Human Terrain & Anthropology (merged thread)

[goesh]

Excellent choice, Wm. There was a Jimmi Hendrix nomination which I felt might give 'Nam vets on hand flashbacks so I scratched it. I'm waiting for Stan's theme nomination. What has our world come to when scholars feel they are in the figurative gun sites of colleagues? I recall in one blog a couple years back the author telling me if she ever spoke her true feelings about the war and terrorism, she would be ostracized by most of her colleagues and the one's sympathetic would be afraid to even speak up on her behalf. I vividly recall her words, "I would be sitting alone in the faculty lounge". Weeping Jesus! Have we reached the apex of evolution already? I think Marct was not jesting when he said this petition business causes him think of the witch hunts of medieval times.

[marct]

I've been following this for several days now on a confidential list serve I'm on, as you might imagine, and I am somewhat encouraged by the reactions I have seen from some of my fellow Anthropologists - mainly from those who refuse to sign the "pledge" for reasons of principle.

I also think that the "pledge" itself contains certain contradictory assumptions that are, to my mind, indicative of an ideological stance that I consider to be unethical. In particular, the "pledge" states

we pledge not to undertake research or other activities in support of counter-insurgency work in Iraq or in related theaters in the “war on terror,” and we appeal to colleagues everywhere to make the same commitment

Nowhere in all of the discussions surrounding this issue have I found any interest or concern with studying all of the roots behind the current conflicts - it is all focused on studying how the West is to blame. To me, this is a theoretically and ethically debunk position.

On the theoretical level, it reverts to a crude "Us" (the West) vs. "Them" (all others) typology where the potential for action is a priori assigned solely to "Us". By denying that "They" can commit action (only reaction) the "pledge" is an insult to "Them" implying, in no uncertain terms, that "They" are incapable of making any meaningful action, and hence having a responsibility for that action.

Furthermore, I find this position to be useless in any scientific sense. The dichotomy underlying their position means that they cannot examine any of the roots of violence (including torture, death squads, terror attacks using car bomb and gas tankers) without concluding that it is simply a reaction to Western aggression. Possibly we should be thankful that they pledge themselves not to "undertake research or other activities in support of counter-insurgency work in Iraq or in related theaters in the “war on terror” " since we already know what their results would be.

On the ethical level, by denying the potential of meaningful action to "Them", I believe that they are denying a core quality of what makes people "human". In effect, they are using the same arguments as the worst of the Colonialists did but to a different purpose. Rather than having even a thin veneer of justification for that ideological position, say an "attempt to 'civilize'" the "savages", they are using the pain and suffering of all involved in the current conflicts to justify an imposition of what I can only call thought control upon their own discipline and, by extension, on the Academy and the populace. If I were to translate how I see this "pledge" into terms most people on the SWC will easily understand, I view this as the middle-to-end of a Stage 1, Classic Maoist insurgency conducted not with guns, but with ideas.

Marc

[goesh]

I am reminded too of the communist witch hunt of the McCarthy era in which a goodly number of artists refused to cave in to the blackballing and intimidation. More recently, there was the attempt to boycott Israeli scholars and intellectuals in England.

"On the theoretical level, it reverts to a crude "Us" (the West) vs. "Them" (all others) typology where the potential for action is a priori assigned solely to "Us". (Marct)

Well said, Sir! Once I get a theme song and ship, I'm nominating you to be the Captain as you are in the forefront of the charge against ignorance and bullying by people who should know better. Stan will have to salute you then.

[marct]

Hi Goesh,

I am reminded too of the communist witch hunt of the McCarthy era in which a goodly number of artists refused to cave in to the blackballing and intimidation. More recently, there was the attempt to boycott Israeli scholars and intellectuals in England.

Agreed, the mechanism is very similar. I keep getting reminded of the dynamics of the Witchcraft trials in Europe . Anyway, there is a truly excellent book by Gustav Henningsen, The Witches Advocate, that really looks at this dynamic, although his focus is the Basque Trials of 1609-1614. Well worth reading for anyone interested in how thought control has been institutionalized.

"On the theoretical level, it reverts to a crude "Us" (the West) vs. "Them" (all others) typology where the potential for action is a priori assigned solely to "Us". (Marct)

Well said, Sir! Once I get a theme song and ship, I'm nominating you to be the Captain as you are in the forefront of the charge against ignorance and bullying by people who should know better. Stan will have to salute you then.

