Human Terrain & Anthropology (merged thread)

[Ken White]

to the bad guys; she got really torqued when we stopped her Ambulance and insisted on searching it and her first attempt at blonde charm failed. She totally lost it when we found 14 weapons and a bunch of ammo. She was big girl, no razor, picked up an old Mauser, cranked off a round at me, it missed, I looked super cool (actually I was saying "wha..." and it all didn't register-- but it became a minor legend [myth?] with the troops) and the young speedy Four standing closest to her buttstroked her.

The good thing about that little soiree was that one of the weapons was an NWM made AR-10, the ones that got sold only to Batista and inherited by Castro and the S2 got to show it to the very anti-American Indian MG who was the UN rep and who was adamant there was no Cubano involvement in the Dom Rep. That and the un-PC PC nurse got hassled, oops, sorry, interrogated, for three days before we turned her over to State.

[goesh]

we had one who after a 2 week courtship married a PLO rep in country - the standard joke was at the wedding reception food and drink would be served on top of a case of hand grenades - they probably inserted some plastique in her and detonated her somewhere in Tel Aviv

[Ken White]

great and few are flakes. Hmmm -- sounds just like your average rifle company...

[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

[jhlaurence]

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.

It is the real deal and I am really taking this feedback seriously. Tell any of those FAOs to contact me and I will give them info on the other Human Terrain Team members besides Social Scientists.

[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

[jhlaurence]

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

Thanks for the welcome. I need this experience. Keep up the contact and the feedback. And THANKS for all you do -- I am a civilian military psychogists who plans to go to Iraq and Afghanistan and see the program functioning at the source! It's an opportunity for me to put my actions where my "mouth" is....

[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!

[jhlaurence]

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!

I agree that we might be late for Iraq and Afghanistan (though there seems to be some good effects in Afghanistan). If (when) this becomes a program of record then I would expect to be in such areas as Africa, Indonesia, South America, etc. So help us make this a program of record!

[goesh]

Tap your in-country connections, make her feel most welcome and keep her extra safe when she lands.

[Stan]

Hey JHL and Welcome !
Marc will indeed have some questions for you...nature of the beast.

It is the real deal and I am really taking this feedback seriously. Tell any of those FAOs to contact me and I will give them info on the other Human Terrain Team members besides Social Scientists.

I'm no FAO, but hung and hang around with many FAOs. I consider myself culturally aware and constantly suspicious.

Don't take what I said too much to heart...well, not right away.

I look forward to your posts.

Regards, Stan

[Jedburgh]

-- 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

-- I am a civilian military psychogists who plans to go to Iraq and Afghanistan and see the program functioning at the source! It's an opportunity for me to put my actions where my "mouth" is....

Janice, welcome to the board. "Human Terrain" has long been a focus of those involved in Small Wars, and the relatively recent injection of social science academia into the military arena - even if still yet to be fully realized - has been something that many of us have been observing closely. We certainly appreciate any feedback you are able to give in response to our comments.

Ted

[marct]

Hi Janice,

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

Great to have you here! I do have a couple of questions about the program that maybe you can answer.

First, especially given the current uproar n Anthropology right now, it certainly looks to me like you are going to have a lot of difficulty meeting recruiting targets for Ph.D.'s. While I would agree that lowering the academic standards is one way to meet them, have you also thought about relaxing the US citizenship requirements, say, to include Canadians, Brits and Oz/NZ academics?

Second, is here a specifically stated policy that is open that meets the ethical concerns about secrecy and informed consent that are at the core of the current Military-Anthropology debate? I have heard rumours that there are, but I haven't been able to find anything on them.

Third, if I remember the original HTS proposal correctly, there were supposed to be reach back teams in CONUS. I haven't heard anything about them, though, since that proposal. Could you fill us in on that?

Marc

[Tom Odom]

I am a civilian military psychogist

Janice,

You are needed here...

We could probably give you a byline column called: "Ask Janice"

Seriously on the FAO thing--good avenue to recruit former FAOs and guys like Stan is through the FAO Association or even through FAO proponency.

Best

Tom

[goesh]

Afghan and Iraqi Law and the exigency of being able to save lives in the very foreseeable future should keep some concerns confined to the ivory tower.
It is my impression that this operational platform will be implemented well out and away from the green zone/Kabul bunkers.

[marct]

Hi Goesh,

Afghan and Iraqi Law and the exigency of being able to save lives in the very foreseeable future should keep some concerns confined to the ivory tower.

From what I have been seeing, the concerns are certainly not limited to the Ivory Tower. There are, to my mind, some very serious concerns that relate to confidentiality that are operating in the field as well given that some of the CORDS data was used, latter on, to arrange selective assassinations; while I disagree with David Price on a number of issues, his research and findings in this area are pretty darned solid and, as the saying goes, "once burned, twice shy".

It is my impression that this operational platform will be implemented well out and away from the green zone/Kabul bunkers.

That's my understanding as well.

[jhlaurence]

Hi Janice,



Great to have you here! I do have a couple of questions about the program that maybe you can answer.

First, especially given the current uproar n Anthropology right now, it certainly looks to me like you are going to have a lot of difficulty meeting recruiting targets for Ph.D.'s. While I would agree that lowering the academic standards is one way to meet them, have you also thought about relaxing the US citizenship requirements, say, to include Canadians, Brits and Oz/NZ academics?

Second, is here a specifically stated policy that is open that meets the ethical concerns about secrecy and informed consent that are at the core of the current Military-Anthropology debate? I have heard rumours that there are, but I haven't been able to find anything on them.

Third, if I remember the original HTS proposal correctly, there were supposed to be reach back teams in CONUS. I haven't heard anything about them, though, since that proposal. Could you fill us in on that?

