Hi Stan,
Sorry for the delayed reply...
True and, let's face it, there are some serious disconnects with how the military and Anthropology view the world .
Thanks, Stan. Information from Anthropologists, specifically some cultural insights from a book published in the 1960's, was used in some cases. The invasion certainly was not "based on" anthropology - in fact, the vast majority of Anthropologists opposed the Iraqi war and would have nothing to do with it.
In a word - "poor". There are serious problems getting anyone to work on the Human Terrain Teams, anyone who tries to work with the military is subject to be ostracized by PC radicals, and the vast majority of Anthropologists just don't want to have anything to do with it. Assisting now is viewed as being a "traitor to the discipline" by some of the extremist, and highly vocal, PC crowd.
Afghanistan is somewhat different from Iraq, although there is still a lot of negativity attached to it. I was actually involved in a project for CIDA at the time, tracking world opinion of what was happening in Afghanistan, and it became pretty clear to me that many government agencies, at least in Canada, didn't want Anthropologists involved.
You know, in some ways we are dealing with a situation where Anthropology has backed itself into a corner. First, yelling "Hands Off!!!" in the 1960-70's to governments established a situation where these agencies wouldn't think of Anthropology. Later on, when people start realizing how useful we could be, the radicals who were yelling "Hands Off" are now the senior members of the discipline and, as with old generals, they are always ready to fight the last war .
Yeah, I understand the feeling .
Marc
Bookmarks