Winnipeg Free Press - ONLINE EDITION
‘Insider attacks’ hard to stop in Afghanistan
WASHINGTON - According to the Pentagon’s December 2012 Report on Progress Toward Security and Stability in Afghanistan, "green on blue" attacks — incidents in which members of the Afghan security forces attack NATO coalition soldiers — "increased sharply" last year.
At least 52 coalition soldiers died as a result of at least 37 green-on-blue attacks in 2012. A recently declassified set of slides produced by U.S. Central Command, made public here for the first time, illustrates some of the steps that the U.S. military has taken to defeat "insider threats" — and why "green on blues" are so difficult to prevent.
The Centcom slides identify four types of threats: "Infiltration," when insurgents join the ANSF with the intent to attack, spy, or create mistrust; "Co-opting," when insurgents use "intimidation, blackmail, or connections" to persuade an existing ANSF member to conduct an attack; "Mimicking," when insurgents use stolen uniforms or forged ID cards to attack ISAF soldiers; and "Destabilizers," ANSF soldiers who (often due to "stress, mental instability, or... drug use") attack ISAF soldiers without having been influenced by insurgents.
Centcom’s ANSF Screening and Monitoring Timeline shows a robust — if belated — effort to quantitatively monitor each soldier in the Afghan army. Screening was hampered because a NATO intelligence-sharing agreement with the Afghan government wasn’t reached until March 2008, and the ANSF biometrics program was not officially established until September 2009. In response to insider attacks, the Afghan ministry of defence began extensively ramping up its counterintelligence program in late 2010.
Troublingly, some other basic steps were not undertaken until late in the war effort. The document reports that in May 2011, "10,000 ANSF uniforms [were] removed from bazaars," but it does not elaborate on how and why they were there; or how many uniforms remain available for purchase by non-soldiers who might attempt "Mimicking" attacks.
The final declassified slide details the eight-step screening process Afghan recruits must complete to enter basic training. These steps include: providing a valid tazkera (identification card), two letters from elders, biometric collection (currently the database stores 430,000 records), a criminal records check, fitness check (officers only), and medical and drug screenings. Failing a THC (marijuana) screening does not disqualify a recruit from serving in the ANSF — despite the document’s earlier claim that drug use can factor into "Destabilizer" (non-insurgent) insider attacks.
Centcom claims that this screening process — which is undergoing "ongoing improvements" — gives "the ANSF a better chance to identify ‘insider threats’ before they enter the service." Since the creation of this May 2011 document, these "ongoing improvements" have included a process for receiving anonymous tips, suspending the training of the Afghan Local Police and some joint "mentoring" operations, installing NATO service members dubbed "guardian angels" to observe all gatherings of NATO and Afghan troops, meetings between Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and senior Afghan commanders and officials, as well as discussion of this problem between Presidents Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai.
Despite these efforts and improvements, green-on-blue attacks continue to escalate, making Centcom’s assessment that "continued shortfalls... will allow some insider attacks to continue to occur" all the more ominous.
Nate Jones is freedom of information act coordinator at the National Security Archive and editor of its blog, Unredacted.
—Foreign Policy
More Analysis
- Back to Top
- Return to Analysis
More Analysis
(1 of 38 articles for this week)
Never take candy from a stranger
05/18/2013 6:37 PM 0Poll
Most Popular Analysis
- What is Struthers afraid of?
- Never take candy from a stranger
- Can't lose when ends justify means
- Cash for coitus scheme gets axed in Oz
- Why we assume the worst
- THIS IS NO WAY TO MAKE A POINT!!!
- 'Most hated man' in Senate
- Philippine election all about personality, not policy
- StatCan survey data worthless
- The humble hero
- The Angelina Jolie effect
- Angelina Jolie: 'I feel empowered... '
- A sad twist in the path that the corner store was on
- Making NRC tool of industry bad for science
- What is Struthers afraid of?
- Ruining lives for cash flow
- Internet becoming a jungle
- Cash for coitus scheme gets axed in Oz
- Harper fuels opposition to oilsands projects
- A small but welcome crack in supply management
- Don, it's not about nakedness
- Speeding fine only half of it
- Ashton might try to get the facts straight
- Ageism is rampant in Canada
- Canadian to expose alien collaboration with U.S.
- Smart people SLEEP LATE
- 'Done deal' offends Whiteshell cottagers
- What are they smoking at First Nations Bank?
- Celebrated economics theory wrong
- Manitoba could follow B.C. on surrogacy issue
- Ruining lives for cash flow
- Happy not-mother's days
- Internet becoming a jungle
- 3D printers will make outsourcing so yesterday
- Early childhood education overrated
- Canada and the Arctic Council
- Speeding fine only half of it
- Manitoba could follow B.C. on surrogacy issue
- Why Stephen Poloz heads the Bank of Canada
- Making NRC tool of industry bad for science
- 'Done deal' offends Whiteshell cottagers
- How CBC and others torque ratings
- Kim Sigurdson It's time for government fish monger to cut bait
- Speeding fine only half of it
- Ice roads, airships could work together
- Where is Canada's strategy to help Ukraine?
- Climate options -- grim, grimmer, grimmest
- Mother Nature springs into action
- Industry, First Nations partnerships exploding
- Ageism is rampant in Canada
Ads by Google












You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is register and/or login and you can join the conversation and give your feedback.
Have Your Say
New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.
The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.