Bullets, Bombs, and Bystanders: The Strategic Implications of Collateral Damage in Afghanistan
Abstract
Recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have highlighted the difficulties modern militaries have when confronting insurgencies. As a product of history, modern Western militaries focus conventional efforts on achieving decisive victory by applying maximum force to an enemy's center of gravity. Unfortunately, in a counterinsurgency operation this model rarely works. Much of the reason for this is that as government forces focus efforts on insurgent forces, they tend to forget the plight of the civilian populous. As collateral damage increases, the civilian populous is forced to choose between an insurgency that is threatening them and a government that is killing them. In areas where the government does not have significant influence this usually pushes the populous toward the insurgency providing them with supplies, information, and a recruitment base. The solution to this predicament is for the government to choose a population-centric counterinsurgency strategy. However, in doing so, they are confronted with a number of challenges. Namely, they must determine what factors are affecting public perception and then convince the military as an organization that it must adopt a strategy which focuses less on kinetic operations and more on social and political solutions. One of the variables which many believe affect public support is the amount of collateral damage involved. This study attempts to substantiate established beliefs about collateral damage and also determine if there are other kinetic factors which negatively affect public support for the operation.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- May 15, 2010
- Accession Number
- AD1019157
Entities
People
- Aaron W. Clark
Organizations
- Air War College