do that for them? Extended operations require resupply. The Taliban can live off the land, and typically base ammunition loads on quantities needed for raids. The government forces can't, and so require soldiers who can do an administrative estimate to figure out what supplies they'll need, and then order replacements throughout the operation (which they don't do now).

You touch on a good issue in noting that we're creating an imitation American force, and I'll add 'one with Western advisors, but led by Afghans.' The Gurkhas may have been organized along the British regimental lines, but were/are officered largely by Brits. That resolved the administration and coordination problems.

But I'm not sure the Afghans are going to let us suddenly officer their army, even if we tell them it's only for the next however many years required to generate a real NCO cadre. Nor are we going to give the ANSF an ops box and say 'right - go commando and knock heads your way,' because culturally, western forces can't abide that kind of uncertainty in the plan. Not only do we not have any real Lawrence's around today, we're pretty short on Allenby's too.

The Afghans aren't stupid. They just don't have centuries of tradition of European-style close combat coupled with a technology fetish and lavish logistics.

Ultimately, that may be more our problem than theirs.

The Greeks and interoperability

by BruceR on Fri, 09/18/2009 - 9:23am

Gurkhas is a ludicrous example for the reasons "F" outlines. As for the Greeks, historians have said one reason the Persian military was so ineffective compared to their Greek adversaries was precisely because the various polyglot multinational contingents couldn't talk to each other, whereas the Greeks under Alexander or Themistocles or Xenophon were more interoperable by virtue of their common language and way of war.

A better question might be how come more Western senior officers still can't figure out a Persian calendar, or at least write Arabic numerals, without a translator?

go figure

by Walking Wounded on Fri, 09/18/2009 - 3:33pm

According to Mansoor, the Iraqis use the Hindu numerals, not the arabic. Dunno how they do it in Pashtuni-land, but I'll guess that the IRP-staners would rather choke on Arabic numerals than admit that Urdu is Hindi.

"Illiteracy undermines Afghan army"

by Walking Wounded on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 4:08pm

That's what the Stars and Stripes caption says, and there's not much to argue with in the assertion.

The ghost of USN Lt. Tom Dooley (MD) or Greg Mortenson might omit 'army', but would certainly agree with the observation. Afghanistan, Pashtunistan, Beluchistan needs schoolin, although their wise men might not agree with us on curriculum beyond readin', writin' and 'rithmetic. (Them Ay-rabs is good at 'rithmetic.)

Spartan or Ghurka or Marine-ness is rooted in the mythos of their corp, a willingness to be 'holy warriors', if necesary to die for or with an elite unit that offers identity as 'the best'. Mr. Ricks is correct that it's not something they need to write essays on, or get from a manual of arms. Unit cohesion is the vital element that steels troops to pitched battle, to crew a weapon under fire, to risk an aimed shot. It's the Greco-USMC edge, until attrition-vs-recruitment arithmetic goes sour.

Afghans are raised to fight for family, clan, tribe, and Allah; not so much for Kabul rug merchants or infidel Washington. That's the bad guy edge. Taliban looks like them, and Arabs look like Allah's holy warriors in the stories. Western soldiers look like the pagan Romans and Hindus that moslem knights beat all the way to the Atlantic and Pacific rims. That's their mythos.

Since the communists lost in Afghanistan, the primary literacy effort in the tribal areas is religious, directed toward Koran memorization, preferably in Arabic. Think 'fidler on the roof', only sub in mullah for rabbi. The first rote writ is likely the be about deity count and messenger legitimacy.

The enemy has a literacy test, which functions as a loyalty test also. 'Mo's the man; other's need not apply. Afterlife benefits guaranteed.' Do we have a language fluency or cultural literacy test for our trainers? (Ask Mikey Weinstein about that.)

Are we trying to raise maneuver forces from a population threatened by police who can't protect themselves? The talk is 'popcentric', but doesn't the red state mentality expect the new afghan army to provide force protection for the foreign infidel army teams training them? If that's how it looks to Christians and Pashtuns, neither are likely to be happy with this shotgun marriage. Point and set to the men dressed like the Messenger.

Afghan police shed US supplied uniforms just because they are uncomfortable? Good excuse, but... They are justly afraid of being the goat staked out for the tiger, and likely ashamed to take infidel money to betray moslems, and maybe need to sneak up on their unarmed victims. Not 'the best', and the opposite of esprit.

As we jump from frying pan into fire, I feel a kind of mid-2003 deja vu. 'Any Al Qaeda around here? Come on!'

Isn't this the war that the impatient UBL sent away for, delivered walking distance from unlimited expendable tribesmen, after a perceived defeat in Iraq? The ghost of Lawrence would point out that the home team's got a big head start on info ops, strategic and tactical. Moslem cheerleaders may look last millennium to us, but we're the minor market audience.

Can it be our illiteracy and widely perceived illigitimacy that's undermining the Afghan army?

