The Jan/Feb 2008 issue of The National Interest contains an interesting article by Seven Metz entitled “Three Years and You’re Out”. The thrust of the article is that history shows that the American public supports counterinsurgency operations for no more than about three years, though of course such operations, even if successful, typically take much longer.
I found especially thought-provoking the following comment about the political elites we support in typical counterinsurgency operations:
“…The elites we support often develop a vested interest in sustaining an insurgency, at least so long as the rebels can’t win. Having a comfortable, controlled insurgency lowers pressure on the regime for reform, allows it greater latitude in controlling its opponents, and often provides a stream of foreign assistance that can be skimmed or used for patronage. And while we ask our partner to improve its security forces, these may be more of a threat than the insurgents themselves………. Ultimately, American counterinsurgency strategy and doctrine assume that our partner elites will commit de facto political and economic suicide, reforming away from the system that made them powerful and rich. Yet we are bewildered when this does not happen.”
Or put more bluntly, some regimes find it convenient to use an insurgency to milk
The interesting point about our own political apparatus, Republican and Democrat alike, is that it has adopted much the same counterinsurgency approach for decades now, all over the world, apparently without paying much attention to whether it is truly effective or not.
Posts
