RSS

Thu, Oct 21st 2010, 05:20

Jennifer Nicole Prystupa, NYU-CGA grad student, Silver Contributor (45)

Traditional warfare incorporates both military might as well as diplomacy. However, we are all aware that the GWOT is an ideological war and the U.S. is not very equipped to solve such wars (like the much contested and misguided "War on Drugs" and "War on Poverty"). The result is a lot of money thrown at the military (or police) to solve the problems, but often that tactic is misdirected. Though I agree to an extent with the author when he says "[t]he United States and its allies can minimize the threat through covert actions and strong defenses," it is these covert actions, "allegedly" in Pakistan, that have killed many civilians, inciting them to violence against U.S. forces, than suspected terrorists actively plotting against the U.S. or her European or Pakistani allies. These surgical strikes have actually increased during the Obama administration, strangely enough.

Although I am a strong believer in diplomacy and grassroots innovation, I do not think the U.S. can so easily wean itself away from the military when it comes to fighting anything, including an ideology. There is room, or room should be made, for a more constructive relationship between the DoD and DoS, along with native CSOs. The problem with Afghanistan and Iraq and the GWOT in general was (and still is to a degree) a lack of information - of history of the regions, the role of Islam in everyday life, the longstanding tradition of strong tribal leadership and a small, central state. Instead of a "shock and awe" in Iraq and attempt to democratize the Afghans (even after the utter failures of the USSR in the country), the previous administrations and administrations in the future should have and should look(ed) to regional experts, academics, historians, religious leaders and NGOs that can provide accurate and frank information about the situation on the ground and the needs of a people before any rash decisions are made.

In the end, it is the U.S. military that can deploy at a moment's notice and has superior organizational skills and can do anything in the field - and this should be an advantage. But despite these skills, the military, under the auspices of the U.S. government, need to think out of the box, per se, in order to really change, if not win, the hearts and minds during an ideological war - for a war of this nature cannot be change by outsiders (some may say "infidels"), but must come from within.