Modernization/Development Theory, CORDS, and FM 3-24?

[Madhu]

Petraeus's father-in-law, William Knowlton, had been involved in the most ambitious of these programs, known as CORDS (Civil Operations and Revolutionary Development Support), which created "strategic hamlets"--distinct areas where the population could be separated (in some cases, physically resettled) from the insurgents--and then trained local self-defense units to stave off the insurgents' return. CORDS was led by a brilliant but wild-eyed White House official named Robert Komer, known to those who worked with him as "Blowtorch." (He didn't mind the nickname.) Knowlton had served as Komer's military deputy, and after Petraeus married Knowlton's daughter, the two talked at length about CORDS: how it operated and its similarities to other counterinsurgency campaigns that Petraeus had been studying.

- The Insurgents, Fred Kaplan

So, supposedly, the Army had forgotten lessons learned in Vietnam about counterinsurgency.

But the topic was kept alive, especially because the Army had an internal argument about who really lost the war and why?

I wonder if the better understanding is that the methodical institutional STUDY stopped, rather than it was entirely forgotten.

Better lesson learned: study on such topics must continue institutionally and be kept intellectually alive and informed by current developments? Intellectual study is a living thing, not simply a "lessons learned" thing?

The American military "Insurgents" (Kaplan book), then, had a point about unpreparedness regarding counterinsurgency but their ideas off the page did not bear fruit?

I personally still think we paid a price for not reviewing our own complicated history in South Asia, especially Afghanistan and Pakistan. (I don't generally talk about Iraq around here because I am not as comfortable with that topic).

I hope the institution corrects that error and studies its own history and its own SELF (if you see what I mean) in South Asia and China so that there is a better understanding of the region. If outside experts or State Department Hands are used, then something important is missing and a DC group think will continue about various regions, IMO. Some of the reading lists around here, on the larger strategic view of regions, is a bit worrisome. I will add to those articles at a later date.

Each institution with its own rigorous understanding may help.