Why does Petraeus read Mortenson, and how does Greg pray over there? Where was Dr. Dooley's mission to build US understanding, to define the non-kinetic nature of the struggle, when the 'brave muj' won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Anthony_Dooley_III

The Sacrad Band

by Tyrtaios on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 4:13pm

I wonder what the literacy is of the American trainers?

America's officer corps' second language capability is a scandal Walking Wounded. Also, in the past, specifically the Army, advisory/training duty wasn't seen as career enhancing, which certainly doesn't attract the best and brightest. And now we're outsourcing "see spot run" testing, which can only be received as demeaning by any real warrior, such as a Pashtun.

And the Spartans? Overrated. Study the Sacred Band of Thebes, where Plutarch records that Philip II, on encountering the corpses "heaped one upon another", understanding who they were, exclaimed, "Perish any man who suspects that these men either did or suffered anything unseemly."

And remember always, "There is more to warfare than just tactics." - our friend from Athens. : - )

After Leuctra...

by Walking Wounded on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 4:48pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Band_of_Thebes
snip>
"Leuctra established Theban independence from Spartan rule and laid the groundwork for the expansion of Theban power, but possibly also for Philip II's eventual victory."
--
There is a marker at the Big Hole battlefield commemorating a warrior who closed and sought death in combat, his close companion having been killed earlier.

Emperor Hirohito knew that a leader can't allow himself the luxury of death before dishonor, and issued orders to 'endure the unendurable.' Kinda like red state icon 'Marse Robert, when he rose to take the communion cup in line behind a free black man. Seeds of a victory greater than a defeat most bitter; but freedom's one slow-growing oak, if you ask me.

American Warrior Class

by Tyrtaios on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 6:35pm

Was'te, le mita cola Walking Wounded

I am the Kit-Fox. I live in uncertainty. If there is anything difficult. If there is anything dangerous to do. That is mine.

Dedicated to Wanbli Isnala - Corporal Brett Lundstrom USMC Oglala Lakota Warrior. Killed in action, Falluja, Iraq.

Literacy of course does not

by Grant on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 5:53pm

Literacy of course does not mean that a soldier is able to fight or negotiate, but it is important. A man who can read has a degree of education that can also help him in other jobs. Literacy means that they can identify a candidate on a list by more than a photo or a party color. They are able to communicate through the written word, which as this site proves is still vital to communication. Finally, I ask the readers to think on this: after a slave rebellion in the United States the slave states enacted some of the most restrictive legislature towards other humans in the history of this country. Among those laws, one of the first things that slaves were forbidden to do was learn how to read.

Maybe it's more an issue . . .

by Charlieford on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 7:38pm

. . . of who's doing the training? Do they know any other way to train than by PowerPoint?

Little Business Thought

by Bill Keller on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 8:34pm

Our operating forces are no more appropriate for this mission than taking a Detroit factory group to Brazil and start a business...

Forcing our inward looking TTPs on a foreigner is nonsense. Let them use the weapon their way...Taliban is very effective doing so locally cause they are well local.

International business learned this long ago...Pentagon and military leadership are not in this business universe. (Other than that which promotes the next career.)China gets expansion even in AfPak and Iraq through business efforts. bin Laden does a very job using the franchise model for global efforts.

This old steel, old Bell, old GM, old heavy mentality - its what happens when an organization goes generations without an existential competitor.

Ricks's reaction to the AP

by Zathras on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 9:58pm

Ricks's reaction to the AP story linked to here is just flip, and unworthy of him. The AP reporter did just what Ricks would have in his place -- he interviewed Afghans as well as American trainers. Ricks ignores this. The Afghans quoted in the story seem to have a pretty good handle on why not being able to read makes their jobs harder, but maybe they hadn't heard about the Spartans.

Come to think of it, despite

by Grant on Wed, 09/16/2009 - 10:55pm

Come to think of it, despite the fact that ultimately it was successful in holding off the Persians the Spartans (and assorted other combatants that Hollywood ignored) died. That isn't exactly the best analogy to use.

LoL

by James S. on Thu, 09/17/2009 - 6:46am

If they have heard about the Spartans they probably heard the Persian version where the evil Leonidas and his pack of brigands thwarted the Persians from bringing enlightenment to the Greek Peninsula. BTW, the Iranians still hate Leonidas.

On a slightly different subject, if you want to have a modern army, you really do need literate soldiers. It helps even Riflemen if you can publish a Duty Roster for guard duty or latrine cleanup. Please stop thinking officers are the end all of an army. The Soviets made that mistake after WWII and 20 years after the cold war ended they still can't fix their army. A modern army needs NCOs. Generally speaking, you get NCOs from the Riflemen not the Officer Academy.

Do the Taliban have Ph.D.'s in English Lit?

by Trtumlin on Thu, 09/17/2009 - 7:14am

I assume the Taliban's success isn't based on their literacy rate. However, I agree that literacy could contribute to the Afghan army's long-term success, and to their country's.

