Shadows of Vietnam
An opinion piece in the New York Times today tries to draw lessons about the interface of military strategic and political decisions applying to the US campaign in Afghanistan, based on the experience of Vietnam. There are some interesting observations.
However, it is fascinating how important the American military men (and politicians and analysts) always think they are in the wellbeing of poor, developing societies. There is no question that the military plays a crucial role in achieving and maintaining the peace in a society (assuming they do it right), but its importance is of a much narrower type than they typically think.
The US has displayed a tendency to think that if we send troops over to another part of the world, they will quell whatever situation there is, establish peace, and put that society on a path to prosperity and stability.
Never mind about the underlying character of the people, the kind of values or lifestyle they have, the quality of their leadership, their historical experience (or lack thereof) with democracy, etc, etc. All that is needed is for the generals and the president to “get the strategy right.”
When will they understand that if a society and a people are not understood and adequately reckoned with, the best “military strategy” on earth will not be worth a damn? Probably when there’s no more money to pay for the troops in-country, much less send new ones, thereby rendering the whole debate moot.
MORE ARTICLES:
[...] reason for this is quite simple: the United States is on a suicide mission in Afghanistan. Since, as I have said, the American leadership does not adequately understand the nature or character of Afghan society [...]
[...] reason for this is quite simple: the United States is on a suicide mission in Afghanistan. Since, as I have said, the American leadership does not adequately understand the nature or character of Afghan society [...]