LOLOL - just, PLEASE, don't use a patter song!

[Stan]

Because they consider the original invasion to be unwarranted, they will take no part of a successful counterinsurgency. Rather, they will try to bully other anthropologists into the same position with a childish “petition” (as if other Doctors of Philosophy in anthropology are incapable of making their own minds up about what they consider to be ethical use of their knowledge).

Sounds like this thread goes straight back to Marc's "Why Doctor Johnny won't go to war".
I won't even pretend to understand the pathetic attack that Doctors McFate and Price concocted stressing the need for 'crytical 'self' evaluation' and freely using native populations as if we were all in Africa fighting the Pygmies for floor space in the jungle.

McFate wastes no time 'stressing' the need to read his book - before even going anywhere with some credible point (other than chewing on Marc for punctuation). That probably kept me from even giving his book a second thought.

Well, that's my take...confusion, when one considers the immense amount of intelligence these individuals have, yet are content to go to the grave with it despite soldiers and 'natives' dying all around them.

Now to Goesh.
Probably one of my favorites from the Vietnam Era, and seems appropriate is by the Animals: ‘We Gotta Get Out of this Place’

Way Off Topic, but short:
Talk to any vet (I have several times during the annual 'Ride to the Wall') and you'll soon discover how much they related to individual songs and the musicians that created them. One very crusty SGM told me how hard it was to discuss his experience, because he felt the language of our politicians was inadequate to describe the war.

Although I like your current choice, my second would have to be "Sitting on the Dock of the Bay" by Otis Redding.

Regards, Stan

[wm]

Even Captains Kirk and Picard felt compelled to disobey the Prime Directive once and while. Are the academic anthropologists pushing this petition sewn together with stronger moral thread than these two heroic icons?

[Rex Brynen]

Even Captains Kirk and Picard felt compelled to disobey the Prime Directive once and while. Are the academic anthropologists pushing this petition sewn together with stronger moral thread than these to heroic icons?

Ahh, now we're really talking in my area of expertise

Rex Brynen, "Mirror, Mirror? The Politics of TV Science Fiction." In David Schultz, ed., It's Showtime! Media, Politics and Popular Culture (Baltimore: Peter Lang, 2000). (version here)

[marct]

Hi Stan,

Sounds like this thread goes straight back to Marc's "Why Doctor Johnny won't go to war".

It is all part of the same issue.

I won't even pretend to understand the pathetic attack that Doctors McFate and Price concocted stressing the need for 'crytical 'self' evaluation' and freely using native populations as if we were all in Africa fighting the Pygmies for floor space in the jungle.

Um, McFate? She is the one who has been vilified to most by the Price Gusterson crowd who wrote the "pledge". It think you have her confused with someone else, Stan .

Well, that's my take...confusion, when one considers the immense amount of intelligence these individuals have, yet are content to go to the grave with it despite soldiers and 'natives' dying all around them.

And that is a moral argument that, IMO, has a chunk of weight.

It goes back to what Rex was talking about regarding professional codes of ethics (aka professional morality).

The second issue is the tensions that arise from one's professional responsibility as a social scientist, and one's potential function as a counter-insurgent. Academic social scientists are suppose to live by a series of research ethics that, for example, require disclosure research project to most interviewees, disclosure of data and findings, informed consent, and very stringent safeguards for interviewing involuntary subjects (such as prisoners) or those otherwise unable to give informed consent. HUMINT collection, IO, PSYOPS, etc all work rather differently, as does providing professional advice in these areas. There are some potentially troubling professional and ethical implications of moving back and forth between both worlds.

I agree, there are some troubling implications about shifting back and forth. But I think that one reason behind the existence of the professional moral codes that has not been examined is that they serve as a guarantor to the state which, ultimately, serves to legitimate and legitimize these professions. This, in turn, implies that these codes are no more that prophylactic mechanisms to avoid state and/or popular censure - a guarantee of moral "purity" as it were.

Marc

[Stan]

Hey Marc !

Hi Stan,

Um, McFate? She is the one who has been vilified to most by the Price Gusterson crowd who wrote the "pledge". It think you have her confused with someone else, Stan .

