I mean, we are so focused on the population and we are very attuned to civilian casualties. And I mean, they were very important in Iraq, but here they have taken on a whole new level of importance it seems.
And I think, you know, if you want the people to cooperate -- and again, I think one thing we learned in Iraq -- you know, at least in our envoys -- you know, the surge was great, the surge provided more troops and more equipment; but at the end of the day, you can't surge trust, you can't surge cooperation, you can't surge personal relations. Those have to be built over a period of time.
If we go into a town and it requires lots of damage to the town and we're killing local people, even if we kill Taliban, those local fatalities and the damage we cause is going to resonate. And I think one of the things that the governor has been so public about this week is that we don't have one -- as far as I know right now, we have not had one civilian casualty in the past seven days. Now, that's -- you think about 4,000 Marines, 600 Afghans, moving through an area, at least 20 engagements with the enemy, and to the best of our knowledge -- and we stay very close to this -- we've not had a civilian casualty.
But the governor is extremely happy with that. I talk with him quite frequently, and he is exceptionally happy with that. He says the people are happy with that. So I think the tactical directive, for us, did not change anything in terms of -- or restrictions in terms of how we're operating in this environment today. So I think for us, we came here focused on the people, and I think we've -- so far, we've been able to accomplish that.
In theory I have no problem with this approach. We doo need to protect the population and separate them from the Taliban.
We expect our troops to risk their lives storming a bunker to take a hill, so we can expect our troops to risk their lives by restraining their firepower to win the human terrain. Our soldiers and Marines are well-trained and as long as their leaders emphasize what we are trying to do, our troops will carry out their orders despite the risks to their lives from holding fire when civilians are at risk. If we win over the people by lowering unintentional casualties and protecting them from Taliban influence, in the long run will suffer fewer casualties.
But this is a risk to our troops in the short run, have no doubt. The enemy already understands how to get away with our rules of engagement:
U.S. Marines trapped Taliban fighters in a residential compound and persuaded the insurgents to allow women and children to leave. The troops then moved in — only to discover that the militants had slipped out, dressed in women's burqa robes.
The fighters, who may owe their lives to the new U.S. commander's emphasis on limiting civilian casualties, were among hundreds of militants who have fled the offensive the Marines launched last week in southern Helmand province. Marine officers say keeping the Taliban from returning so the Afghan government can establish a stable presence will be a bigger challenge.
I hope we can learn to kill the enemy within our ROE better than the enemy can learn to evade us exploiting our ROE. We still need to kill the enemy, this being a war and all that, you know.
