DOCSLIB.ORG

The Discourse Trap and the US Military from the War on Terror to the Surge

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Discourse Trap and the US Military from the War on Terror to the Surge Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 The Discourse Trap and the US Military From the War on Terror to the Surge By Jeffrey H. Michaels Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 pal-michaels-all.indd iii 2/13/13 7:20 AM Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 the discourse trap and the us military Copyright © Jeffrey H. Michaels, 2013. All rights reserved. First published in 2013 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN® in the United States— a division of St. Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Where this book is distributed in the UK, Europe and the rest of the world, this is by Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries. ISBN- 13: 978-0230-37204-7 Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Michaels, Jeffrey H. The discourse trap and the US military: from the War on Terror to the surge / by Jeffrey H. Michaels. p. cm. ISBN 978– 0– 230– 37204– 7 (alk. paper) 1. United States. Dept. of Defense— History— 21st century. 2. United States— Armed Forces— Public relations— History— 21st century. 3. Military planning— United States— History— 21st century. 4. United States— Military policy— Decision making. 5. Military doctrine—United States— History— 21st century. 6. Afghan War, 2001— United States. 7. Iraq War, 2003– 2011— United States. 8. War on Terrorism, 2001– 2009. 9. Discourse analysis, Narrative. I. Title. UA23.6.M555 2013 355.601'4— dc23 2012039050 A catalogue record of the book is available from the British Library. Design by Scribe Inc. First edition: March 2013 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 pal-michaels-all.indd iv 2/13/13 7:20 AM Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 Contents Acknowledgments vii 1 Introduction 1 2 Global War on Terrorism 17 3 Shock and Awe 81 4 Characterizing the Irregular Adversary in Iraq 107 5 The Surge: From Iraq to Afghanistan 147 6 Conclusion 167 Notes 175 Bibliography 221 Index 257 Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 pal-michaels-all.indd v 2/13/13 7:20 AM Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 CHAPTER 1 Introduction n Makers of Modern Strategy, John Shy and Thomas W. Collier make a brief mention of the importance of language in “revolutionary war,” Iclaiming that words are weapons. They state, “Language is used to iso- late and confuse enemies, rally and motivate friends, and enlist the support of wavering bystanders.” Rather than being merely a tool of war, they also argue that language can shape a war: “But the same language directs— or misdirects—military effort; the rhetoric of political conflict becomes the real- ity of strategic theory.”1 This observation is one of the primary ideas inform- ing this study. It is my contention that the importance political and military systems attach to the creation, dissemination, and control of language in war extends beyond “revolutionary war” and instead is a key feature of conflict more generally. Once introduced into the political- military discourse, words can shape a battlefield and be battled over themselves. This terminological phenomenon has so far received scant academic attention and represents a gap in the existing war studies literature. This book aims to bridge this gap by examining how the discourses devised for political or military reasons can have a much greater, and in many ways, different impact than was intended when the discourse was first introduced. It will argue that discourse plays an integral role in conflict, direct as well as indirect. Discourse can take on a life of its own, forcing political and military leaders and their associated institutions to fall victim to a “discourse trap.” This phenomenon is defined as the action that is motivated or constrained primar- ily by the discursive constructs ostensibly created to serve the needs of policy makers. In some instances, political and military leaders may feel compelled to adopt policies and practices in order to justify or abide by their discourse. In other instances, the discourse, perhaps out of sheer repetition, creates a “self- fulfilling prophecy”— defined as “a false definition of the situation which makes the originally false conception come true”—and can seriously impair strategic Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 pal-michaels-all.indd 1 2/13/13 7:20 AM Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 2 ● The Discourse Trap and the US Military and operational performance.2 Nevertheless, it should be noted that, similar to Robert K. Merton’s observation that “unforeseen consequences should not be identified with consequences which are necessarily undesirable,” the effects of the “discourse trap” might be undesired but not always undesirable.3 This study will attempt to establish the existence of the discourse trap by providing a framework for identifying the phenomenon and its associated effects and demonstrating the ways in which it impacts the conduct and study of warfare and strategy. Specifically, the discourse trap will be examined through the prism of contemporary US military operations. The cases to be studied are “Global War on Terrorism,” “Shock and Awe,” “Characterizing the Irregular Adversary in Iraq,” and the “Surge.” This introduction chapter will begin by establishing a framework to clarify how the discourse trap functions, which will then allow subsequent investigation into how it impacted the US military. The relevance of discourse to war must also be firmly established, particularly as the literature on this subject is limited as a result of scholars’ reliance on a tradition- ally narrow approach to the function of language. Discourse and War Why is the study of discourse relevant to the study of war? After all, in the