Blending into the mindset of the Human Terrain

[jmm99]

from jen..10
2. Other than terminology/semantics, we've discussed the future of war and the possible role of our military in it. So far we have not discussed the corrolary implicit in the points of every person that's replied so far (at least, the ones that weren't pickin on people): how do we capture cultural information from the soldiers' experience, make it useful (operational) for the immediate future and in the decisionmaking going on way above that guy's head and for parallel operations of other branches and teams, and also feed it back into the training system?

this is what is being discussed - although to this perhaps dim-witted legal type, it cannot be gleaned by him from the OP etc. It can be gleaned by him from MAJ Chandler's article.

[jmm99]

from Ken
- Regardless of degree of training, military forces do not do a good job in stability operations and their use should be avoided.

- Problematic nations should first be assisted to the maximum possible extent by civilian efforts. I'll add to that should the security situation be dire or deteriorate, then military force can be used as necessary -- but the direction of effort and the primary stabilization work should all be civilian. Soldiers do not and will not make good nation builders...

and so it be.

Not surprising when we consider the first of Dobbins' priorities (link in my post on p.2 of thread):

Security: peacekeeping, law enforcement, rule of law, and security sector reform

of which only "peacekeeping" is a military function (peace enforcement in a forced entry situation requires much more military input - Dobbins gives 10x as something of a norm). The remaining security functions are primarily "blue coat" and "black robe" things - although a gendarmerie-type force well might be required in a rougher environment. In any event, they are aspects of criminal law enforcement within a criminal justice system.

Dobbins' remaining five priorities are neither military nor criminal justice functions: Humanitarian relief; Governance; Economic stabilization; Democratization; and Development. In legal terms, these are all civil law sectors in a normally functioning nation - e.g., in the US and UK, civil law matters dwarf criminal law matters.

This is not to say that soldiers should be oblivious to these civilian considerations. They may well become involved in situations (e.g., in Vietnam, as Ken has pointed out in the past) where one district has HIC, another district virtually no conflict, and a third has LIC - with not many klicks separating the districts.

Another consideration (US) is that the normal legal structure established by Congress (having to do with appropriations and turf protection) gives the civilian component primacy. When in a stability operation the military is ordered to step in having primacy in fact, the result is kludgey.

My perception - very much civilian-driven.