the navy at war in afghanistan: operation enduring freedom 2000-2003

31
The Navy at War in The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Operation Enduring Freedom Freedom 2000-2003 2000-2003

Upload: amanda-charleen-davis

Post on 23-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


3 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

The Navy at War in The Navy at War in Afghanistan:Afghanistan:Operation Enduring Operation Enduring FreedomFreedom2000-20032000-2003

Page 2: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Learning ObjectivesLearning Objectives

●●The student will understand the events leading The student will understand the events leading up to the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, up to the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, including President George W. Bush’s foreign including President George W. Bush’s foreign policy doctrine before and after September 11, policy doctrine before and after September 11, 20012001

●●The Student will understand the conduct of war The Student will understand the conduct of war in Afghanistan, to include the coalition and in Afghanistan, to include the coalition and command structures, as well as the relevance command structures, as well as the relevance of naval components.of naval components.

●●The student will critically assess an The student will critically assess an interpretation of the Afghan War as the best interpretation of the Afghan War as the best exercise to date of a modern war according to exercise to date of a modern war according to Seapower 21 doctrine, especially in in the Seapower 21 doctrine, especially in in the application of Network-Centric concepts.application of Network-Centric concepts.

Page 3: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Prologue: Foreign Policy Prologue: Foreign Policy of President George W. of President George W. BushBushEmphasis during 2000 presidential campaignEmphasis during 2000 presidential campaignwas to keep up with the Revolution in Militarywas to keep up with the Revolution in MilitaryAffairs (RMA) and within budget byAffairs (RMA) and within budget bymodernizing modernizing the military. President Bush’sthe military. President Bush’splan included:plan included:● ● Missile systemMissile system● ● Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary ofDonald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense (mandated under “transformation”)Defense (mandated under “transformation”)● ● Transformation OfficeTransformation Office

Page 4: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Missile Defense Missile Defense SystemSystem

●●Hostile states (Iran, N. Korea) Hostile states (Iran, N. Korea) were developing long range were developing long range missile programsmissile programs

●●China challenges U.S. protection China challenges U.S. protection of of TaiwanTaiwan

●●It was suggested U.S. would not It was suggested U.S. would not be willing to use nuclear weapons be willing to use nuclear weapons if challenged.if challenged.

Page 5: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

September 11, 2001September 11, 2001

Unfortunately, it took the tragedy of 9/11 to Unfortunately, it took the tragedy of 9/11 to initiate President Bush’s call for change.initiate President Bush’s call for change.

Page 6: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

The ChallengeThe ChallengeThe administration had to bring firepower to The administration had to bring firepower to an area with no immediately available bases, an area with no immediately available bases, but how?but how?

● ● Sea-based carrier warfareSea-based carrier warfare● ● Network-centric concepts Network-centric concepts (limited, (limited, PRECISIONPRECISION force) force)

Page 7: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

CoalitionCoalition WarfareWarfare

● ● U.S. invokes Article 5 of U.S. invokes Article 5 of NATO treatyNATO treaty

● ● NATO governments respond NATO governments respond slowly to call for troopsslowly to call for troops

Page 8: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Maritime WarMaritime War

● ● Naval aircraft flew ¾ Naval aircraft flew ¾ of all sorties, dropped of all sorties, dropped 1/3 of all bombs1/3 of all bombs

●●Amphibious Ready Groups (ARGs) provided Amphibious Ready Groups (ARGs) provided principal ground force in Southern Afghanistanprincipal ground force in Southern Afghanistan●●New tanking architecture and cooperation with New tanking architecture and cooperation with allied forces provided tanking to support carrier allied forces provided tanking to support carrier based air strikesbased air strikes

Page 9: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Coalition ForcesCoalition Forces

●●EnglandEngland (heavy contributor of sea (heavy contributor of sea and air power, tankers, and and air power, tankers, and surveillance)surveillance)

●●Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, JapanNetherlands, Spain, Japan (moderate sea power contributors)(moderate sea power contributors)

●●PakistanPakistan (allowed integral covert (allowed integral covert use of airfields)use of airfields)

Page 10: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

CommandCommand●●Preexisting CENTCOM command structure makes Preexisting CENTCOM command structure makes

command relationships clear from onset, its success command relationships clear from onset, its success prompts permanent Joint Task Force build upprompts permanent Joint Task Force build up

●●Exercise of command via satellite later blamed for Exercise of command via satellite later blamed for important misunderstandings in the warimportant misunderstandings in the war

●●USAF Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) in Saudi USAF Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) in Saudi Arabia vital for effective air power employmentArabia vital for effective air power employment

USAF Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC)USAF Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC)

Page 11: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Precision Air Attack: Precision Air Attack: The New Kind of WarThe New Kind of War