Doctor Montgomery McFate is a she ? Jeez, and I thought I had a hard time going to school with my first name

It's no wonder then why she has such a pesky demeanor !

Regards, Stan

[Beelzebubalicious]

Not much new here, but I did like the quote about clubbing seals...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080109/...hropologist_dc

[Stan]

Not much new here, but I did like the quote about clubbing seals...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080109/...hropologist_dc

Great post ! And on a positive note, what I did like reading was:

"I'm a Californian. I'm a liberal. I'm a Democrat," he says. "My impetus is to come here and help end this thing."

"There's been a knee-jerk reaction in the anthropology community, that you've been co-opted, that you're a warmonger, like you're clubbing baby seals or something," he said. "I came here to save lives, to make friends out of enemies."

Short, sweet, and to the point.

[jcustis]

I'd like to take this thread slightly off the anthopological tack and delve into a question that has been grinding my gears for at least a week now.

Imagine if you will, that you are serving as a PRT member, and are involved in bringing foreign businessmen into Iraq for the purpose of business development talks in an area where a foreign company was responsible for an agricultural project many years ago. Along for the ride is a certain blond DoD liaison representative who, while attractive and young, and a Harvard grad, has about zero wits about her when it comes to cultural sensitivity, and doesn't recognize the fact that her Uggs boots don't fit the freaking climate

If you are said PRT and you are participating in an engagement with the "sheik of sheiks" of Iraq, and happen to know that there is a potential for many other sheiks to be present for impromptu discussions, would you require that the DoD liaison adhered to the basic cultural sensitivity nod of covering her head before she stepped into the ornate home of the host, even if it was a relaxed Queen Noor sort of way?

[Jedburgh]

Moderator at Work

Prompted by the most recent post I have merged eight threads on the subject of Human Terrain, Human Terrain teams (HTS) and Anthropology into one. Most threads were in the Social Science forum and a few outside, including one in Job Seekers. I have left two threads on Iraq & HTS. (Ends)

If anyone is interested in joining a Human Terrain Team or knows of someone who would be qualified to be on one of the teams, they are looking for additional personnel:

• The Human Terrain System is a new Army program designed to improve the military’s ability to understand the local socio-cultural environment in Iraq and Afghanistan. This program is a pioneering effort with the potential to fundamentally change the way the military operates in foreign environments: knowledge of the local population provides a departure point for a military staff’s ability to plan and execute its mission more effectively using less lethal force. Preliminary findings from Afghanistan demonstrate that Human Terrain Teams help military commanders reduce the amount of lethal force used, with a corresponding reduction in military and civilian casualties.

• Social scientists will be members of five-person Human Terrain Teams, which are composed of military specialists, linguists, area studies specialists, and others. The Human Terrain Teams act as advisers to Army Brigades and Marine Corps Regiments. The Human Terrain Team does not engage in combat missions, nor does it collect intelligence. This program is neither covert nor clandestine: when interacting with the local population, all members of the human terrain team fully identify themselves and their mission. All team members undergo four months of training, with a deployment of 6 to 9 months.

• In addition to drawing upon their own experience and expertise, field social scientists, as members of a Human Terrain Team, will gather data from a variety of sources operating in theatre (e.g. conventional military patrols, non-governmental organizations, international organizations, civil affairs units, special forces). The teams assist commanders in understanding the operational relevance of socio-cultural information as it applies to the military decision-making process. The expectation is that the social scientist’s knowledge will allow the commander to make decisions that will increase the security of the area, allow other organizations (local and international) to more effectively provide aid and restore the infrastructure, ensure that US efforts are culturally sensitive, promote economic development, and help the local population more effectively communicate their needs to US and Coalition forces.

• In recent decades scholarly access to military operations has been limited to those in uniform and a select handful of insiders. Working as a social scientist on a Human Terrain Team offers a rare and unique opportunity to help reshape the military's execution of their mission by offering them a much greater appreciation of existing socio-cultural realities and sensitivities in the countries where they are operating. This position also offers an opportunity to develop new methods for data collection and analysis. Social scientists will be able to write about their experiences and otherwise contribute to the academic literature in their field after participation.

• Applicants selected will be subject to a government security investigation (which requires that applicants report their employment, residence and lifestyle activities for the past seven years) and must meet the eligibility requirements for access to classified information. Applicants will also undergo a 4-month training program at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, including orientation to the military/deployment environment, in-depth country briefings, and multi-disciplinary social science concepts and methods.

