"I always liked the probably apocryphal tale of a Gurkha Battalion asked to undergo airborne training. A surprisingly small number of volunteers climbed rapidly when it was explained that parachutes would be provided."
-- From a discussion at Small Wars Journal about David Kilcullen's statements regarding AFPAK to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
If the acronym is new to you, get used to it because you'll be hearing a lot of it. It stands for "Afghanistan-Pakistan" but more specifically it's shorthand for the emerging consensus in the defense establishment and Congress that the U.S. military and NATO need to think of the security problems in both countries as one and treat them as such.
To pinpoint AFPAK even more precisely, it's The Great Game spelled backward only this time instead of different countries vying for power in the region, it's different factions of the U.S. military and NATO establishments vying over which strategies they think best for routing terrorism from the region.
Why not simply let General Petraeus do what he was sent to Afghanistan to do?
No no that would be the rational decision.
Boiled down, it's a new U.S. President, and everyone wants to test how much they can get away with around him.
So, ladies and gentleman, we have officially arrived at the Tweet Chirp era in U.S. defense thinking. Parachute, anyone?
This entry is crossposted at RBO, with pix, of course.