rich war studies literature, very little attention has been devoted to this subject. In comparison to the study of the nature and character of war, military history, military capabilities, military sociology, and so forth, the study of discourse remains marginalized. At best, the study of discourse in war has been subor- dinated to other areas of enquiry, such as those aforementioned, rather than existing independently. One of the main reasons for this is that scholars tend to view the function of language in war in very limited terms. For most schol- ars, language is relevant mainly for the study of propaganda and public affairs. Thus, in order to mobilize and sustain support for a war, or to undermine an adversary, political and military systems employ certain types of language. However, as will be highlighted, such a conception of the function of lan- guage in war is too limited. Instead, by expanding this conception, numerous avenues of enquiry can emerge. The term discourse is one that has acquired many different meanings and is often used by a single author in multiple ways.4 To avoid confusion, for the purpose of this book, discourse simply refers to the language actors use to discuss certain issues and assign meanings to them. For instance, when referring to “counterterrorism discourse” in the context of the US Department of Defense (DoD), I am merely referring to the way defense officials talk and think about “counterterrorism” and what they mean by it. However, the very fact that defense officials are talking and thinking about an issue in terms of counterterrorism, as Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 pal-michaels-all.indd 2 2/13/13 7:20 AM Copyrighted material – 9780230372047 Introduction ● 3 compared to “counterinsurgency,” also necessitates viewing discourse from the perspective of the terminology employed by the actors being studied. This then raises the problem of the relationship between discourse and terminology. My argument is that the two are mutually constitutive. Discourse gives terminology its meaning, or to put it slightly differently, terminology only acquires mean- ing within discourse. Simultaneously, terminology provides the essential building block for discourse, since it is impossible to discuss an issue without employing a term to describe it. By way of illustration, to take the example of counterterror- ism again, the term itself can have many different definitions assigned to it and also be used and understood in both positive and negative ways depending on who uses it and when. In this specific case, and as will be shown in Chapter 2, the way defense officials employed the term counterterrorism in the 1980s was very different from the way it was used after 9/11. Yet the way in which a term is employed in discourse is one thing; that the term is used in the first place is quite another. The simple fact that officials are employing the term counterterrorism, as opposed to counterinsurgency or some other term, can have the effect of guiding the discourse in a particular direc- tion. It is here that the possibility of a “trap” emerges, in which a discourse is perceived to be misguided yet is difficult to escape from. In the context of defense policy, officials may perceive that the term counterterrorism is inappro- priate to employ, preferring instead counterinsurgency, which they feel more accurately reflects reality and the use of which would lead to a different set of actions potentially resulting in more favorable outcomes. However, for either intended (e.g., political objections) or unintended (e.g., the effect of socializa- tion or indoctrination) reasons, officials may find themselves constrained by the discourse of counterterrorism and find it difficult if not impossible for a dis- course of counterinsurgency to emerge. Attempting to change a discourse is made particularly difficult when it is competing against a “dominant” discourse, or a discourse that can be considered “mainstream” or “acceptable,” especially if it has become institutionalized.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Politics of Security in Ninewa: Preventing an ISIS Resurgence in Northern Iraq
    The Politics of Security in Ninewa: Preventing an ISIS Resurgence in Northern Iraq Julie Ahn—Maeve Campbell—Pete Knoetgen Client: Office of Iraq Affairs, U.S. Department of State Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Advisor: Meghan O’Sullivan Policy Analysis Exercise Seminar Leader: Matthew Bunn May 7, 2018 This Policy Analysis Exercise reflects the views of the authors and should not be viewed as representing the views of the US Government, nor those of Harvard University or any of its faculty. Acknowledgements We would like to express our gratitude to the many people who helped us throughout the development, research, and drafting of this report. Our field work in Iraq would not have been possible without the help of Sherzad Khidhir. His willingness to connect us with in-country stakeholders significantly contributed to the breadth of our interviews. Those interviews were made possible by our fantastic translators, Lezan, Ehsan, and Younis, who ensured that we could capture critical information and the nuance of discussions. We also greatly appreciated the willingness of U.S. State Department officials, the soldiers of Operation Inherent Resolve, and our many other interview participants to provide us with their time and insights. Thanks to their assistance, we were able to gain a better grasp of this immensely complex topic. Throughout our research, we benefitted from consultations with numerous Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) faculty, as well as with individuals from the larger Harvard community. We would especially like to thank Harvard Business School Professor Kristin Fabbe and Razzaq al-Saiedi from the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative who both provided critical support to our project.
