03. OPERATION ANACONDA: CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES IN THE SHAH-I-KOT VALLEY, AFGHANISTAN
Estimated reading: 6 minutes
306 views
In the wake of the Northern Alliance retaking Afghanistan in late 2021, Operation Anaconda emerged as a pivotal military endeavour. This operation aimed to address the intelligence reports of approximately 300 foreign fighters amassing in the strategically significant Shah-i-kot Valley. This article delves into the strategic context, operational challenges, and the rationale behind undertaking Operation Anaconda.
The Northern Alliance’s successful retake of Afghanistan from October 7th to November 2021 set the stage for Operation Anaconda. With only about 20,000 US military personnel and an additional 10,000 in the ISAF contingent, the focus was on the Shah-i-kot Valley, located hundreds of nautical miles away from population centers. The terrain, particularly in the lower “Shah-i-kot” Valley, posed significant challenges, with elevations ranging from 2400 to 2700 meters. The overall operating environment was characterized by severe restrictions and challenges.
Objectives and Intelligence
The primary motivation behind Operation Anaconda was intelligence indicating the presence of around 300 foreign fighters gathering in the Shah-i-kot Valley. These fighters had access to the Pakistan tribal areas, utilizing them to build combat power. The exact intentions of this group remained unclear, but the urgency to address the potential threat prompted the operational leaders of CJTF Mountain to view this as an opportunity to showcase aerosol capability.
Operation Anaconda: initial plan (credit: US Army Center for Army Lessons Learned)
Operational Challenges
The geographical and environmental constraints posed critical challenges for Operation Anaconda. The Shah-i-kot Valley’s elevation and restricted terrain meant that helicopters (particularly the CH-47) were the only viable means of inserting troops onto the objective. However, this came with its own set of challenges, including a limited ability to mass artillery support. One glaring shortfall was the absence of tube artillery to support the operation, highlighting the difficulty in achieving massed effects. Additionally, due to altitude, temperature, weight, and humidity considerations, the CH-47 was the only helicopter deemed suitable for the mission. This forced planners to adjust normal considerations for troop load, limiting the number of soldiers on each helicopter from 30 to 20, thus significantly degrading the overall combat power that could be deployed.
Operational Approach
Task Force 64, a multinational Special Operations Forces (SOF) formation comprising Canadian, Dutch, and US Army and Navy special operations teams, played a pivotal role in Operation Anaconda. The commander’s unconventional decision to infill by foot rather than using helicopters allowed for undetected movement, enabling effective fire support for the forces in the valley. Notably, this location marked the heroic actions of Air Force Sergeant Chapman, who would later receive the US Medal of Honor.
The events of Operation Anaconda commenced on March 1st, with Task Force Anvil, primarily consisting of Afghan partners, experiencing significant friction during their ground infill. A blinding snowstorm and the dominating terrain forced them to choose a light-load approach, sacrificing the element of surprise. The initial CH-47 lift encountered immediate challenges, with six of eight missing their intended locations, facing 12.7mm DShK heavy machinegun fire, and disrupting the infiltration of infantry battalions supporting the separation.
Task Force Summit, designated as 1/187, found themselves pinned down on the 2nd of March, facing DShK and mortar fire. Despite enduring 35 casualties and recovering during darkness, the striking force from Afghan forces had not yet reached the objective area. Additional Special Forces teams were inserted to partner with the Afghans, while anti-aircraft fire restricted AC-130 employment to the period of darkness.
Takur Gah Battles
The focus shifted to Takur Gah, a dominating piece of key terrain, where MAKO-30 (SEAL team planned to establish an observation point on the end of the valley) faced aircraft problems and crash-landed. This initiated a series of events involving the theatre quick response force, leading to two Chinooks on Takur Gah being targeted by attacks. Although none of the three attacks were successful due to US suppressive fire support, casualties mounted, and evacuation became challenging. Recognizing the need for support, two additional battalions from the 10th Mountain Division were flown in, initiating their insertion on March 5th.