●●Effects-based Effects-based targetingtargeting

●●New weapons: GPS New weapons: GPS and Joint Defense and Joint Defense Attack Munitions Attack Munitions (JDAM)(JDAM)

●●Improved Air Tasking Improved Air Tasking OrderOrder

●●Real time intelligence Real time intelligence streamingstreaming

Page 12: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Initial StrikesInitial Strikes

Mission:Mission: Roll back Afghani Integrated Roll back Afghani Integrated AirAir

Defense System (IADS) and destroy landDefense System (IADS) and destroy land

communicationscommunications

07OCT01:07OCT01: Attack on Taliban begins with Attack on Taliban begins with TLAM launches, followed by carrier TLAM launches, followed by carrier strike aircraft, USAF long-range strike aircraft, USAF long-range bombers from Diego Garcia, B-2s from bombers from Diego Garcia, B-2s from United States, etc.United States, etc.

Page 13: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Taliban ResponseTaliban Response

● ● U.S. accused of U.S. accused of killing civilianskilling civilians

●●Taliban moves Taliban moves targets into targets into civilian-populated civilian-populated areasareas

●●Shoulder-Shoulder-launched Stinger launched Stinger missile threatmissile threat

Page 14: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

AfghanistanAfghanistan

Page 15: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

War in the NorthWar in the North

●● Northern AllianceNorthern Alliance

● ● Special Force Special Force representativesrepresentatives

● ● 13NOV:13NOV: Northern Northern Alliance take Alliance take Kabul, then Kabul, then Konduz (last Konduz (last stronghold in the stronghold in the north) with little north) with little oppositionopposition

Page 16: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003
Page 17: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

War in the SouthWar in the South

● ● Southern Alliance (weak)Southern Alliance (weak)

● ● Fifth Fleet (based in Bahrain) Fifth Fleet (based in Bahrain) responsible for most of theaterresponsible for most of theater

● ● Task Force 58 (2 MEUs minus Task Force 58 (2 MEUs minus heavy material) allow personnel heavy material) allow personnel insertion far inland with organic insertion far inland with organic helicoptershelicopters

Page 18: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Chain of Com mand

TF K-BarS A S , S E A Ls ,C anad ian, D utch , e tc.

C V B G s P -3 s, e tc.

T a sk Fo rce 57

1 5 th M E UP e le lieu A R G

2 5 th M E UB a taa n A R G

T a sk Fo rce 58B rig . G e n . Ja m es N . M a tt is

F ifth F le e tV A D M C h a rle s W . M o o re

N A V C E N T /M A R C E N TB a hra in

T a sk F o rce S w o rdM a j. G en .D e ll L . D a iley

A rm y S p ec ia l F o rces

T h ird A rm y

C E N T C O MG e n e ra l T o m m y F ra n ks

M a cD ill A F BT a m pa , FL

Page 19: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

War in the SouthWar in the South

● ● Task Force 57 (air support)Task Force 57 (air support)

● ● Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG)Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG)

● ● Camp RhinoCamp Rhino

Camp Rhino MarinesCamp Rhino Marines

Page 20: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

FOB RhinoFOB Rhino

●●Seized by the Marines 25NOVSeized by the Marines 25NOV● ● Position (“tyranny of distance”) limits Position (“tyranny of distance”) limits

rate at which Rhino can be built up.rate at which Rhino can be built up.●●Marines thrived in smaller formations.Marines thrived in smaller formations.●●Initial strikes eliminated Taliban anti-airInitial strikes eliminated Taliban anti-air capability.capability.●●Rhino personnel was capped, so as not Rhino personnel was capped, so as not

to anger native Afghanis, raids are to anger native Afghanis, raids are limited, and conducted at night.limited, and conducted at night.

Page 21: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

War in the SouthWar in the South

19OCT:19OCT: Southern campaign Southern campaign commences with special forces commences with special forces attack on Taliban compound attack on Taliban compound outside Khandaharoutside Khandahar

●● The U.S. proves itself and learns The U.S. proves itself and learns that Afghan fighters have limitsthat Afghan fighters have limits

● ● Body armor keeps U.S. casualties Body armor keeps U.S. casualties low during the entire warlow during the entire war

Page 22: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

War in the SouthWar in the South

06DEC:06DEC: Kandahar taken by Marines Kandahar taken by Marines from Rhino and Southern Alliance from Rhino and Southern Alliance forcesforces

Jan 2002:Jan 2002: TF 58 relieved in place by TF 58 relieved in place by Army’s 101Army’s 101stst Airborne Division. The Airborne Division. The fighting did not stop, and handover fighting did not stop, and handover was not completed until the end of the was not completed until the end of the month.month.