    [Show full text]
  • Chasing Success
    AIR UNIVERSITY AIR FORCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Chasing Success Air Force Efforts to Reduce Civilian Harm Sarah B. Sewall Air University Press Air Force Research Institute Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama Project Editor Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Dr. Ernest Allan Rockwell Sewall, Sarah B. Copy Editor Carolyn Burns Chasing success : Air Force efforts to reduce civilian harm / Sarah B. Sewall. Cover Art, Book Design and Illustrations pages cm L. Susan Fair ISBN 978-1-58566-256-2 Composition and Prepress Production 1. Air power—United States—Government policy. Nedra O. Looney 2. United States. Air Force—Rules and practice. 3. Civilian war casualties—Prevention. 4. Civilian Print Preparation and Distribution Diane Clark war casualties—Government policy—United States. 5. Combatants and noncombatants (International law)—History. 6. War victims—Moral and ethical aspects. 7. Harm reduction—Government policy— United States. 8. United States—Military policy— Moral and ethical aspects. I. Title. II. Title: Air Force efforts to reduce civilian harm. UG633.S38 2015 358.4’03—dc23 2015026952 AIR FORCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE AIR UNIVERSITY PRESS Director and Publisher Allen G. Peck Published by Air University Press in March 2016 Editor in Chief Oreste M. Johnson Managing Editor Demorah Hayes Design and Production Manager Cheryl King Air University Press 155 N. Twining St., Bldg. 693 Maxwell AFB, AL 36112-6026 [email protected] http://aupress.au.af.mil/ http://afri.au.af.mil/ Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the organizations with which they are associated or the views of the Air Force Research Institute, Air University, United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or any AFRI other US government agency.
    [Show full text]
  • US Military Policy in the Middle East an Appraisal US Military Policy in the Middle East: an Appraisal
    Research Paper Micah Zenko US and Americas Programme | October 2018 US Military Policy in the Middle East An Appraisal US Military Policy in the Middle East: An Appraisal Contents Summary 2 1 Introduction 3 2 Domestic Academic and Political Debates 7 3 Enduring and Current Presence 11 4 Security Cooperation: Training, Advice and Weapons Sales 21 5 Military Policy Objectives in the Middle East 27 Conclusion 31 About the Author 33 Acknowledgments 34 1 | Chatham House US Military Policy in the Middle East: An Appraisal Summary • Despite significant financial expenditure and thousands of lives lost, the American military presence in the Middle East retains bipartisan US support and incurs remarkably little oversight or public debate. Key US activities in the region consist of weapons sales to allied governments, military-to-military training programmes, counterterrorism operations and long-term troop deployments. • The US military presence in the Middle East is the culmination of a common bargain with Middle Eastern governments: security cooperation and military assistance in exchange for US access to military bases in the region. As a result, the US has substantial influence in the Middle East and can project military power quickly. However, working with partners whose interests sometimes conflict with one another has occasionally harmed long-term US objectives. • Since 1980, when President Carter remarked that outside intervention in the interests of the US in the Middle East would be ‘repelled by any means necessary’, the US has maintained a permanent and significant military presence in the region. • Two main schools of thought – ‘offshore balancing’ and ‘forward engagement’ – characterize the debate over the US presence in the Middle East.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations
    S. HRG. 109–130 Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations Department of Defense Appropriations Fiscal Year 2006 109th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION H.R. 2863 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES Department of Defense Appropriations, 2006 (H.R. 2863) S. HRG. 109–130 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H.R. 2863 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2006, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Department of Defense Nondepartmental witnesses Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 99–854 PDF WASHINGTON : 2005 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland CONRAD BURNS, Montana HARRY REID, Nevada RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HERB KOHL, Wisconsin JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire PATTY MURRAY, Washington ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois MIKE DEWINE, Ohio TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MARY L.
