Sisyphus and Counterinsurgency

[Cavguy]

Basically, what is the extent of the relationship between the security of the population and the dismantlement of the insurgency? There is some dissonance between the two because the logical extreme of asserting that the population itself is the decisive object suggests that we ought to build a McDonald's and Wal-Mart in every neighborhood and hope that somehow the provision of material needs will somehow deflate the political will of the insurgency.

Nice long post I will respond more later ... but I wanted to catch you on this point.

Building "things" for the population does not usually work. We have conflated economic projects and stability too often. Quite simply, there is not enough money in our treasury to make Afghanistan's infrastructure like ours - nor should it.

Re-read point #7 in the article - human infrastructure is key. Physical infrastructure matters so the government can provide basic needs for its people, but if the human ability is lacking, it really doesn't matter how many power lines you string or jobs you provide.

COIN, and "hearts and minds", is all about self-interest. Dr. Kilcullen would argue most people try and sit on the fence. Both sides work to push people off the fence. Therefore, your actions must focus on motivating the populace to get off the fence and take a clear side. This can be done through bribery, loyalty, coercion, patriotism, threats, and force. Winning "Hearts and Minds" doesn't mean they necessarily like you - just that you have made it in their interest to support your side. Their "mind" is the practical reason (money, job, etc), the "heart" is the emotional component (political, safety, religious, etc.) that goes with it.