The clearance of the lower Shah-i-kot Valley, a challenging task over severely restricted terrain, involved three US battalions, two Afghan partners’ battalion-sized formations, and eventually the deployment of tanks. Highlighting the difficulties, it tookseven full days,until March 12th,to complete the clearance, emphasizing the resilience and determination required in such complex operations.
Operation Anaconda: area of Operation (credit: US Army Center for Army Lessons Learned)
Key takeaways and lessons learned
Limited Objectives and Shifting Dynamics: One of the primary takeaways from Operation Anaconda is the realization that despite the significant efforts and challenges faced, the operation achieved limited objectives. The clearance eventually led to the discovery that most foreign fighters had already moved to the south and back to the Pakistan tribal areas, showcasing the dynamic nature of the conflict.
Success with Air Fire Support: OP Anaconda highlights the success of units relying on air fire support, which proved effective in certain aspects of the operation. However, this success comes with a significant caveat – the high costs associated with air fire support and threats by enemy AA fire. The ease of use of air fire support also poses a risk, as it could lead to increased reliance by US units, potentially limiting their adaptability in diverse operational environments.
Challenges with Partner Forces: Despite the inclusion of partner operational detachments, there were significant challenges with partner forces. Issues in communication, coordination, and timely execution were evident, emphasizing the need for a more streamlined and efficient collaboration between US and partner forces to enhance overall mission effectiveness.
Interoperability in Multinational SOF: OP Anaconda reveals three critical domains of interoperability: procedural, interpersonal, and technical. The multinational Special Operations Forces (SOF) involved in Operation Anaconda struggled with effective interoperability, facing difficulties in operating and communicating directly with each other. This lack of ease collaboration underscored the importance of addressing interoperability challenges in future multinational operations.
Communication and Decision Dominance: The reliance on UHF tactical radios for communication throughout the entire operation was evident. While this form of communication was initially effective, an signals operating instructions (SOI) change in the middle of the operation disrupted communication between battalions, leading to a significant breakdown in synchronisation and decision-making. This emphasizes the need for robust communication systems and the potential risks associated with sudden changes in signals operating instructions.
03. OPERATION ANACONDA: CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES IN THE SHAH-I-KOT VALLEY, AFGHANISTAN
In the wake of the Northern Alliance retaking Afghanistan in late 2021, Operation Anaconda emerged as a pivotal military endeavour. This operation aimed to address the intelligence reports of approximately 300 foreign fighters amassing in the strategically significant Shah-i-kot Valley. This article delves into the strategic context, operational challenges, and the rationale behind undertaking Operation Anaconda.
The Northern Alliance’s successful retake of Afghanistan from October 7th to November 2021 set the stage for Operation Anaconda. With only about 20,000 US military personnel and an additional 10,000 in the ISAF contingent, the focus was on the Shah-i-kot Valley, located hundreds of nautical miles away from population centers. The terrain, particularly in the lower “Shah-i-kot” Valley, posed significant challenges, with elevations ranging from 2400 to 2700 meters. The overall operating environment was characterized by severe restrictions and challenges.
Objectives and Intelligence
The primary motivation behind Operation Anaconda was intelligence indicating the presence of around 300 foreign fighters gathering in the Shah-i-kot Valley. These fighters had access to the Pakistan tribal areas, utilizing them to build combat power. The exact intentions of this group remained unclear, but the urgency to address the potential threat prompted the operational leaders of CJTF Mountain to view this as an opportunity to showcase aerosol capability.
Operational Challenges
The geographical and environmental constraints posed critical challenges for Operation Anaconda. The Shah-i-kot Valley’s elevation and restricted terrain meant that helicopters (particularly the CH-47) were the only viable means of inserting troops onto the objective. However, this came with its own set of challenges, including a limited ability to mass artillery support. One glaring shortfall was the absence of tube artillery to support the operation, highlighting the difficulty in achieving massed effects. Additionally, due to altitude, temperature, weight, and humidity considerations, the CH-47 was the only helicopter deemed suitable for the mission. This forced planners to adjust normal considerations for troop load, limiting the number of soldiers on each helicopter from 30 to 20, thus significantly degrading the overall combat power that could be deployed.
