COIN Counterinsurgency (merged thread)

[marct]

Sports analogies for warfare have had tragic results. They give the impression that the civilians and non-combatants sit on the sidelines and aren't involved. A better analogy might be rugby with hand grenades in a crowded multi-level shopping mall.

I love that! You're quite right about the mis-use of analogies and metaphors. They are, however, probably the best communicative devices our species has worked out for a "quick and dirty" type of communication.

Marc

[wm]

Sports analogies for warfare have had tragic results.

Sports analogies aren't the only producer of tragic results. Misapplication of lessons learned from analogies in general can have tragic results. I submit that far too often the analogical relationship between two things is mistaken for something much more like an identity relationship. That is, instead of saying that "A is sort of like be in certain respects," folks seem to forget that analogies show only similarities and jump to a position that "A is just like B," forgetting the dissimilarities between the two things being compared. Using analogies should be limited to applying them as a heuristic device that may aid in producing better understanding of an otherwise-hard-to-grasp subject.

[marct]

Really good point WM. When I teach using analogies, which I do a fair bit, I usually try to use two differing analogies and then ask the students how they interpret the results - i.e. what is the intersection set of the analogs. It avoids some of the analog = identity problems while, at the same time, getting the students to think in terms of set-theoretic based topologies.

Marc

[wm]

Again, I will say that if these are the criticisms of the idea, then I am not being adequately clear. I do not at all mean to suggest that there ought to be a paternalistic or patronizing slant to this. I don't think that a force fighting a counterinsurgency ought to think of themselves as "parents."

Go back to the first point in the "presentation" -- you can't kill the baby, that's not being a successful parent. It is neither successful in COIN to kill the locals. If a baby is always fawned upon, then in COIN you have to remember that the insurgents and locals will always have better PR. If as a parent you would do anything to protect the baby, then in COIN you have to see your role as protecting the locals, and sometimes even the insurgents.

For example, in a real life case: an IED trigger puller is captured, the jundi are beating the guy, probably going to kill him, and an American Lt. advisor jumps on the prisoner, as if to hit him, and stays there, thus stopping the beating. I doubt the Lt. thought of himself as a parent, but he used an instinct that is common to parents, to protect the "object" despite all the terrible things it may have done in the past. There was no paternalism involved, but the actions were similar.

I suppose it's time to get back to the drawing board to set the idea properly.

I thought you were being quite clear in the original presentation. As I hope my more recent posts on this thread point out, I think your point has been misconstrued by misapplication of your analogy. You were making the point, I thought, that a major piece of a successful COIN operation is similar to the protective role that parents play with children. My original counterpoint was that the protection required might be more like a "tough love" approach to the world view of a teenager. That is, we don't need to be overprotective and coddling, as parents tend to be with very young children. Instead we need to teach self-protection in a protected environment (think of the sex ed lectures you got in junior high school--oops, sorry, another analogy).

My point about not being paternalistic, a la Kipling, Cecil Rhodes and the "White Man's Burden" was made to suggest that maybe the wrong lessons were being extrapolated from your original "protective parent" analogy. We ought not be paternalistic in the sense of trying to do others thinking for them. Rather, as I think the Orwell essays point out, we need to become more understanding of the viewpoints of those we are trying to help. Again, the "parenting of teens" view comes out. I don't want to tell my teens how to think. I want to understand how (and what) they think so I can more effectively help them make their own way in the world.

Don't flog yourself for lack of clarity. I thin this thread exemplifies the point about getting better understanding from and about the "target" (and that is a really poor choice of words) population. For another interesting example of multiple interpretations of the same piece of writing, take a look at the "Non Cents" thread under Doctrine & TTPs.

[120mm]

Ah, yes, the beloved "distinction without a difference". Pole-vaulting over mouse-turds again.

[SteveMetz]

http://www.ftleavenworthlamp.com/art...news/news3.txt

A professor of Strategic Studies of the U.S. Naval War College has been selected to become the first holder of the Congressman Ike Skelton Distinguished Chair for Counterinsurgency at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

Dr. Ahmed S. Hashim will teach and help develop curricula relevant to counterinsurgency operations, including ensuring that the most relevant counterinsurgency material is included in CGSC courses attended by mid-grade officers. He will also teach electives in the CGSC, and deliver lectures at the School of Command Preparation and the School of Advanced Military Studies. Additionally, he will serve on Master of Military Arts and Science committees and conduct regular faculty development seminars for key CGSC personnel and faculty.

Hashim will develop a counterinsurgency outreach program by actively surveying and participating in "high payoff" counterinsurgency efforts throughout the Joint, interagency, academic and civilian arenas in order to promote institutional change in the U.S. Army. He will also periodically update Missouri Rep. Ike Skelton, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, on the chair's activities.

A bit of news--Ahmed apparently backed out of the position and they've opened it back up.

