Hi Marc,
I personally think it's a relations issue. The military are not trained to get along with their Anthropologists in order to get the job done, and our politicians are also not interested in why Dr. Johnny won't go !but it is a good indication of the military’s problem, and why those anthropologists who have cooperated with the military have often come to regret it. To return to my imagined example above, the military is committed to invade the region our researcher’s expertise is in, regardless of the quality of their intelligence.
I realize that perhaps somewhere in history this was often the case. Your recent and detailed analysis was excellent in covering that subject.
Did we truly invade Iraq based on knowledge gained from Anthropologists ?
Now that we are indeed 'there', what's the opinion ? Is it now OK to assist and make the situation less painful, make it 'go away' smoother, faster, and without further regret ?
My rotations in Afghanistan were not graced with experts, and the learning curve was steep. By the 3rd rotation, our teams were functioning well. Would it have hurt one's pride to get us going faster with far less risk ? I would have loved someone getting me ahead of the game without further loss of life. That's my Bravo-Sierra-Bible-Study take.
As I reflect on the years of experience in Sub-Sahara, Tom and I were always in a sense 'used'. Yes, we knew it from the start. It may not have always been pleasant, but we convinced ourselves that, what we were doing was better than standing on the sidelines watching things go to hell, when we could have prevented it.
Thanks, I enjoyed the article !
Bookmarks