If the United States is going to be doing some nation-building, then educating Afghan army soldiers is a great pathway. I'm sure Tom and others agree that the U.S. military has been a tremendous engine for social change and improvement, not only reducing race barriers in a (ostensibly) meritocratic system but giving tens of millions of people education, experience and skills that make society stronger.

Basic Land Navigation

by Tyrtaios on Fri, 09/18/2009 - 7:09am

Westernizing armies to fight what is essentially a simple war (though complex in other areas) isn't necessary nor desireable. Be careful on using our American historic example as a model.

One of many issues is the speed in which we desire to see this Afghan army trained-up and operating. It takes patience along with motivated and culturally adroit "advisors" to arrange and supervise the "trainers" to ensure the "appropriate" training is being conducted, from start-to-finish; to include being alongside the Afghan when they put this into practice in their first gun fight.

The backbone of any qualified army will be the NCO ranks, which takes many years to develope, while also developing a lower (company grade) officer who will eventually become a senior leader.

How much time have do we left to accomplish this before Congress cuts-off funds as they did in Vietnam, which they assurdly will this time as well, at some point?

Taliban literacy

by Walking Wounded on Thu, 09/17/2009 - 6:30pm

Talib means student, and in the narrow use it implies he's studied the Koran, the very best reason for literacy.

I grant that a 'Taliban' connection with Omar's Peshawar orphan refugee students is mostly mythical now, and that their tactical literacy and access to ISI HiLux cavalry mounts contributed much to the early success of his orthodoxy.

Churchill inveighs against the fanatical mullahs in his 'Malakand Force', but the British learned to whip up trouble using the Deobandi mullahs. TE Lawrence did postwar service for the Crown, posing as a religious Arab scholar in Pashtunistan, in an insurgent scheme to paint the Afghan king as unfaithful. Worked well, until the robed 'sheik' was spotted by a newsman, partying in Pakistan.

Now that's literacy, of a rare sort.

The original student base

by Grant on Sat, 09/19/2009 - 1:10am

The original student base versed in the Koran probably currently makes up the inner core of Taliban strength, whereas the average anti-government insurgent probably can't read much less understand the Koran. Further, though I dislike encouraging the military to embed itself into bureaucracy if those soldiers can read they may be able to perform advanced tasks in public and private life. You can't very well have a good job at a bank if you can't read the check, and you can't manage a road network either.
Obviously most here do think that a literate force is an intelligent thing to strive for and I don't need to reiterate each point made ad nauseam. For me, I believe it is useful. It is not essential, but if we have success in literacy programs it will be remembered as something worth doing.

Spartans

by Eponymous on Thu, 09/17/2009 - 5:25pm

I won't gainsay the claim that literacy isn't relevant, but it's worth pointing out that the Spartans who died at Thermopylae were _Spartans_, that is, part of the elite of their state, and were surely extremely well educated and literate. That's why the loss of even such a small number as 300 of them was a great blow. If you read Thucydides, you'll find lots of examples where the various Greek city-states were worried about what are really very small numbers of men.

Literacy in the German Empire

by John A Schwartz on Fri, 09/18/2009 - 9:01am

I've read that when Germany entered the first world war, they had the advantage of a highly literate population (>95%). Compared to Austria-Hungary, Italy, and Russia, which were all burdened by largely illiterate peasants, Germany was able to put a higher percentage of their manpower into the field, and exploit technologies and new tactics on a larger scale. While it's tough to prove that Germany's relative success was a result of literacy, it's certainly an interesting point for debate.

the greek were BETTER educated than the current afgan

by GWHH on Fri, 09/18/2009 - 9:28am

Greeks Spartan soilders could all read and write to a certain degree and the higher the rank you had the more education you had and they got an education at birth, regardeless of who your dad was. Because a soilder that can read and write is a better soilder than can not.

Plus-the common women in Spartan was better educated than most males in Afganistan. Because they took care of the home and books while the man fought and trained year around. Spartan women had the most freedom and education of any common women in the ancient greek word.

Did we read the same article?

by Strahd on Fri, 09/18/2009 - 9:43am

Even the quote you published counters your comments. Maj. Gen. Formica was speaking about soldiers they want to make into officers. Your first comment was "The average private soldier..."

The AP story itself contains quotes from Afghan soldiers saying exactly how illiteracy hurts them and how it would benefit them.

While I agree with your sentiment that we should try to train them "to be an Afghan", is that realistic? Do we expect the military trainers (which others have pointed out is not generally a well-regarded or rewarded field in the military) to be able to become Afghans themselves? How else could they possibly train Afghans to be "Afghan Soldiers" in any real way? I think basic competency and cohesion is enough, then the Afghans can decide themselves how the Afghan Army should be organized and run.