Warrior Ethos

[Brandon Friedman]

Thanks, but I am not doing this to be a semantic pr*k. There is a real danger now that some, maybe a lot, think there is something called COIN and something call "War fighting" so the all the diverse reasons and conducts of warfare, are now in two boxes. When you they find another conflict that doesn't fit, they'll invent another box. In fact if you look at "Hybrid" and the Lebanon, they did.
Words matter, and so does the meaning. If it doesn't you can't have doctrine, because you cannot teach it.

While there might be some people who want to put "COIN" and "war fighting" in two different boxes, I'm not one of them, and I never suggested that. But you're absolutely right that words do matter.

I can empathise with them on a very basic human level. That's entirely normal, and you don't need to be taught to do it.
You can't tell soldiers to respect a culture that holds values they don't understand and are in some cases abhorrent to them.
Do you think it's okay to deny women's right? Allow male domestic violence? Arrange marriages? Honour killings? Consider some races sub-human?
These are unacceptable, and you should not respect cultures, or those elements of culture that advocated such things.

I'm not going to get sucked into broad-brushing a billion Muslims here. That's absurd. Of course we don't respect men who abuse women or who practice honor killings. But when you walk into a city like, say, Baghdad with the mentality and preconception that the inhabitants are a bunch of wife-beating, 11th century savages, then you're setting yourself up for failure. When you enter a situation like that, you have to give people the benefit of the doubt--regardless of what you think you know about them. And if they disappoint you (or try to kill you), then you can make the adjustment. But when you allow an air of "their-culture-is-abhorrent"/"hajji-this-hajji-that" to permeate your unit in advance of any interaction, I'm telling you, it's going to cause problems for everyone.

Culture is a highly complex area with many different forms of expression, and vastly variable, so the blanket guidance "respect culture," is so simplistic as to cease to be useful.

Fair enough.

Let me give you a specific example. If you went to search a house and woman told you from behind a close door, "my husband is not home, go away!" would you? Respecting her culture means you go away. Understanding her culture, means going and getting two woman from another house, who can protect "her honour" and tell her husband, while you search her home.

World of difference. - and at some point, all the allowances and negotiations run out. If you can't find other women, you are going in anyway, and in some cases, that could get that woman beaten or even killed, by the husband, and there is nothing you can do about it. - then turn around to the platoon and tell them this is a culture they need to respect.

The ideal answer here is neither. In ultra-conservative areas like eastern Afghanistan, the answer is to bring along both Western female troops and plenty of Afghan troops. If that's not possible, then, like you say, in most--but not all--cases you have to go in anyway. If it's viewed in the community as a lack of respect, then it's something you'll have to take up with the village elders. But if you've shown respect in the past and you have good working relationships in the area, then it should work. On the other hand, if they're all Taliban, then you can, you know, make the adjustment.