Agreed. Yet we used our power and influence to encourge this behavior all the same. And I suspect you underestimate our ability to either push things in the direction we desire, or steer them elsewhere. Here we pushed where we should not have, and we will never know what might have happened if we had tried to steer in stead.
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
I think you hugely overestimate our ability to control others, or to steer them... especially in matters of domestic policy that they perceive as essential to their own survival.
If we push them to do things our way they make a show of agreement, moan in private over our naivete, and keep doing things their way... if, that is, they need something from us. Many of these countries need nothing from us, and wouldn't even bother to fake it.
People generally resist being steered, especially in a direction they don't want to go.
Last edited by Dayuhan; 03-01-2011 at 01:40 AM.
I think Americans do overestimate our ability to influence others, as well as our overall centrality in the politics of other states. However, especially when it comes to our client states, the U.S. can often play a positive role.
Taiwan and South Korea are two examples directly relevant to my own personal experience. Both countries experienced peaceful transfers of power to opposition parties. In our own hemisphere. El Salvador recently elected an FMLN President with no threat of violence from a military which killed thousands fighting the FMLN. The Turkish military has subordinated itself to civilian authority in a similar way, partly due to EU and U.S. pressure. The Bush Administration successfully orchestrated a democratic transition in Pakistan, from Musharraf to a civilian government.
As the example of Pakistan shows, the departure of the dictator hardly means that the problems of the country end. But at the very least it means that the progress can, hopefully, get started.
A former CIA counterterrorism official that I can agree with. This article by Robert Grenier is IMO spot on and parallels my own beliefs and experiences within the SOF/military community.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth...255184637.html
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
I quite agree that these revolts are good things, that there's no need to fear them, that they need to happen and where they are happening we should not oppose them, and indeed that we should help them along in appropriate way.
If we take that one step further and go out and try to provoke them in countries where they aren't yet happening, or support them too energetically (giving the impression that they are our pawns or doing our bidding) we will turn a good thing into an unholy mess.
Agree that this is not the time and place for provoking. We do, however, need to be in front of these and engaging the governments hard to open talks now with the people to ward off more turmoil. Not broadsides of advice from US podiums, but private talks. Not against blazing into town in Airforce one to have those private talks, but give these guys the ability to come out and announce their own changes without the words being fed to them acorss the airwaves.
My advice is contained in my model. First create "hope" through giving the people legal, trusted and certain means to engage and shape government. What these are will vary by culture, country, time. This is first because these are things that can be designed and approved at the stroke of a pen, and because this is the off ramp from insurgency.
Then I would advise them to look hard at how they can shore up and repair the populaces perceptions as to the legitimacy of the government. To look at and address how just the populace finds the rule of law to be and also to address deep-seated perceptions of disrespect where they exist. These are the drivers of insurgency.
Are the people hungry and poor? Certainly, but that alone does not make an insurgency. It typically takes the presence of some disconnected royal living in unearned opulence that can casually suggest when told that the people are staving and that they have no bread to "let them eat cake." A populace also without hope, with no justice under the law, treated with disrespect, and that has come to question a legitimacy to rule that they may once have supported.
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
Bookmarks