[SteveMetz]

120--

CGSC has at least a fairly good history of teaching COIN and other Small Wars euphemisms. In the 1970s, when the army decided to forget Vietnam and COIN, it reduced curriculum to a mere 1 hour. At that time LTC Don Vought realizing that terrorism was the new hot topic saved all the old stuff under that file so it was available as COIN came back into play in the 80s. Late 70s and 80 - 81 is the period when John Waghelstein was teaching at Leavenworth.
In 92 when I returned as a civilian prof, DJCO had a committee of 7 or so guys devoted to teaching and deveoping curriculum on MOOTW. They included Britishe Lt. Col. Mike Smith who had served in Oman. We also used to have regular lectures by Larry Cable and Amb Dave Passage who had been Charge in El Salvador in 1985.

And, as you may know, Peter Leahy, Chief of Army in Australia, was one of the guys who helped us rebuild the LIC/OOTW curriculum in DJCO in the late 80s. After his student year, he stayed on as the Aussia exchange faculty member. Bob Liecht, Terry Grissom, and Roland Dutton were among the drivers of the process.

Larry Cable was a piece of work. You know the story about his demise?

[John T. Fishel]

Hi Steve--

It's good to see you here. I did not know about the Aussie connection although I was somewhat familiar with Roland's and Bob's roles. Thanks for adding to the context.

I've heard about Cable's demise but I don't recall the details. He did, however, have the best characterization of MOOTW I've ever heard - "Sounds like a cow goig out fo both ends!"

Cheers

JohnT

[SteveMetz]

Hi Steve--

It's good to see you here. I did not know about the Aussie connection although I was somewhat familiar with Roland's and Bob's roles. Thanks for adding to the context.

I've heard about Cable's demise but I don't recall the details. He did, however, have the best characterization of MOOTW I've ever heard - "Sounds like a cow goig out fo both ends!"

Cheers

JohnT

I loved Larry but HATED to follow him as a speaker (which I did at a SOF branch conference once). Despite his werid looks (black-on-black clothing, hair down to his butt), he was absolutely electric on stage. One of my rules for life is "Never follow an animal act, Larry Cable, or Ralph Peters."

But, to make a long story short, Larry claimed he was Marine Force Recon in Vietnam while a teenager, then stayed on as a CIA strike team guy for a number of years. Someone was doing some research and found out that--as well as the undergraduate degree he claimed--was bogus. He left his position at UNC-Wilmington in a cloud of scandal and the last I heard he was living on an ashram in New Mexico or something like that.

[Van]

I have to echo 120mm's comments from earlier in the thread. I also just completed non-resident ILE and was very disappointed with the course work. Some bits were good, but the nuggets were less than 10% of the many hours of my life thrown away as I ground through that flavorless pap. Hopefully, the new chair will be able to ram more material about "normal" (i.e. small wars) Army operations into the curriculum for non-resident ILE even if it means missing out on some of the endless 'finer points' of the acquisition process.

To be fair, it is hard for the instructors and curriculum writers to get past the students' (accurate) perception that this is a "block" to check. Of course, there are exceptions, but the structure of the Army promotion system, and the culture of the Army today have placed CGSC/ILE in the pile of mandatory training requirements, like suicide awareness and consideration of other training. The students main motivation is not to learn, but to complete an assigned task. To add insult to injury, the big reward for completing resident CGSC/ILE is an extension of the officers obligation.

If CGSC/ILE is mandatory training, it should be designed to convey the material as painlessly as possible, in the minimum time required. If CGSC/ILE is professional military education and professional development, the curriculum should be engaging and challenging, not interminable drudge work designed to build calluses on the intellect. What it appears to be, is both mandatory training and professional military education combining the worst aspects of both while retaining the attractions of neither.

Recommendations:
1- If ILE is supposed to be graduate level work, award an academically recognized graduate certificate. People outside the military have heard of CGSC but not ILE, so an ILE certificate without reference to academic accreditation means nothing.
2- If ILE is supposed to be professional military education, minimize the endless, numbingly detailed discussions of bureaucratic processes, condense them to executive summaries (adequate for most warfighters), and focus on military education. Small Wars scenarios and case studies provide an ideal vehicle.
3- Overhaul the curriculum every year or two, not every ten years and manage the overhaul better (I got caught up in the big curriculum overhaul a couple of years ago and that was just abusive to the students).
4- If ILE is professional military education; exploit it. They've got a brain trust, replace some of the spiritual abuse of bureaucratic trivial pursuit with real world problems to address. A few thousand Majors working individually or in small groups is the ultimate distributed processing machine for attacking emerging problems. Yep, 97 out of 100 of the non-resident answers/recommendations will be rote, doctrinal answers, but those other three will make it all worth while.

[SteveMetz]

Actually, the policy is for everyone in the AC to attend the active course. Because of the manpower requirements for the wars, there are a lot of empty seats at ILE and the War College. The Guard and Reserve have started sending more officers to these slots because the AC can't fill them. There were traditionally a few slots for RC personnel in both courses, but again, because of the war there are greater opportunities available.

