Will ‘Green-on-Blue’ Attacks Change NATO Strategy?

Attacks Could Serve as Ready-Made Excuse for Prolonging Occupation

The growing concern about the “green-on-blue” attacks by Afghan forces against NATO troops is sparking a lot of finger-pointing. Karzai is blaming Pakistan. Gen. Allen is blaming Ramadan. The Taliban is taking credit for itself, while the Pentagon is trying to downplay the Taliban’s role.

Whatever the cause, it is a growing problem for occupation forces in Afghanistan, particularly because many of them are spending a lot of time on Afghan bases training the security forces.

So far, Gen. Allen is insisting their will be no major changes until the matter is more fully studied, while others are speculating that this might force a rethink that would slow down the training mission and, by extension, prolong the occupation.

Of course this has been a time-honored strategy for the US already in keeping the Afghan war going, but with the 2014 “transition” date still being given lip-service, it is about time for NATO to come up with an excuse to bump it back yet again, and the “green-on-blue” problem could be ready-made for just that.

Author: Jason Ditz

Jason Ditz is Senior Editor for Antiwar.com. He has 20 years of experience in foreign policy research and his work has appeared in The American Conservative, Responsible Statecraft, Forbes, Toronto Star, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Providence Journal, Washington Times, and the Detroit Free Press.