Green-On-Blue Attacks In Afghanistan: A Troubling Trend

Green-on-blue attacks refer to incidents where Afghan soldiers attack U.S. or coalition troops. These attacks have been a common occurrence in Afghanistan, with various motives, including Taliban infiltration, disgruntled soldiers, or cultural differences. The term green-on-blue comes from the colour-coding system used by the U.S. military, with blue denoting friendly NATO forces and green denoting host nation Afghan personnel. The increasing incidence of these attacks has raised questions about the trust between U.S. and Afghan troops and the sustainability of international efforts in the country.

'Green-on-blue' attacks refer to incidents where an Afghan soldier attacks US troops

"Green-on-blue" is a term used by NATO to refer to attacks carried out by Afghan soldiers on US troops. The term comes from the colour-coding system used by the US military, in which "friendly" NATO forces are denoted as "blue" and "host nation" Afghan personnel are denoted as "green". These attacks have become an increasingly common threat to coalition forces in Afghanistan, with the number of "green-on-blue" attacks rising in recent years.

In one notable incident in August 2012, three Australian soldiers were killed and two others were wounded in Uruzgan Province by a man wearing an Afghan army uniform. This incident sparked widespread concern and debate about the nature of the coalition's partnership with Afghan troops and the future of the international forces' presence in Afghanistan. The Australian Prime Minister at the time, Julia Gillard, cancelled a meeting with the Cook Islands Prime Minister to receive a briefing on the incident, which was also referred to as an "insider attack".

Another "green-on-blue" attack occurred in October 2011 in Kandahar Province, when an Afghan soldier opened fire on twelve Australian soldiers who were mentoring the Afghan Army, killing three and wounding nine. This attack was referenced in a charcoal drawing titled "Green on Blue: The betrayal of trust" by artist and veteran Rob Douma, which won the 2018 Napier Waller Art Prize.

The increasing incidence of "green-on-blue" attacks has raised questions about the level of trust between US and Afghan troops and the sustainability of international efforts to combat the Taliban and establish a stable government in Afghanistan. Some analysts attribute the rise in these attacks to Taliban infiltration of the Afghan Army, while others point to cultural differences, inadequate living conditions, and the stress of military service as contributing factors.

The unpredictable nature of "green-on-blue" attacks poses significant challenges for coalition forces, underscoring the importance of training and preparedness in responding to such incidents.

Green-on-blue attacks are also known as 'insider' attacks

Green-on-blue attacks, also known as insider attacks, refer to incidents where Afghan soldiers or civilian police and security attack US and coalition troops. The term "green-on-blue" comes from the colour-coding system used by the US military: "friendly" NATO forces are known as "blue" personnel, while "host nation" Afghan forces are identified as "green".

These attacks have had a significant impact on the sustainability of international forces' efforts in Afghanistan and have raised questions about the level of trust between US and Afghan troops. The increasing incidence of green-on-blue attacks has also highlighted the vulnerability of international forces and the need for improved cultural awareness among NATO troops.

There are various reasons why green-on-blue attacks occur. One of the main causes is cultural misunderstandings and perceived insults or provocations by US troops, which lead to grievances among Afghan forces. Additionally, Taliban infiltration into the Afghan army has been a contributing factor, with some attacks being pre-planned and organised by Taliban-affiliated groups. However, it is important to note that not all attackers are linked to the Taliban, as many act independently out of a sense of revenge or to restore pride to their families.

The increase in green-on-blue attacks has prompted NATO to boost security measures, such as assigning "guardian angels" to watch over their comrades while they sleep. However, the complex nature of these attacks and the various motivations behind them present significant challenges to preventing them.

The attacks are thought to occur due to Taliban infiltration or defection

"Green-on-blue" attacks refer to incidents where an Afghan soldier attacks U.S. or coalition troops. These attacks are especially prevalent in Afghanistan when coalition forces are fired upon by Afghan troops or civilian police and security. The term "green-on-blue" comes from the colour-coding system the U.S. military uses: "friendly" NATO forces are known as "blue" personnel, while "host nation" Afghan personnel are identified as "green".

