The So-Called COIN Debate and Institutional Memory
The So-Called COIN Debate and Institutional Memory
by Bill Van Horn, Small Wars Journal
The So-Called COIN Debate and Institutional Memory (Full PDF Article)
I’ve been following with some interest the debate between the “Nagl-ites” and the “Gentile-ites” (for lack of better terms) regarding the supposed future of the Army. Both sides make some good points and some weak points, but what really strikes me is the historical vacuum both sides have established for their discussion. Neither camp seems —to admit that there IS military history before Vietnam, or that we’ve seen this debate many times before. And in almost every case the debate ignores the reality that created it, preferring to seek refuge in what appears to be a distorted view of the past or a dream picture of the future.
I’d like to frame this discussion with two propositions. The first is that for the majority of its history, the U.S. Army has been a force that was used mainly for internal security or COIN-type missions. And the second proposition is that for the same majority of its history the Army has rejected that role; the amount of force in that rejection varying based on external considerations.
The So-Called COIN Debate and Institutional Memory (Full PDF Article)