    [Show full text]
  • Mythology and the Air Campaign in the Liberation of Iraq
    Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, Spring 2005, Vol. 7, Issue 3. MYTHOLOGY AND THE AIR CAMPAIGN IN THE LIBERATION OF IRAQ Major J.R. McKay, DAT 4-6 (Capability and Force Development Training Support), Department of National Defence Myths about the Liberation of Iraq Despite the unprecedented degree of media scrutiny, the coalition’s liberation of Iraq in 2003 strayed into the realm of mythology with regard to the air campaign. Two myths have developed about the air campaign and these are: • Its simultaneity. • Its ‘strategic’ focus, that is the air campaign sought to deal with Iraq’s ‘capacity to wage war’ through attacks on Iraq’s strategic command and control systems, its infrastructure and forces out of contact with the coalition’s forces. Such myths are not borne out by the available body of facts and can lead to faulty conclusions about the nature and role of air power in contemporary war. This article will dispel these two myths. The coalition’s presence in Iraqi skies between 1991 and 2003 allowed the coalition to prepare and execute operations well in advance of the recognised start of the war (the air attack against a leadership target early on 19 March 2003) let alone land operations. It will also demonstrate that the intended focus of air effort was placed against Iraq’s fielded forces as opposed to its war-making capacity, and as such was ‘tactical’ as opposed to ‘strategic’. Launch of operations The 1991 Gulf War represented the sequential application of air power and ground forces where an air campaign preceded the commencement of offensive operations on ©Centre for Military and Strategic Studies, Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Saddam's Generals: Perspectives of the Iran-Iraq
    SADDAM’S GENERALS Perspectives of the Iran-Iraq War Kevin M. Woods, Williamson Murray, Elizabeth A. Nathan, Laila Sabara, Ana M. Venegas SADDAM’S GENERALS SADDAM’S GENERALS Perspectives of the Iran-Iraq War Kevin M. Woods, Williamson Murray, Elizabeth A. Nathan, Laila Sabara, Ana M. Venegas Institute for Defense Analyses 2011 Final July 2010 IDA Document D-4121 Log: H 10-000765/1 Copy This work was conducted under contract DASW01-04-C-003, Task ET-8-2579, “Study on Military History (Project 1946—Phase II)” for the National Intelligence Council. The publication of this IDA document does not indicate endorsement by the Department of Defense, nor should the contents be construed as reflecting the official position of the Agency. © 2010 Institute for Defense Analyses, 4850 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, Virginia 22311-1882 • (703) 845-2000. This material may be reproduced by or for the U.S. Government pursuant to the copyright license under the clause at DFARS 252.227-7013 (November 1995). Contents Foreword............................................................................................................................................ vii Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 1 Summary and Analysis........................................................................................................................ 5 Background ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • War on Terrorism: Immigration Enforcement Since September 11, 2001
    WAR ON TERRORISM: IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT SINCE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 8, 2003 Serial No. 21 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/judiciary U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 86–954 PDF WASHINGTON : 2003 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., Wisconsin, Chairman HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois JOHN CONYERS, JR., Michigan HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina HOWARD L. BERMAN, California LAMAR SMITH, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia ELTON GALLEGLY, California JERROLD NADLER, New York BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia ROBERT C. SCOTT, Virginia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina WILLIAM L. JENKINS, Tennessee ZOE LOFGREN, California CHRIS CANNON, Utah SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama MAXINE WATERS, California JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts MARK GREEN, Wisconsin WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts RIC KELLER, Florida ROBERT WEXLER, Florida MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin JEFF FLAKE, Arizona ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York MIKE PENCE, Indiana ADAM B. SCHIFF, California J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia LINDA T. SA´ NCHEZ, California STEVE KING, Iowa JOHN R. CARTER, Texas TOM FEENEY, Florida MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee PHILIP G. KIKO, Chief of Staff-General Counsel PERRY H. APELBAUM, Minority Chief Counsel SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, BORDER SECURITY, AND CLAIMS JOHN N.
