ANA to get C7s? from the Globe and Mail 13 Aug 2007

[MG34]

Like it or not the Afghans are our allies in this fight, if re-equipping them with modern weapons will get them into the fight then I'm all for it. The argument that the Taliban will use these weapons against us is pretty much moot as captured ot stolen M16s and M4 Carbines and  black market versions of the same are already being used against us, wether or not you are killed by an ex-Soviet AKM  or a Colt product doesn't matter you are still dead. Given the marksmanship standards of the Taliban and others I am not too worried about it either way, as it is the shooter not the tool that makes the difference.

 

 

[Jorkapp]

Like it or not the Afghans are our allies in this fight, if re-equipping them with modern weapons will get them into the fight then I'm all for it. The argument that the Taliban will use these weapons against us is pretty much moot as captured ot stolen M16s and M4 Carbines and  black market versions of the same are already being used against us, wether or not you are killed by an ex-Soviet AKM  or a Colt product doesn't matter you are still dead. Given the marksmanship standards of the Taliban and others I am not too worried about it either way, as it is the shooter not the tool that makes the difference.

+1

 

[blacktriangle]

Like it or not the Afghans are our allies in this fight, if re-equipping them with modern weapons will get them into the fight then I'm all for it. The argument that the Taliban will use these weapons against us is pretty much moot as captured ot stolen M16s and M4 Carbines and  black market versions of the same are already being used against us, wether or not you are killed by an ex-Soviet AKM  or a Colt product doesn't matter you are still dead. Given the marksmanship standards of the Taliban and others I am not too worried about it either way, as it is the shooter not the tool that makes the difference.

 

Fair enough.

My only gripe is just where are these weapons coming from, our war stocks, or is it an order of new weapons through our Government? Also, out of curiousity, do afghan troops tend to clean their weapons as much as us, or do they not really worry about that?

 

[3rd Herd]

There was a story in the press in the past 5 days that discussed an order, allegedly approved by the US for Iraqi police & military that was being funneled through Italy.  AKs and AKMs I believe.  Turns out that this was not a US approved order and that it was probably destined to arm some militias & terrorists.

The whole thing is being unraveled right about now, arrests of arms merchants and the middlemen have been carried out.  With luck they can roll things back to the instigators, recoup some of that Iraqi reconstruction $$$ that's dissapeared and make Iraq a little bit safer, for a little while.

Are these the ones geo ?

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/65137.0.html

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/65198.0.html

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I don't mind equipping them with new equipment, but is it really the right choice for them? If the weapon does not function correctly because of lack of upkeep it will not do them any good and will hurt morale. They will be lucky if half their recruits have more than 5 years of school and half can read and write.

Same with the tanks, the Leo C2's will be far les useful than an updated T-55.

 

[geo]

Are these the ones geo ?
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/65137.0.html
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/65198.0.html

Yep, those are the very ones........... what are thousands of additional weapons in the hands of the insurgents...

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

And if we keep treating them as ignorant savages will we get anywhere? Treating them as equals will pay dividends in the long run and when they see that they will bend over backwards to please. Just because they are 3rd World does not mean they are lower on the totem pole. If we keep treating 3rd World Armies like they are second or third rate (yeah I know some are) then we end up pushing them away.

 

[geo]

FWIW, the C7 as a basic weapon is for all intents and purposes, the equivalent of the M16.
The M16 continues to do well with troops from Thailand, the Phillipines and many other countries in jungle/damp climates not known for being gentle with ANY weapon... and they continue to work well.

If we provide C7s with iron sight / no Elcan scope, it there any reason why an Afghan warrior couldn't keep his weapon operational?

Though their formal educational level is low, is there a reason we should be treating them as monkeys & donkeys?
Aren't they something more than simple cannon fodder?

 

[3rd Herd]

And if we keep treating them as ignorant savages will we get anywhere? Treating them as equals will pay dividends in the long run and when they see that they will bend over backwards to please. Just because they are 3rd World does not mean they are lower on the totem pole. If we keep treating 3rd World Armies like they are second or third rate (yeah I know some are) then we end up pushing them away.

If you look at the Phillipines and Burma in the Second World War and off the top of my head, Von Lettow in the First, those are prime examples of the success of so called inferior troops. Specifically, in view of this thread was the arming of "indigenous troops" with the Carbine over the standard rifles of the time. Again primarily based on the physical stature differences between east and west. This also led to the A-Team concept and the fight between the "Regular" army types and those advanced thinkers in the early SF. Force multiplier anyone ?

Geo,
as you and I, others well know "formal education" can mean a number of things. Books or generations of traditional knowledge, again the developed vs non developed (less developed, developing, or what ever the lastest PC buzz word is) dichotomy.

 

[geo]

One thing most everyone can attest to is that the Afghans, as a people, know how to fight.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Giving them the right tools for their current abilities is not demeaning them, nor is recognizing their strengths and weakness. Upkeep is a major issue in any 3rd world country, hell even the Malay’s like to joke about how they are much better building new things than fixing the old. Afghanistan has not had a real functioning education system for the last 10-20 years. The AK family and it’s derivatives are ingrained into the local culture, likely most men can field strip one without formal lessons (I am taking an educated guess here) Why not build on that strength instead of re-inventing the wheel? I suspect this has more to do about politics and money, then tactical requirements. 

 

[3rd Herd]

I suspect this has more to do about politics and money, then tactical requirements.   