Marc

Marc -- I have been speaking to an ad hoc committee of the AAA about HTS. As with the American Psychological Association, there seems to be misunderstanding on both sides -- military and anthropologists. This program is designed to be "green" not "red" -- we are not looking for enemies but looking for ways to interact positively with the local population. I hope that the "ethical" concerns can be addressed but suffice it to say here, I think that social science and the military MUST interact for the good of both "institutions." On a personal note, when I worked at the Pentagon (ugh!!) I would see the protesters there at the metro entrance every Monday. They have a right to be there but I kept saying to myself that they were at the WRONG building. They should be at the White House. The military is just doing what the US government asked them to do....
There is a Research Reachback Center (RRC)that is up and running 24/7 and we have a network of subject matter experts (SME-net). The HTS is growing and adapting as the "field" conditions demand. The citizenship requirement is only for the Teams in country. FOr the RRC and SME-net -- not all have to be US citizens. Perhaps in time we will truly be multinational but the clearance requirements for HTT members are not something that we can negotiate right now -- although from my Quadrennial Defense Review days -- I do remember the Brits and Australians in on almost every meeting. Again, to you and all -- I will be bringing these suggestions forward. We are having our first conference Nov 6-8 in Leavenworth. At the opening staff meeting, I will voice your questions and concerns..

Janice

[marct]

Hi Janice,

Marc -- I have been speaking to an ad hoc committee of the AAA about HTS. As with the American Psychological Association, there seems to be misunderstanding on both sides -- military and anthropologists. This program is designed to be "green" not "red" -- we are not looking for enemies but looking for ways to interact positively with the local population. I hope that the "ethical" concerns can be addressed but suffice it to say here, I think that social science and the military MUST interact for the good of both "institutions."

I was interviewed by that committee as well - it was an "interesting" experience all around . On the actual debate between the military and Anthropology, I've been following it for some time now and written one article (here) on it and I'm in the process of writing another that is trying to get at the underlying mechanisms of why the debate has gone the way it has.

My original ethical concern about the program goes back to the original proposal to build local databases and then turn them over to the host government. To me, that was a) a clear violation of confidentiality and b) a really bad precedent since I fully suspect that such databases would be used to target non-government supporters. On general interaction and finding ways to reduce harm on both sides, I certainly had no problems .

On a personal note, when I worked at the Pentagon (ugh!!) I would see the protesters there at the metro entrance every Monday. They have a right to be there but I kept saying to myself that they were at the WRONG building. They should be at the White House. The military is just doing what the US government asked them to do....

The perils of living in a democracy <sigh>.

There is a Research Reachback Center (RRC)that is up and running 24/7 and we have a network of subject matter experts (SME-net). The HTS is growing and adapting as the "field" conditions demand. The citizenship requirement is only for the Teams in country. FOr the RRC and SME-net -- not all have to be US citizens. Perhaps in time we will truly be multinational but the clearance requirements for HTT members are not something that we can negotiate right now -- although from my Quadrennial Defense Review days -- I do remember the Brits and Australians in on almost every meeting.

Well, if you can use a symbolic Anthropologist on SME-net, just drop me a line. I suspect that, in time, you will have to either a) relax the citizenship requirements for field teams or b) get other nations to form them (I believe that we [Canada] have one Anthropologist in the field in Afghanistan right now). It may be an idea to consider reworking it so a NATO TS clearance would be enough.

Again, to you and all -- I will be bringing these suggestions forward. We are having our first conference Nov 6-8 in Leavenworth. At the opening staff meeting, I will voice your questions and concerns.

Thank you! If you don't mind, I may just try and put together a list of specific concerns (and, maybe, possible solutions to them) and shoot it off to you before that meeting.

Marc

[jhlaurence]

Hi Janice,



I was interviewed by that committee as well - it was an "interesting" experience all around . On the actual debate between the military and Anthropology, I've been following it for some time now and written one article (here) on it and I'm in the process of writing another that is trying to get at the underlying mechanisms of why the debate has gone the way it has.

My original ethical concern about the program goes back to the original proposal to build local databases and then turn them over to the host government. To me, that was a) a clear violation of confidentiality and b) a really bad precedent since I fully suspect that such databases would be used to target non-government supporters. On general interaction and finding ways to reduce harm on both sides, I certainly had no problems .



The perils of living in a democracy <sigh>.



Well, if you can use a symbolic Anthropologist on SME-net, just drop me a line. I suspect that, in time, you will have to either a) relax the citizenship requirements for field teams or b) get other nations to form them (I believe that we [Canada] have one Anthropologist in the field in Afghanistan right now). It may be an idea to consider reworking it so a NATO TS clearance would be enough.



Thank you! If you don't mind, I may just try and put together a list of specific concerns (and, maybe, possible solutions to them) and shoot it off to you before that meeting.

Marc

Please do so -- I'm off and running for now

[Rex Brynen]

Marc -- I have been speaking to an ad hoc committee of the AAA about HTS. As with the American Psychological Association, there seems to be misunderstanding on both sides -- military and anthropologists. This program is designed to be "green" not "red" -- we are not looking for enemies but looking for ways to interact positively with the local population. I hope that the "ethical" concerns can be addressed but suffice it to say here, I think that social science and the military MUST interact for the good of both "institutions."

First off, welcome aboard SWC, Janice. It is great to have you contributing.

I think any effort to address the possible ethical concerns that the program might create would probably benefit from some scenario-based training for the missions before they deploy. Anthropologists are better than most on these issues, but I'm struck how often social scientists fail to think through the possible ethical dilemmas before they come and smack them in the face.

You may have seen the thread, but we did some playing around with these potential situations here.