Human Terrain & Anthropology (merged thread)

[Ethereal]

Actually, a fairly talented person with even a modicum of information can increase a commander's knowledge incredibly even in a short period of time.

The security environment you describe is largely a myth; someone with just a little bit of fieldcraft can navigate most of Afghanistan quite easily with very minimal security.

The ethnographic interview is a very flawed technique; people lie and they most often lie to themselves. Observation ethnography and looking at societal outputs actually make rapid ethnographic surveys very do-able and are usually more accurate, to boot.

The problem is, most Anthropologists are wonks, who work slowly, pedantically and often come from white-bread America with no experience in anything but academia.

Someone with a broad background, especially with one in agriculture, mechanics, history and linguistics and who is sensitive to nuance and has good perception can make rapid assessments and be correct.

I once sat on a hill in Helmand for four hours, and was joined by a US DoS guy who engaged me in conversation. I proceeded to tell him things he'd never heard before about "his" district that he'd never imagined before, based solely on that morning's observations of things like architecture and planting patterns. That guy had been there five years.

I just returned from a district that was reputed to have "no industry" by so-called "experts" who'd been there since 2002. I spent less than one day in the district and was able to identify a thriving brick-making industry, a combine factory and a large and apparently expanding machining business along the route we took through the district.

Based on your experience, or based on fact? Do you really believe that you "engaged" a DoS guy in a conversation he's never had? Seriously?

E.

[120mm]

Based on your experience, or based on fact? Do you really believe that you "engaged" a DoS guy in a conversation he's never had? Seriously?

E.

Yes. I am not some kind of wunderkind. What I do is actually go out into the district, armed with a bit of of research, and look at the countryside with a critical eye.

The problem is as I state it. The kind of person who gets assigned to the field often does not have a discriminating eye, or they lack relevant real world experience. Frankly, if I were in charge of picking folks to send downrange, I'd look very hard at guys and gals with agricultural experience, and experience with the mechanical arts.

What I don't mention is what a rich resource the ADTs and USDA representatives have turned out to be. I cannot praise highly enough the insight these guys have pretty uniformly had.

The problem you run into, of course, is finding the right mix of ag/mechanical experience and a basically curious outlook on the world and knowledge of history/culture.

[jmm99]

to say nothing of possums.

Yup, actually a compliment - metaphor would be talking with Montagnard types - making like a practical, field anthropologist (vs the office bound type), sitting on the edge of the village until accepted and then eventually getting to participate some in the local activities. Something like Dayuhan has done.

As I said, BSing with the indigenous folks "ain't a bad talent for any interviewer and/or intel type."

Now, if you've been reduced to BSing with possums, that's where I draw the line.

Regards

Mike

[Pete]

Thanks for the compliment. My main downfall as an officer, besides a fondness for beer, was in the area of leadership -- I was never entirely comfortable or confident in leadership positions. My college degree fast-tracked me into OCS after I enlisted. Had I spent more time enlisted I would have either developed my leadership skills through experience and attendance at junior NCO schools, or barring that I would never have been considered for commissioning in the first place. Nobody ever doubted that I was intelligent or a nice guy.