Logistics Nightmare Developing In Support of Troops in Afghanistan

"There is nothing more common than to find considerations of supply
affecting the strategic lines of a campaign and a war." - Carl von Clausevitz

Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, Former Military Logistics Officer: A story on OilPrice.com addresses a disastrous NATO friendly-fire event in Pakistan which has unleashed a "perfect storm" as re-supply routes for Afghanistan have been closed permanently.

The Pentagon and Washington are putting the best public relations spin possible and keeping their fingers crossed. Obviously, we need to know more about resolving this incident. And the "lame street" media may be abetting the silence on this issue.

According to the below referenced article, Pakistan officials are not being placated and the consequences of this event may have a massive impact on the region and NATO's efforts in Afghanistan. In fact, the impact is already being felt as Pakistan has closed all its border crossing into Afghanistan used by roughly 50 percent of ISAF troops' and where logistics flow through, carrying everything from bullets to fuel to food.

Historically, both the French and German's military learned from their wars with Russia that the military cannot operate and survive without a continuous supply line. In the present situation, the logistics needed to resupply NATO troops, predominately American troops, in the Afghanistan mountains is almost beyond calculations. Alexander The Great who suffered through mountains in his attempt to conquer India, said, "My logisticians are a humorless lot ... they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay."

So far, I have been able to confirmed the actions being taken by the Pentagon to resolve this critical situation or by the U.S. Transportation Command to adjust and adapt to meet this major logistical challenge. The article mentions that "NATO and the Pentagon have a backup plan – since 2009 they have been shifting their logistics to the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), a railway link running from Latvia’s Riga Baltic port through Russia and Kazakhstan terminating in Uzbekistan’s Termez on the Afghan border." History has shown that those and other logistic lines did not fare well with the Russians attempted to take over Afghanistan. While the American / NATO's forces are there tto defeat the Taliban terrorist forces hiding in and operating out of Afghanistan, many Afghans do not see things that way and after years they see the foreign military forces as invaders of their country.

I encourage you to read the full report on the current situation on the Afghanistan Pakastan borders and the logistical nightmare that is developing in support of our troops and allied troops and contractors in Afghanistan: Furious at Latest U.S. Attack, Pakistan Shuts Down Resupply Routes to Afghanistan "Permanently." To better understand the developing logistical situation, below are excerpts from the detailed article by Chief Analyst John Daly:

NATO recently literally shot itself in the foot, imperiling the resupply of International Assistance Forces (ISAF) in Afghanistan by shooting up two Pakistani border posts in a “hot pursuit’ raid.

Given that roughly 100 fuel tanker trucks along with 200 other trucks loaded with NATO supplies cross into Afghanistan each day from Pakistan, Pakistan’s closure of the border has ominous long-term consequences for the logistical resupply of ISAF forces, even as Pentagon officials downplay the issue and scramble for alternative resupply routes.

Pakistan, long angry about ISAF/NATO cross border raids, has apparently reached the end of its tether. Following the 26 November NATO aerial assault on two border posts in Mohmand Agency in Pakistan’s turbulent NorthWest Frontier Province, Islamabad promptly sealed its border with Afghanistan to NATO supplies after the allied strikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

The U.S. military insists a joint patrol with Afghan forces was fired upon first and only responded with return fire and calling in airstrikes on the posts, which a commander mistakenly identified as Taliban training camps, after reportedly checking that there were no Pakistani military forces nearby. Pakistan Major General Ishfaq Nadeem, director general of military operations, rebutted Washington’s assertions one by one, commenting, "The positions of the posts were already conveyed to the ISAF through map references and it was impossible that they did not know these to be our posts."

So, what does this mean for logistical support of ISAF forces? According to Nesar Ahmad Nasery, the deputy head of Torkham Customs, around 1,000 trucks cross into Afghanistan on a daily basis, nearly 300 of which are NATO contractors carrying NATO supplies in sealed containers. Khyber Transport Association chief Shakir Afridi said that each oil tanker has a capacity of 13,000-15,000 gallons. In October 2010 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen said that fossil fuels are the number one import to Afghanistan.

Noting the obvious, as Afghanistan has no indigenous hydrocarbon supplies, every drop must be brought in, with transit greatly increasing the eventual cost. For 2001-2008, almost all U.S. and NATO supplies were trucked overland to Afghanistan through parts of Pakistan effectively controlled by the Taliban.

. . . The major issue at stake here for ISAF and U.S. forces is fuel, all of which must be brought in from abroad at high cost. In October 2009 Pentagon officials testified before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee that the "Fully Burdened Cost of Fuel" (FBCF) translates to about $400 per gallon by the time it arrives at a remote Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Afghanistan. Last year, the FBCF reached $800 in some FOBs following supply route bombings in Pakistan, while others have claimed the FBCF may be as high as $1,000 per gallon in some remote locations. For many remote locations, fuel supplies can only be provided by air - one of the most expensive ways being in helicopter fuel bladders.

The majority of U.S. tonnage transported into Afghanistan is fuel - 70 percent, according to Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Alan Haggerty. The Marines' calculate that 39 percent of their tonnage is fuel, and 90 percent is either fuel or water.

. . . According to ISAF spokesman Colonel Wayne Shanks, there are currently nearly 400 U.S. and coalition bases in Afghanistan, ranging from the massive Bagram airbase outside Kabul down to camps, forward operating bases and combat outposts.

The Pakistani supply lines have come under increasing attack by militants. Baluchistan Home Secretary Akbar Hussain Durani noted that last year, 136 NATO tankers were destroyed in 56 attacks in the province, with 34 people killed and 23 wounded in the assaults.

But NATO and the Pentagon have a backup plan – since 2009 they have been shifting their logistics to the Northern Distribution Network (NDN), a railway link running from Latvia’s Riga Baltic port through Russia and Kazakhstan terminating in Uzbekistan’s Termez on the Afghan border. . . .

According to ISAF spokesman Lieutenant Gregory Keeley in Kabul, the NDN now accounts for 52 percent of coalition cargo transport and 40 percent for the U.S., which also receives around 30 percent of its supplies by air. . . . in January Russian Railways increased rail tariffs for freight by 10 percent and is suggesting an additional increase of 11.7 percent in 2011 to cover “operating costs.” Further east, Uzbekistan increased rail tariffs twice last year.

Bringing supplies overland on the NDN costs two or three times as much as shipping them by sea and moving them up through Pakistan. And the NDN is not without problems of its own. On 16 November, Uzbek media reported an explosion on an NDN railway line on a railway bridge on the Galaba-Amuzang section of track on Uzbekistan’s border with Afghanistan. . . .

The U.S. military's Transportation Command deputy commander Vice Adm. Mark Harnitchek said of resupplying Afghanistan, "This is the logistics challenge of our generation." If the Pentagon does not issue an apology, then the U.S. military had better expect “the logistics challenge of our generation” to continue. . . . [The Full Article"]

"Clearly, logistics is the hard part of fighting a war." - Lt. Gen. E. T. Cook, USMC, November 1990-------------
OilPrice.com is an online energy news site addressing news and analysis of all energy sectors from crude oil and natural gas to solar energy and hydro. Publisher James Stafford shared by email the above referenced article and authorized extracting content from the article.

---

Tags: Afghanistan, Pakistan, border, incident, NATO troops, American military, logistics, nightmare, OilPrice.com, ARRA News Service To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!