2

Afstan and the CF’s new training mission: Some serious research further to the “sin of actual journalism”/Bob Rae Update/Toronto Star Upperdate

BruceR. at Flit, unlike most of our journalists, does some real analysis (I’ve omitted the numerical details, do check them):

I hear Mazar in spring is even nicer than Kabul in winter

Matthew Fisher continues to perform the sin of actual journalism by trying to pin down people on where Canadian troops in Afghanistan post-2011 will be going and what they’ll be doing. This was telling:

As Canada is insisting that most of its trainers will be in or near the capital, which is already awash with trainers from other countries, there is immense interest in what specific training tasks Canada is to be assigned by NATO and how its trainers will be shoehorned into already-crowded bases in the capital.

If only these answers were on the web somewhere… oh, yes, they are*. Now, first off, it seems I was off on my previous SWAG [Scientific Wild Ass Guess--see Update here] of the “behind the wire” strength of NTM-A, but not by a huge number: total current planned number according to Fig. 13 is about 1800, with the hope of rising to 2800 over the next year. Assuming most of that increase were Canadian in the end, that would mean we would be increasing the strength of the trainer force single-handedly by about 50%.

But where are the jobs, actually, and what would they be doing? Ah, for that you’ll have to click on the link.

The key figure here is figure 14, which breaks down the 442 most critical deficiencies by location and trade. Cross-referencing that with the training locations on pages 30 and 31 gives, as a provincial breakdown…

If that kind of breakdown [by type of trainer] persists, it’s going to be difficult to answer the call with an existing unit, like an infantry battalion. Sure, combat arms soldiers can cover Afghan police training easily enough, but 38% of the shortfall are in specialist trades not found in the line units.

Put the two together, and the demand for what could be readily offered becomes rather small. So in the Kabul area, there were only 106 critical jobs in police and army training that could be filled by “regular” soldiers as of the NTM-A annual report, dated three weeks ago… far less than what Canada is now offering.

(What’s not defined are the locations and trades of the 450+ “non-critical” positions. One should expect a significant number of those will be in logistics, though, where according to the NTM-A report, exactly 0 (out of an undefined total number) have so far been secured.)

*I’m grateful to ANSF freelance researcher Anand Choudhuri for the pointer.

Update: Mildly related, at the National Post’s “Full Comment”:

Bob Rae on partisan politics and Afghanistan gamesmanship:

Upperdate: The Toronto Star likes the new mission too. Talk about a, er, coalition.

Mark
Ottaw

2 Responses so far.

  1. FrancesNo Gravatar says:

    It will no doubt come as a shock to some, but ‘peacekeeping’ or ‘training’ missions are not hazard-free. We’ll still be seeing coffins coming home. Only difference from the old days was that there wasn’t airport-to-grave coverage on CBC and CTV.

  2. [...] whose soldiers teach and fight alongside Afghans [that's the type of training we're going to stop doing in 2011], says militants that managed to flee will find NATO and Afghan forces holding their ground [...]