Anthropologists on the Front Lines

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments (7)

  Page 1 of 1 pages

  Hmmm —

  This concern about the ethics of studying the likes and dislikes of people, some of whom have been killing our troops, seems a bit lame. Getting shot at may give those in doubt of the ethics release from the guild of such service.

  Some of these people (the Radical ones in Sudan) want to kill a teacher for allowing a Teddy Bear to be named Mohammed by her class —

  We may all derive benefit from this new military procedure. David Price worries about the wrong issues.

  Why not just say, “Thank you General.”?

  Posted by whattheheck on Dec 1, 2007 at 4:27 PM

  Maybe. Price is not the only one with concerns, nor is his the only relevant opinion.

  For some of the lively discussion going on amongst anthropologists, see Savage Minds: http://savageminds.org/category/anthropology-at-war/
  And the AAA blog on the subject: http://aaanewsinfo.blogspot.com/

  There aren’t many circumstances these days where the ethical questions are simple and the consequences predictable. All we can do is engage in public exploration and debate of the issues. Kudos to the anthropologists—we didn’t hear near this level of discussion from journalists regarding their -own- embedment.

  Posted by occassia on Dec 3, 2007 at 2:23 AM

  Seems to me that governments in today’s world should be collecting this kind of information to help forestall unnecessary conflict and perhaps war itself, to help them see the potential drastic blunders they themselves could avoid, more so than merely trying to find a way to persuade tribals to “jine up” as frontline sacrifices.

  Oh yeah, “allies”, I meant “allies”.

  After mountains of ethnographic data is collated, they’ll probably discover that people don’t like foreign sponsorship and promotion of madcap dictators in their country, or foreign invasion and occupation on trumped-up pretexts, or foreigners’ idiotic tactics leading to the looting and destabilization of their entire society.

  Maybe they can get a modern-day Napoleon Chagnon to write up a monograph. Any self-styled Margaret Meads out there ready to “jine up”?

  I like the Orwellian touches, especially “kinetic operation”. That’s right up there with “collateral damage” and “faulty intelligence” (although not quite as flagrantly newspeakish as “Patriot Act”, which is a masterpiece of doublethink encapsulated).

  “Non-kinetic neutralization” (i.e. the effort to enhance understanding and smoother relations) should have been a policy priorty all along, but especially before feeding Saddam Hussein money and weapons for all those years as our proxy warrior, our pet dictator. No, further. Back to before toppling Mohammed Mossadegh of Iran in ‘53, which would have shaped the “human terrain” in the region into an entirely different form from what we actually fostered.

  Posted by Kuya on Dec 3, 2007 at 6:35 AM

  Occassia & Kuya,

  It is now more complicated than it needed to be only because too few politicians are familiar wiith history. Harry Truman be well be the last in depth reader of history among our Presidents.

  The folly of trying to impose democracy on a group of diverse tribes whose favorite passtimes include feuding among themselves now calls for far deeper understanding of the customs and religious conflicts among those who may possibly want some degree of peace and stability in the area.

  We also need to realize their criminal element is just like our own — only concerned with making moneyand turmoil works in their favor.

  There were warnings from former State Dept., acedemics and military professionals, but they were successfully stifled.

  All that aside, I’m for anything which benefits our own troops and ethical nitpicking be damned.

  The Sudanese wackos may be offended with naming the Teddy bear Mohammed but, could it be that Teddy Roosevelt’s memory is diminished by the act as well?

  With such extreme reactions to what we would consider minor events, we’d better increase our understanding for our own good.

  Posted by whattheheck on Dec 3, 2007 at 5:17 PM

  During the “Dirty War” years in Argentina (1970s), medical practicitioners, including a physician, assisted the military’s nuertralization of opponents by sedating those who were thrown from helicopters into the Pactific Ocean while still alive. This professional assistance was intended to reduce the resistance such condemned insurgents would be expected to effect when faced with such endgame kinetics. It is not unlikely that some of these professional care-givers might ethicitize themselves with declarations of the humanity intended by their sedations, in that those groggy with injections may have been less alarmed by the prospect before them. Such a scenario illustrates how professionals, including anthropologists, might justify forays into warfare, ostensibly to advance research and/or mitigate the horrific. However, as any fool could deduce, applying the healing arts to such pursuits is reprehensible from every and all points of view. With this as illustrative background, it would seem puerile to expect that persons intellectually empowered to attain credentials in anthorpology would assist in warfare of such questionable honor as that posed by the pre-emptive strategems of Bushdumb. Alas, as the environmental industries reflect, for all too many academics and professionals, pursuit of career advancement and Mammon’s calf are sufficient impediments to moralizations and aspirations to higher ground. One wonders whether the academics and other professionals responsible for warfare enhancements like Agent Orange, Bouncing Betty, MIRV, recylced nuclear waste as shell casings and other highlights of sinister arts deserve standing ovations at their respective professional confabs or whether they should be viewed as waterboarders.  Were I an anthropologist, I’d not touch the Pentagon with an aborigine’s pole.

  Posted by Bud Wizer on Dec 3, 2007 at 6:05 PM

  IF this trend continues, next they will ask hard scientists (e.g., physicists, chemists, etc) to build *weapons* to defend our country. Surely a slippery slope, since science is meant (by university standards) to benefit all of mankind.

  Kinda funny when you think about it. But some of us have work to do.

  Posted by wolf on Dec 6, 2007 at 7:40 PM

  We wouldn’t want our anthropologists to snitch on our enemies.

  
  WARNING:
  When science is banned only the bad guys will have scientists!
  (Start saving sticks and stones.)

  Posted by whattheheck on Dec 7, 2007 at 2:38 PM

  Page 1 of 1 pages

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also by Lindsay Beyerstein

• Kiriakou and the Kite Runner
  The CIA agent who just admitted to waterboarding a high-ranking al Qaeda operative has had an interesting retirement.
• Anthropologists on the Front Lines
  The Pentagon's new program to embed anthropologists with combat brigades raises many concerns
• Rudy Guiliani: Criminal or Liar?
  An investigation into Guiliani's claims of familiarity with "intensive questioning" techniques
• Examining the Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act
  Harman doesn't believe homegrown terrorism is a major threat to U.S. security today, but that it is important to learn from experiences in other countries like Britain and Canada, where citizens have been inspired to commit terrorism at home by Islamic propagandists reaching out over the Internet
• A Resolution Too Far?
  U.S.-Turkish relations, already strained by the war in Iraq, are being tested further by the controversial congressional resolution recognizing the 1915 genocide of Armenians.
• Merc is the New Crack
  America's deadly dependence on private security contractors in Iraq