I don't think there are any empty seats at the Army War College. The number of RC slots has remained consistent, at least in the resident course (the non-resident course has always been heavily RC).

[Van]

P.S. I hope someone is in a position to invite the new CGSC COIN Chair to join SWJ

[SteveMetz]

P.S. I hope someone is in a position to invite the new CGSC COIN Chair to join SWJ

They have to hire one first. They've opened the search back up.

[Bill Moore]

Steve, I heard they unmasked Larry Cable, but then decided that he actually did have a relevant background and education (just not the original bill of goods that he sold), and that he was lecturing again at SWC. He has been published fairly recently also. I was on the receiving end of a couple of his lectures, and his response to a challenge was "I been there, I know, you don't", which told me he didn't know his audience, and his ego was out of control. None the less, I think he made some worthwhile contributions to the community.

[John T. Fishel]

I looked at the job announcement. It is a remarkable salary for Leavenworth KS - $114 - 136k. Not bad even in DC. If they weren't insisting on a US citizen (even though they have the authority to hire a non-citizen) it is a perfect job for Marct. Surely, there is somebody in SWC who is qualified and interested. And Leavenworth is not really out in th boonies - close to KC and KCI.

[Jimbo]

Hashim supposedly went to Iraq to work with GEN Petreaus et al. Van, the resident and non-resident courses are not the same thing, so I would suggets that you not rush to judgement on this. The school is looking for somebody with an established reputation in the field. When I sat in my outbriefing survey, what was clear was that there was a need for a chairperson on the faculty to get the faculty who teach the core COIN block on the same sheet of music, some faculty knew nothing beyond what the teaching notes had on them. The dilemma you will run into at Leavenworth is you are teaching a bunch of folks who might have never read any COIN literature, but they have a lot of expereince. With many of the faculty, the inverse is the norm. Tom Odom, I have lived in SW Louisiana and Leavenworth, I would opt for Leavenworth, you ought to apply!

[John T. Fishel]

I agree. Tom, you ought to apply. I didn't see a PhD requirement in the job listing.

[Dr Jack]

I didn't see a PhD requirement in the job listing.

Here are the requirements from the vacancy announcement:

Applicants should have a mastery of counterinsurgency concepts, theories, and studies. Should possess a combination of academic and/or military experiences in education at senior levels. Must possess an earned Ph.D. in a research discipline in the social sciences or the humanities, and have a strong background in counterinsurgency studies. Operational counterinsurgency experience is a plus, but not required. Strong interpersonal and communications skills will be required to interact effectively with the elements of CGSC, CAC and external audiences. Should have a proven record of teaching ability, academic achievement to include publication in the field, good knowledge of national security issues, and active contributions in the on-going discussions on counterinsurgency. The successful candidate must hold or be eligible for a high-level security clearance.

I suspect there will be quite a few applicants... but you never know. I may also throw my hat in the ring, but haven't decided yet. The closing date is 5 July.

[Dr Jack]

They have also opened up a job announcement for a Culture Chair at CGSC. Here are the requirements for that position from the vacancy announcement:

Applicants should have a mastery of counterinsurgency concepts, theories, and studies. Should possess a combination of academic and/or military experiences in education at senior levels. Must possess an earned Ph.D. in a research discipline in the social sciences or the humanities (cultural anthropology or cultural geography as examples), and have a strong background in cultural studies. Operational cultural analysis experience is a plus, but not required. Strong interpersonal and communications skills will be required to interact effectively with the elements of CGSC, CAC and external audiences. Should have a proven record of teaching ability, academic achievement to include publication in the field, good knowledge of national security issues, and active contributions in the on-going discussions on cultural impacts on military planning and operations. The successful candidate must hold or be eligible for a high-level security clearance.

This job also has a closing date of 5 July.

[SteveMetz]

Here are the requirements from the vacancy announcement:

Applicants should have a mastery of counterinsurgency concepts, theories, and studies. Should possess a combination of academic and/or military experiences in education at senior levels. Must possess an earned Ph.D. in a research discipline in the social sciences or the humanities, and have a strong background in counterinsurgency studies. Operational counterinsurgency experience is a plus, but not required. Strong interpersonal and communications skills will be required to interact effectively with the elements of CGSC, CAC and external audiences. Should have a proven record of teaching ability, academic achievement to include publication in the field, good knowledge of national security issues, and active contributions in the on-going discussions on counterinsurgency. The successful candidate must hold or be eligible for a high-level security clearance.

I suspect there will be quite a few applicants... but you never know. I may also throw my hat in the ring, but haven't decided yet. The closing date is 5 July.

I'm surprised they can do that. Here at the Army War College, we are told we can make a Ph.D. "desired" for a Title 10 professor position, but not "required." I guess Leavenworth's civilian personnel people interpret the rules differently than the Carlisle ones.

(By the way, I'm recruiting for an Asia security specialist to replace Dr. Andrew Scobell who LTG (ret) Chilcoat lured to the Bush School at Texas A&M. Would be happy to provide details if anyone is interested).