Page 23: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Other ConsiderationsOther Considerations

● ● Tribal leadersTribal leaders

● ● U.N. stabilization U.N. stabilization force (called in to force (called in to legitimize Afghan legitimize Afghan government government without the without the appearance of appearance of American American occupation)occupation)

Map of tribal leader territoriesMap of tribal leader territories

Page 24: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Opposition’s Opposition’s LeadershipLeadership●● Although major cities had fallen, none of the Although major cities had fallen, none of the

Taliban or Al Quaeda leaders had been Taliban or Al Quaeda leaders had been captured.captured.

●● Leaders were believed to be either hiding in the Leaders were believed to be either hiding in the mountains or escaping to Africa by sea.mountains or escaping to Africa by sea.

●● U.S. and allied warships set up an interception U.S. and allied warships set up an interception zone in Arabian Sea, but only a few leaders were zone in Arabian Sea, but only a few leaders were caught.caught.

●● However, new campaigns waged in the However, new campaigns waged in the mountainous regions of Tora Bora and Anaconda mountainous regions of Tora Bora and Anaconda were fruitful in providing masses of documents, were fruitful in providing masses of documents, computers, personnel, and intelligence.computers, personnel, and intelligence.

Page 25: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Tora BoraTora Bora

●●Large Taliban concentration, Large Taliban concentration, including Osama Bin Ladenincluding Osama Bin Laden

● ● Assault conducted by Assault conducted by Afghan troops and U.S. Afghan troops and U.S. firepowerfirepower

●●Many key figures escaped, Many key figures escaped, perhaps due to difference in perhaps due to difference in coalition and U.S. goalscoalition and U.S. goals

●●Taliban loses 50% of forceTaliban loses 50% of force●●Al Quaeda learn U.S. can Al Quaeda learn U.S. can

intercept radio and cell intercept radio and cell phone communicationsphone communications

Page 26: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Operation AnacondaOperation Anaconda

●●U.S., British, Canadian forces, with Australian SOFU.S., British, Canadian forces, with Australian SOF●●Largest ground battle of the warLargest ground battle of the war●●Mostly Army operation, Naval support came via air Mostly Army operation, Naval support came via air

sortiessorties● ● Considered a disappointment due to joint effort Considered a disappointment due to joint effort

problems—lives saved mostly due to effective body problems—lives saved mostly due to effective body armorarmor

The war ends with U.S. and coalition forces in The war ends with U.S. and coalition forces in nominalnominal

control of Afghanistan, however, many Taliban are control of Afghanistan, however, many Taliban are stillstill

in place, and there is general agreement that the warin place, and there is general agreement that the waris not over, as conflict still exists.is not over, as conflict still exists.

Page 27: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Disposition of forces and Topography of Shahi KhotDisposition of forces and Topography of Shahi Khot

Page 28: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

Airstrike FootageAirstrike Footage

March 11, 2002: March 11, 2002: F/A-18 F/A-18 airstrike on fleeing Al airstrike on fleeing Al Qaeda forces Qaeda forces attempting to attempting to exfiltrate the exfiltrate the Anaconda areaAnaconda area

March 4: F-14 airstrike March 4: F-14 airstrike on a mortar position on a mortar position that was engaging that was engaging friendly forces. friendly forces.

Page 29: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

A Modern WarA Modern War

●●RMA: emphasis on network-centric war RMA: emphasis on network-centric war

●●Initial air strategy: attack Centers of Initial air strategy: attack Centers of Gravity (successful with addition of Gravity (successful with addition of ground support, e.g., MEUs and ground support, e.g., MEUs and Northern AllianceNorthern Alliance

●●SOF liaisons with Northern AlliancesSOF liaisons with Northern Alliances

●●New approach to presence--reflected in New approach to presence--reflected in decision to form ESGs and ARGs decision to form ESGs and ARGs (Amphibious Ready Groups).(Amphibious Ready Groups).

Page 30: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

In Hindsight…In Hindsight…

The Afghan air war was closer to The Afghan air war was closer to network-centric models than past network-centric models than past wars (Kosovo), but did not quite wars (Kosovo), but did not quite get there:get there:

●●Not enough sensorsNot enough sensors

●●Split objectives between hunt for Split objectives between hunt for Bin Laden and defeat of TalibanBin Laden and defeat of Taliban

Page 31: The Navy at War in Afghanistan: Operation Enduring Freedom 2000-2003

ConclusionConclusion

The Afghan War demonstrated the The Afghan War demonstrated the value of naval forces which could value of naval forces which could operate free of bases, remote operate free of bases, remote sensing assets (satellites), and sensing assets (satellites), and special forces operations. Sea-special forces operations. Sea-basing offered independence, and basing offered independence, and sensing facilitated the information sensing facilitated the information “backplane” necessary for network-“backplane” necessary for network-centric warfare. All of this is integral centric warfare. All of this is integral to Sea Power 21.to Sea Power 21.