BAGRAM, AFGHANISTAN -- A Reuters report on rising casualties in Afghanistan makes an interesting observation: U.S. commanders are avoiding the word "surge" to describe the recent infusion of U.S. troops here.
So what's the current term of art? I made a quick inquiry at the public affairs shop here at Bagram Airfield, and found a different phrase in use. "This is a planned troop increase," said Capt. Scot Keith. "A surge suggests that it's temporary."
It's more than just semantic distinction: It sends a message to the public that the U.S. commitment here is more open-ended. Some re-branding is at work here as well. The word "surge" is closely associated with George W. Bush's 2007 re-think of Iraq strategy.
Still, the word "surge" loosely applies to the population-centric approach that was employed in Iraq. And it also suggests a parallel effort by diplomats, development experts and other civilians. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen -- currently on a visit to Afghanistan -- has emphasized that Afghanistan will not be won by military means alone. And Gen. David Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, has called for a "surge in civilian capacity" out in Afghanistan's provinces. Whatever you call it, it means more boots on the ground for the United States and its allies.
[PHOTO: U.S. Department of Defense]
ALSO:
- Marines Wrestle With Afghanistan's New Airstrike Rules
- High-Tech Brigade Heads to Afghanistan, Loaded With Gadgets ...
- Surge of Nerds Rebuilds Afghanistan
- U.S. Denies Incendiary Weapon Use in Afghanistan
- NATO Wants Sim Afghanistan to Test War Plans
- Taliban Bigwig Admits: We Screwed Up Afghanistan
- The Military's New Monster Truck for Afghanistan
