The International Institute for Strategic Studies, the London-based military and political think-tank, has suggested in its annual report that the United States and its allies need to pay more attention to the hearts and minds of local populations in the battle against terrorism.
“Our judgment is that military planning procedures need to incorporate so called ‘influence activities’ as an integral part of pre-deployment preparation for complex warfare missions,” said Dr. John Chipman, the chief executive of the I.I.S.S., in a statement today. “Without this deeper perception of the mission environment, operations will lack the necessary ingredient for long-term success.”
The analysis is part of the body’s annual report “The Military Balance,” which takes stock of “the military capabilities and defense economics of 170 countries world-wide.”
From a Reuters report on the analysis:
“Insurgents and jihadists have proved adept at conducting successful information campaigns that reach a global audience and foment violence elsewhere,” the International Institute for Strategic Studies said.
But Western militaries have shown insufficient capability in their own attempts to carry out information and psychological operations, its annual report … said.
The IISS said it was not enough for Western armies to distribute leaflets telling the local population “we are here to help” or to put out the message that “life is getting better.”
“In reality, life may not be getting better and in the eyes of the target audience the military presence could be contributing to the problem,” it said.
The report notes that, for instance, the NATO practice of broadcasting the number of local fighters killed could be acting against the best interests of Western troops, because for the Taliban — and often for the local populations that support them — “death is a form of victory.”
From the report:
Using ‘body count’ as a measure of effect has a very different impact within the area of operations than it does with a home audience. …
The psychological effect at home is one of military success and may generate political support. In the theater of operations the opposite may be true, with every publicly announced kill delivering more willing recruits to the cause.
In simplest terms, this all seems to boil down to understanding the complex interaction between individual psychology and group culture — and in this case the various Arab cultures caught in the struggle between Western forces and the Islamic extremists they are combating.
“Units being deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan are not being provided with the training to enable them to have a real, positive psychological impact on the population in their area of operations,” the IISS report stated.
A January, 2006 Army handbook developed by the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., gives a basic glimpse of how Arab cultural differences, mindsets and allegiances are being taught to American troops — although it’s unclear just how many
