Thinking Critically about COIN and Creatively about Strategy and War
Thinking Critically about COIN and Creatively about Strategy and War
An Interview with Colonel Gian Gentile
by Octavian Manea
Download the Full Article: An Interview with Colonel Gian Gentile
I’ve carefully read your commentary concerning David Galula’s work on counterinsurgency and its applicability for today’s COIN campaigns and you seem to identify a special kind of lesson or warning than the ones that influenced the development of FM 3-24: “its tactical brilliance was divorced from a strategic purpose. So don’t repeat the same mistake. After all, France lost Algeria”. So, why do you think that by embracing Galula’s tactical brilliance, we tend to lose sight of the art of strategy?
That has been the whole problem with the COIN narrative that developed at least in US Army circles since the end of the Vietnam War. It was, and is, premised on the idea that the Vietnam War could have been won by better counterinsurgency tactics and operations. This is the basic nugget of an idea that had a snowball effect; in the 1980s with Andrew Krepinevich’ The Army and Vietnam, then in the 1990s with John Nagl’s Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam and Lewis Sorley’s A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and the Final Tragedy of America’s Last Years in Vietnam, and more currently many of the writings of Colonel Robert Cassidy and others.
The idea of a better war through improved counterinsurgency tactics has come to define causation in the Iraq war too. Recent books like Tom Ricks’s duo of Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq and The Gamble: General Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq and Linda Robinson’s Tell Me How this Ends: General Petraeus and the Search for a Way Out of Iraq offers the notion of a bumbling, fumbling conventional army that is doing counterinsurgency incorrectly, but because a better and enlightened general comes onto the scene combined with a few innovative new officers at the lower levels who figure out how to do counterinsurgency by the classic rule and voila the operational Army is reinvented and starts doing the things differently. And it is because the Army does things differently on the ground that it produces a transformed situation, as the narrative states. It’s the idea that better tactics can rescue a failed policy and strategy.
Download the Full Article: An Interview with Colonel Gian Gentile
Interview with Colonel Gian Gentile conducted by Octavian Manea (Editor of FP Romania, the Romanian edition of Foreign Policy).