• Qualifications:
o US citizen
o PhD (or ABD) in anthropology or related field such as sociology, political science, history, theology, economics, public policy, social psychology or area studies
o Experience living or working overseas for extended periods
o Comprehensive physical exam within last year
o Ability to travel to Afghanistan and/or Iraq
o Ability to obtain and maintain a security clearance
o Ability to work in a team environment
o Ability to work with social scientists from other disciplines
o An open-minded attitude towards a variety of concepts and methods
o Willingness to work with the military

• In addition to the above requirements, the following are preferred:
o Experience living or working in the Middle East
o Arabic, Pashtoo or Dari language skills

• Start date: open

• Salary: negotiable, depending on experience and qualifications

• All inquiries should be directed to Dr. Janice Laurence, Director of Human Resources: Janice.laurence@us.army.mil

[goesh]

This is quite a step forward for the US Military. They would be very wise to ramp down the academic requirements a notch or two or at least have an exception clause based on experience incorporated into the program. I have two Archeologist friends for instance who have ran digs and done a spot of publishing with naught but a Masters and the good Peace Corps Volunteers who accomplished a few things I knew didn't have but B.A./B.S. degrees. My gut reaction to the posting was, 'heavy on the intellectual side with lots of conferencing and meetings and sitting at the computer in the green zone and little time on the streets/in the bush'. Talent trumps rank? Seems I read that somehwere in some COIN publication.

[Stan]

You're quite right, Goesh. An ambitious step forward for the Army, but the bar is set a tad too high. That and the fact that we have our own assets - those who were neglected for years in the form of FAOs and intel Os and Es. Culturally aware and language background to boot. The Army blindly squandered her best assets just prior to needing them folks more than ever. We should have kept those soldiers In Service and Up to Speed.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with employing Peace Corps Volunteers. Nothing personal, they kinda went too local even for me.

[goesh]

Stan, I never had a problem wearing ju-jus in the bush or feathers or ears for that matter. One out of a thousand former PCVs at best would commit to the military, along the same reasons Anthros are whining and wringing their hands and pontificating about it. I don't know the reason for not scouring the ranks for real in-house talent to employ. The first sniper/IED/fire fight is going to send half the civilians home on the spot most likely so the standards will have to be adjusted anyway. It's in its infancy and will flex to make itself work this program. Alot of employed Phds are not going to ship over for the sake of some extra money I don't think so they will have to tap in-house talent at some point. It sounds like its for real this program and not some look-good-feel-good BS.

[Ken White]

You're quite right, Goesh. An ambitious step forward for the Army, but the bar is set a tad too high. That and the fact that we have our own assets - those who were neglected for years in the form of FAOs and intel Os and Es. Culturally aware and language background to boot. The Army blindly squandered her best assets just prior to needing them folks more than ever. We should have kept those soldiers In Service and Up to Speed.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with employing Peace Corps Volunteers. Nothing personal, they kinda went too local even for me.

PhD is overkill, get advanced degree candidates.

Re: the PC PC (not redundant), I even got shot at by one -- once.

[jhlaurence]

There are exceptions -- I agree with the need for experience and not just rank. There are additional team members that don't require a Ph.D. The ideal is to have a military lead with credibility, a senior social scientist with the right skills and credibility, a linguist, an area expert. The "additional" social scientist need not have the "official" credentials.

Thanks for the feedback -- I am the director of human resource development

[Tom Odom]

There are exceptions -- I agree with the need for experience and not just rank. There are additional team members that don't require a Ph.D. The ideal is to have a military lead with credibility, a senior social scientist with the right skills and credibility, a linguist, an area expert. The "additional" social scientist need not have the "official" credentials.

Thanks for the feedback -- I am the director of human resource development

JHL,

Thanks for stopping in. This work is really important and of great interest to those of us who have worked this arena. Lot's of experience on here.

Best

Tom

[goesh]

Thanks for joining Dr. Laurence and by all means join in other discussions when time permits. HTP is overdue but better late than never. The fact that opponents and antagonists have so quickly arisen is a testament to the potential of the program. The diversity, experience and commitment found in the membership of this forum is truly impressive and can prove to be a valuable asset easily tapped. Keep up the good work!