Colin,
having similar thoughts I tend to agree. For one the lack of a "dedicated" teaching cadre. Instead we have a rotational cadre to a certain extent on the "voluntold" basis. An example everyone can relate to is the substitute teacher in the class room. Very few "substitutes" can keep the continuity of the program intact. Next, as with most areas there are those that are "gifted" or "have the knack" or are "naturals" but historically those personal have been often described as suffering from "Chinese fever", having gone "Asiatic" or have been so successful they are deemed a threat to the regular for life types. It is because of their natural gifts that they are a threat to those who one either do not the gift and are unwilling to learn, or who are still buying into the white man's supremacy doctrine.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Apart from the capacity and technical issues, if the Coalition is trying to help AFG rebuild the society, military and government ("The Afghan people are relying on the international community to help them rebuild their lives and their country after having suffered through decades of instability, oppression and insurgency"), does anybody know if the ANA and other security forces have been asked if they have a preference one way or another? 

I'm far from a technical expert, but here appears to be a case to be made for either the AK-family of weapons (familiar, resiliant to adverse conditions with limited maintenance, parts and ammo easy to obtain on open markets) or the M-16 family (easier to integrate with NATO/western forces, newer technology).  Given that, have the Afghans said which they'd like better? 

Yes, I realize they're still a growing military (which is why all those Coalition folks are helping build them up), but if we're here to help them help themselves, I'd like to think they'd been consulted in some manner, no?

 

[1feral1]

There was a story in the press in the past 5 days that discussed an order, allegedly approved by the US for Iraqi police & military that was being funneled through Italy.  AKs and AKMs I believe.  Turns out that this was not a US approved order and that it was probably destined to arm some militias & terrorists.

The whole thing is being unraveled right about now, arrests of arms merchants and the middlemen have been carried out.  With luck they can roll things back to the instigators, recoup some of that Iraqi reconstruction $$$ that's dissapeared and make Iraq a little bit safer, for a little while.

This is a seperate issue, as the new weapons were already coming in when I was there.

Cheers,

Wes

 

[1feral1]

Any wide spot on the road has 7.62x39

....are subject to US Department of State ITAR requirements due to the Colt license.  Minister O'Connor can talk till he is blue in the face - but unless Condi gives her John Hankok on the paper all he is doing is wasting oxygen.

True Kevin, back in 2000/2001 in Australia, we rebuilt several hundred M16A1's (Colts and GMs) using our Viet Nam stock (prior to this all M16A1 rifles in catalogue were pre 1970 'purchase'. We were recalled off our Christmas leave, as these weapons were destined for the new Timor L'este Army. They got through, and suddendly were returned to Australia, as they were still considered 'Lend lease' with return only to the USA, to keep for Australia or be destroyed. All that hard work for nothing. The Timor L'este Army ended up with 'off the shelf' new M16A2 rifles. The US government did not approve of the export to Timor L'este, adn the whole project was cancelled.

Canada too will have to comply, and I am sure the US Governemt sees $$$$, so maybe the EM thing will be repeated?

Cheers,

Wes

Cheers,

Wes

 

[Kiwi99]

Just going back to a comment made a while back on the thread, in ref to the enemy being not very good shots.  I tend to disagree.  At times they employ all the basic warfighting skills that we use, and I can attest that they DO know how to aim and shoot, apply fire movement, and rates of fire.  Lets not undersetimate them, or the freindly dudes, eh.

Let them have C7s all they want.  Big deal.  All this mumbo jumbo about falling into enemy hands, logistics issues, what type of ammo.  It means nothing.  If a new riflke makes them feel better as soldier, then do it up.  And if it pisses off Mr Dion and Jack Layton, even better! there are more than enough weapons missing from the CF to float around on the black market anyway.

 

[3rd Herd]

Let them have C7s all they want.  Big deal.  All this mumbo jumbo about falling into enemy hands, logistics issues, what type of ammo.  It means nothing.  If a new riflke makes them feel better as soldier, then do it up. 

A point we had missed so far.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

+10 Kiwi99

Those posting need to place this very minor "issue" in context.  We are engaged in an increasingly large effort to professionalize the ANA and to have them play a greater part in the fight.  Until recently, they've participated using secondhand US-surplus trucks, Mongolian artillery (well, until 2005 anyway), Ranger pickups and hand-me-down AK-47s.  They're not stupid and there have been repeated stories in the press quoting Afghan commanders envious of the massive technological superiority enjoyed by the West.  If giving away several hundred surplus C-7s helps alleviate this envy and contributes to the ANA's operational success, I'm all for it.

Moreover, there may well be a larger agenda at work.  Provision of Western weapons links the ANA more firmly to Western methods, doctrine, and supply systems.  The Taliban is likely to use Soviet-type weaponry for the foreseeable future, in part because spares and ammunition can be found in any Pakistani Frontier Province bazaar.  Indeed, some of their Russian pattern weapons are made there.  A Taliban fighter picking up (or buying) a C-7 is far less likely to be able to obtain both spares and ammunition from his traditional supply chain.

Anything that sets the ANA apart from the Taliban, links them more closely to us, aids in their professionalization, and limits interoperability with Taliban weapons is all good in my book.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I know they just mention C7s but will C8s and C9s be included as well?

 

[KevinB]

I would assume -- however you know what they say about that...


  FWIW - I'd replace all the x39 small arms leaving the only Russian weapon I like, the PKM in its x54R cartidge as the PL's only Warsaw Pact calibre.