I don't have a problem with that. You are either supporting the insurgency against a government or you are supporting a government against the insurgency (COIN). I think it is far to approach the problem differently depending on which side you are on.
I didn't see anything in Metz's system that said that winning hearts and minds was part of the plan.
I do like the idea that you need a palette of options from which to chose, so DR. Metz's concept is a step in the right direction. But I also don't like his system of categorization.
I did like his distinction between whether it was a strictly internal matter or whether the insurgents had external backing. External backing provides the insurgency assets and support to keep the fight going. I have seen at least one paper that claims that every successful insurgency had external support, but that is probably a bit of a wild overstatement.
I also take issues with it. The assumption being that we are either supporting the government or the insurgency -- back to my first comment. I don't believe that we would find ourselves in a position to be supporting a government that we were not somehow aligned with. Or maybe that was the point.
I will have to go back but there was an article that discussed the critical aspects of successful counterinsurgency operations. That is probably a good place to start.
Bookmarks