The increasing incidence of green-on-blue attacks has raised questions about the sustainability of international forces' efforts in Afghanistan and the level of trust between U.S. and Afghan troops. These attacks have also highlighted the vulnerability of international forces and the need for improved training and preparedness to respond to such incidents.

To address the threat of green-on-blue attacks, coalition forces typically respond with deadly force to neutralise the perpetrator immediately. However, there have been instances where Afghan police and troops have been able to take the perpetrator into custody alive, usually after they are wounded or have surrendered.

In response to green-on-blue attacks, coalition forces typically respond with deadly force

Green-on-blue attacks refer to incidents where Afghan soldiers or civilian police and security attack US or coalition troops. These attacks are especially prevalent in Afghanistan, where coalition forces share the same goal of fighting the Taliban with Afghan troops. However, despite this shared goal, attacks from within occur frequently and pose a serious threat.

Coalition forces must be able to react quickly and effectively to green-on-blue attacks. These attacks are often perpetrated using firearms, with the majority of cases between 2008 and 2017 involving a subject opening fire. There are also occasional suicide attacks and situations where green-on-blue attacks become active threat situations. Therefore, it is crucial for soldiers and warfighters to maintain an alert posture and be prepared to respond with deadly force when faced with a green-on-blue attack.

To effectively respond to green-on-blue attacks, coalition forces must have knowledge of how these incidents typically occur. However, green-on-blue attacks can be unpredictable and often happen by surprise. Soldiers and warfighters may not always be able to identify when something is wrong with a friendly or neutral party. Therefore, maintaining an alert posture and being aware of the location of one's weapon at all times is crucial.

In the event of a green-on-blue attack, if there is a threat to life, a well-placed shot to the head is the best way to neutralize the threat immediately. This ensures central nervous system shutdown, resulting in instantaneous neutralization. To achieve this, shot placement and aim training are necessary.

The increase in green-on-blue attacks in Afghanistan has raised concerns about the trust between US and Afghan troops and the future of the country. These attacks have also highlighted the vulnerability of coalition forces and the need for effective training to prepare for such incidents.

The increasing incidence of green-on-blue attacks has cast doubt on the sustainability of international forces' efforts in Afghanistan

The increasing incidence of green-on-blue attacks has brought into question the viability of international forces' efforts in Afghanistan. Green-on-blue attacks refer to incidents where Afghan soldiers attack U.S. or coalition troops, despite their shared goal of fighting the Taliban. These attacks have had severe consequences, with a significant number of casualties among coalition forces. For instance, in 2012, three Australian soldiers were killed and two wounded in a green-on-blue attack, leading to concerns about the trust between U.S. and Afghan troops and the future of Afghanistan.

The rise in green-on-blue attacks can be attributed to various factors, including Taliban infiltration, cultural differences, and the stress experienced by Afghan recruits due to violent postings and inadequate food rations. The vulnerability of international forces in Afghanistan has been highlighted, and some have called for an exit strategy. The complexity of the situation is further exacerbated by the withdrawal of foreign combat troops and the need to maintain a partnership with Afghan troops.

The increasing frequency and severity of green-on-blue attacks have significant implications for the international forces in Afghanistan. These attacks not only cause casualties but also undermine trust and cooperation between coalition and Afghan forces. The situation is made more challenging by the varied motives behind the attacks, which are not always due to Taliban infiltration. The stress and cultural differences experienced by Afghan soldiers also play a role, leading to a complex and dynamic environment that international forces must navigate.

The sustainability of international forces' efforts in Afghanistan hinges on their ability to address the green-on-blue attacks effectively. While responding with deadly force may be necessary in some cases, it is also crucial to consider the underlying factors contributing to these attacks. By improving cultural awareness, addressing logistical issues, and enhancing security measures, international forces can work towards mitigating the threat of green-on-blue attacks and strengthening their partnership with Afghan troops.

The increasing incidence of green-on-blue attacks has cast doubt on the ability of international forces to achieve their objectives in Afghanistan. The complex dynamics and lack of trust between coalition and Afghan forces have made it challenging to establish a credible government in Kabul. The attacks have also highlighted the vulnerability of international forces and the need for a well-planned exit strategy. As efforts to push back against the Taliban face setbacks, the future of Afghanistan remains uncertain.

Frequently asked questions