Lost in Translation, embedded!
Slap, Cavguy, and all the rest
Slap is right that seeing how one is seen by others is a GREAT training/educational tool. But it must be used as such, not to ridicule a troop who is doing the best he can in horribly trying circumstances. That said, this video should be forwarded to COL John Agoglia at the Afghanistan COIN Academy. It certainly ought to be part of his curriculum. Would also be good to use at Fort Riley.
On a side note, I have assigned viewing it and critiqueing the NCO's performance to my Small Wars class as extra credit. I have 4 guys who will be 2LTs within a year in the class and they got "extra" encouragement to do the extra credit assignment. I also passed it on to a new 2LT who just sent me his senior thesis from Wast Point - he interviewed me for it. Point is that this is a superb teaching video on several levels.
Cheers
JohnT
Yep. I'm far more worried about the sloppy TTP
I saw on that patrol than I am about an edited for purpose translation difficulty demonstration. Interpreter problems are a fact of life, always have been and always will be -- and it's easy to cherry pick a film clip to show that.
While proper application of COIN principles is helpful, it's not in this case a matter of certainty that other things were not said or done which might mitigate the apparent lapses.
What is not questionable is that sloppy TTP will get you killed.
Yeah but.. Hmph. Grumble, grumble...
How many people have been shot with weapons that were 'already cleared?' ;)
Sloppy will get you killed...
(Okay, so I'm a grumpy old no-slack Dude -- but I'm still here... :D and that's why...)
If that Elder were a westerner, I'd agree with that assessment.
As he's not, I strongly suspect that his attitude differed a bit. More patience -- much more -- and a generally far greater knowledge and acceptance of human foibles has in my experience been a hallmark of folks from the ME and South Asia. They emphatically do not think as we do and they mostly perceive offensiveness in a different vein than we do. They are also more polite and charitable in addition to being more tolerant of error and youthful attitudes. I'd suggest those qualities are shown to an extent in that video.
I think it's almost a certainty that the NCO in the video is far from the first western military representative that Afghan has talked to and that said Afghan knows and cheerfully accepts that SFC will not be the last...
And I'm still more concerned about the lingering potential for harm to US forces by demonstrated sloppy TTP than I am about possible communication disconnects that can and will be -- and probably already have been as we write -- repaired. :wry:
Ken, my take on the video
was that interpretation (or its lack) was symptomatic of a number of ills of operating in another culture. If you meant that the interpretation issue has been repaired, then I think there is a reasonable probaility you are right (but this is the US Army, remember, and we do know how to keep shooting ourselves in the foot:eek:).
If, however, the issue is one of cross cultural communication with its attendant empathy aspects, then I doubt very much that an effective repair job has been accomplished. Like you, I am sure that the elder has dealt with many Westerners and is prepared to deal with many more. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that he can empathize pretty well with the SGT. That does not mean he likes or agrees with him but I'm pretty sure he understands to the point of predicting his behavior. One of the interesting questions is whether to take the elder at face value. Is he really indicating some desire to work with the Americans or is he only showing us how stupid we are? I'm not sure it matters in the short run because, regardless of why and his intent, their is a lot of intel value in his story. I tend to go back to the Reagan quip, "Trust, but verify." for the longer term.
Cheers
JohnT
I agree with much of that, John.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
John T. Fishel
...If you meant that the interpretation issue has been repaired, then I think there is a reasonable probaility you are right (but this is the US Army, remember, and we do know how to keep shooting ourselves in the foot:eek:).
Agree with both comments. It may have been repaired in that locale but it'll crop up elsewhere; Interpreters will always be a problem and while I think we should strive to better vet -- and train (when was the last time you saw a 'Terp training program?) -- them, one must accept that their use will always pose problems and harm efficiency and effectiveness. We also need to realize that we will absolutely not be able to get necessary or even minimally desired language skills embedded in the Force. Thus, interpretation will remain a problem and we will continually try to fix it...
Quote:
If, however, the issue is one of cross cultural communication with its attendant empathy aspects, then I doubt very much that an effective repair job has been accomplished.
I'm not sure that is attainable or repairable. It is extremely difficult if not impossible to empathize with people you really do not understand -- and that applies both ways. There will always be a few on each side who can cross that chasm but most folks will not be able to do it at all well; that, as they say, is life. Kipling came to understand that. East is east and so forth...
Quote:
Like you, I am sure that the elder has dealt with many Westerners and is prepared to deal with many more. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that he can empathize pretty well with the SGT. That does not mean he likes or agrees with him but I'm pretty sure he understands to the point of predicting his behavior.
Heh. I'd bet big money you're correct on that.
Quote:
One of the interesting questions is whether to take the elder at face value. Is he really indicating some desire to work with the Americans or is he only showing us how stupid we are? I'm not sure it matters in the short run because, regardless of why and his intent, their is a lot of intel value in his story. I tend to go back to the Reagan quip, "Trust, but verify." for the longer term.
He may well be the local Talib honcho -- I've been surprised no one seems to have thought of that (except you and Ron). Or he could be the local poppy cake smuggling leader...
Nothing in the ME / South Asia region is as it seems and a recipe for disaster is to take things at face value. We should never forget that.
Simple things like "...that village was cleared yesterday, so don't waste time, hurry down there." are dangerous fallacies. Yesterday is not today, today's Farmer is tomorrow's Sniper. The benign village elder will slice your scrotum without a blink (and his wife will be meaner...) given the opportunity.
Nope, we should never forget those things. Nor should we forget a great military truth about US unit operations. A lot depends on the attitude of the local US Commander; if he's COIN oriented, the Troops pick up on that and emulate it. If he's a "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out," and "...they're Ragheads..." type, then the Troops will pick up and operate on that. The Locals aren't stupid and they also pick up on the attitude and operate accordingly -- and they'll do that about as fast or faster than the Troops will...
I'd like to say there are no bad Commanders or Units out there but I know better. Show me an NCO that isn't doing right and I'll show you a unit that probably has problems... ;)
Ramble on -- I agree with every bit of that.
Seen more than one mediocre commander get an epiphany from some source and turn out great; far, far more than go the other way. All things considered, the guys in Afghansitan are doing great. There's a learning curve on each rortation and that's to be expected, unavoidable and not terribly problematic. Some units go with little or no contact for a few weeks and get lazy; that's human nature and is always a problem in any COIN operation. Commanders just have to watch it and jack 'em up. :wry:
We can do better on language training -- seems to me there is no central authority directing the program so there is no program -- there should be one and it should include a structured by echelon series of courses of increasingly large vocabularies. It would help if CentCom would stop trying to play mix and match on who goes where and return units to the same AO for the continuity factor. There's no need for a bunch of Mech in Afghanistan and there was little need for light infantry in Iraq. Then people could get a language program going instead of wondering which language they might need...
There should also be a Theater/National (or Corps level at a minimum) training course for Interpreters...
Slap, you are right on the money!
Video of oneself is a very useful technique. As long as one does not use it to punish or ridicule but only as a teaching/learning tool.
During much of the 80s and 90s the Army used its ARTEP program to improve performance. Officers and NCOs were allowed to make mistakes and learn from them. The AARs after an exercise were brutal but they were not punishments - officers and soldiers learned from their mistakes. In the 70s, however, we had a zero defects Army - make a mistake and get punished for it. Some of what I have heard of today's training suggests that we may have returned to something like that. If true, it is terribly counterproductive (understatement of the year:rolleyes:).
Cheers
JohnT