Operational Approach
Task Force 64, a multinational Special Operations Forces (SOF) formation comprising Canadian, Dutch, and US Army and Navy special operations teams, played a pivotal role in Operation Anaconda. The commander’s unconventional decision to infill by foot rather than using helicopters allowed for undetected movement, enabling effective fire support for the forces in the valley. Notably, this location marked the heroic actions of Air Force Sergeant Chapman, who would later receive the US Medal of Honor.
The events of Operation Anaconda commenced on March 1st, with Task Force Anvil, primarily consisting of Afghan partners, experiencing significant friction during their ground infill. A blinding snowstorm and the dominating terrain forced them to choose a light-load approach, sacrificing the element of surprise. The initial CH-47 lift encountered immediate challenges, with six of eight missing their intended locations, facing 12.7mm DShK heavy machinegun fire, and disrupting the infiltration of infantry battalions supporting the separation.
Task Force Summit, designated as 1/187, found themselves pinned down on the 2nd of March, facing DShK and mortar fire. Despite enduring 35 casualties and recovering during darkness, the striking force from Afghan forces had not yet reached the objective area. Additional Special Forces teams were inserted to partner with the Afghans, while anti-aircraft fire restricted AC-130 employment to the period of darkness.
Takur Gah Battles
The focus shifted to Takur Gah, a dominating piece of key terrain, where MAKO-30 (SEAL team planned to establish an observation point on the end of the valley) faced aircraft problems and crash-landed. This initiated a series of events involving the theatre quick response force, leading to two Chinooks on Takur Gah being targeted by attacks. Although none of the three attacks were successful due to US suppressive fire support, casualties mounted, and evacuation became challenging. Recognizing the need for support, two additional battalions from the 10th Mountain Division were flown in, initiating their insertion on March 5th.
The clearance of the lower Shah-i-kot Valley, a challenging task over severely restricted terrain, involved three US battalions, two Afghan partners’ battalion-sized formations, and eventually the deployment of tanks. Highlighting the difficulties, it took seven full days, until March 12th, to complete the clearance, emphasizing the resilience and determination required in such complex operations.
Key takeaways and lessons learned
Limited Objectives and Shifting Dynamics: One of the primary takeaways from Operation Anaconda is the realization that despite the significant efforts and challenges faced, the operation achieved limited objectives. The clearance eventually led to the discovery that most foreign fighters had already moved to the south and back to the Pakistan tribal areas, showcasing the dynamic nature of the conflict.
Success with Air Fire Support: OP Anaconda highlights the success of units relying on air fire support, which proved effective in certain aspects of the operation. However, this success comes with a significant caveat – the high costs associated with air fire support and threats by enemy AA fire. The ease of use of air fire support also poses a risk, as it could lead to increased reliance by US units, potentially limiting their adaptability in diverse operational environments.
Challenges with Partner Forces: Despite the inclusion of partner operational detachments, there were significant challenges with partner forces. Issues in communication, coordination, and timely execution were evident, emphasizing the need for a more streamlined and efficient collaboration between US and partner forces to enhance overall mission effectiveness.
Interoperability in Multinational SOF: OP Anaconda reveals three critical domains of interoperability: procedural, interpersonal, and technical. The multinational Special Operations Forces (SOF) involved in Operation Anaconda struggled with effective interoperability, facing difficulties in operating and communicating directly with each other. This lack of ease collaboration underscored the importance of addressing interoperability challenges in future multinational operations.
Communication and Decision Dominance: The reliance on UHF tactical radios for communication throughout the entire operation was evident. While this form of communication was initially effective, an signals operating instructions (SOI) change in the middle of the operation disrupted communication between battalions, leading to a significant breakdown in synchronisation and decision-making. This emphasizes the need for robust communication systems and the potential risks associated with sudden changes in signals operating instructions.