    [Show full text]
  • The Anglosphere: a Genealogy of an Identity in International Relations
    THE ANGLOSPHERE: A GENEALOGY OF AN IDENTITY IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Srdjan Vucetic, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2008 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Ted Hopf, Adviser _____________________________ Professor Jennifer Mitzen Adviser Professor Alexander Wendt Political Science Graduate Program © Copyright by Srdjan Vucetic (2008) ABSTRACT The Anglosphere refers to a grouping of English-speaking states, whose core is said to consist of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States. In international relations, the term is usually used to describe and/or prescribe civilization, empire, military coalitions, customs union or even a political association. The Anglosphere is a neologism, but one rooted and reflected in long-standing international phenomena such as the Anglo-American Special Relationship, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the Australia-New Zealand-United States Pact (ANZUS) Pact and the Commonwealth of Nations. In addition, quantitative research on the sources of international security cooperation clearly shows a pattern of behavior particular to the Anglosphere. While it offers no shortage of explanations of international conflict and cooperation across different groupings of states, the field of International Relations (IR) is silent on the subject of the Anglosphere. This dissertation seeks to open up the research agenda by investigating two basic questions: how did the Anglosphere become possible and what effects does it have on international politics? The dissertation considers these questions in parallel, via two complementary analytical tasks. The first task is to provide a genealogy of the Anglosphere as a grouping of states characterized by shared identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Airpower, Afghanistan, and the Future of Warfare an Alternative View
    After you have read this research report, please give us your frank opinion on the contents. All comments––large or small, complimentary or caustic––will be gratefully appreciated. Mail them to CADRE/AR, Building 1400, 401 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6428. Airpower, Afghanistan, and Wills the Future of Warfare An Alternative View Cut along dotted line Thank you for your assistance. COLLEGE OF AEROSPACE DOCTRINE, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION AIR UNIVERSITY Airpower, Afghanistan, and the Future of Warfare An Alternative View CRAIG D. WILLS Lieutenant Colonel, USAF CADRE Paper No. 25 Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112-6615 November 2006 Air University Library Cataloging Data Wills, Craig D. Airpower, Afghanistan, and the future of warfare : an alternative view / Craig D. Wills. p. ; cm. – (CADRE paper, 1537-3371 ; 25) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 1-58566-161-9 1. Airpower—United States—Evaluation. 2. Afghan War, 2001– 3. Unified opera- tions (Military science) 4. Interservice rivalry (Armed Forces)—United States. I. Title. II. Series. III. Air University (U.S.). College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Edu- cation. 358.4/00973—dc22 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. This CADRE Paper and others in the series are avail- able electronically at the Air University Research Web site http://research.maxwell.af.mil and the AU Press Web site http://aupress.maxwell.af.mil.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons of Iraq
    House of Commons Defence Committee Lessons of Iraq Third Report of Session 2003–04 Volume I: Report HC 57-I [incorporating HC 695-i to-xii, Session 2002-03 and HC 57-i to-viii, Session 2003-04] House of Commons Defence Committee Lessons of Iraq Third Report of Session 2003–04 Volume I Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 3 March 2004 HC 57-I [incorporating HC 695-i to-xii, Session 2002-03 and HC 57-i to-viii, Session 2003-04] Published on 16 March 2004 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mr Bruce George MP (Labour, Walsall South) (Chairman) Mr Crispin Blunt MP (Conservative, Reigate) Mr James Cran MP (Conservative, Beverley and Holderness) Mr David Crausby MP (Labour, Bolton North East) Mike Gapes MP (Labour, Ilford South) Mr Mike Hancock CBE MP (Liberal Democrat, Portsmouth South) Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Mr Kevan Jones MP (Labour, North Durham) Mr Frank Roy MP (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw) Rachel Squire MP (Labour, Dunfermline West) Mr Peter Viggers MP (Conservative, Gosport) The following Members were also a members of the Committee during the inquiry. Mr Gerald Howarth MP (Conservative, Aldershot) Jim Knight MP (Labour, South Dorset) Patrick Mercer OBE MP (Conservative, Newark) Syd Rapson BEM MP (Labour, Portsmouth North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Deterrent Impact of U.S. Overseas Forces for More Information on This Publication, Visit
    C O R P O R A T I O N BRYAN FREDERICK, STEPHEN WATTS, MATTHEW LANE, ABBY DOLL, ASHLEY L. RHOADES, MEAGAN L. SMITH Understanding the Deterrent Impact of U.S. Overseas Forces For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2533 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0078-9 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: U.S. Army photo by Spc. Andrew McNeil Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface This report documents research and analysis conducted as part of a project entitled Limited War: The Role of Ground Forces in Extended Deterrence and Escalation Management, sponsored by the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, Plans, and Training (G-3/5/7), U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lessons of the Iraq War: Executive Summary
    SIS___________________________________ Center for Strategic and International Studies 1800 K Street N.W. Washington, DC 20006 (202) 775-3270 (To comment: [email protected] For Updates see Executive Summary: http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_instantlessons_exec.pdf; Main Report: http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_instantlessons.pdf) The Lessons of the Iraq War: Executive Summary Eleventh Working Draft: July 21, 2003 (Note: This is the last prepublication version. The CSIS book to be published this fall will have substantial additions and corrections, and comments on this draft will be incorporated into the book, and the ongoing CSIS Lessons of War project. Comments --and requests to cite, quote, or reproduce any part of this document should be requested in writing or by e-mail to [email protected].) Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair for Strategy Cordesman: Lessons of the Iraq War 7/23/03 Page 2 Index Introduction................................................................................................... 6 ANALYZING THE MORE DETAILED LESSONS .............................................................................................. 8 The War Plan and Transformation Debate ............................................... 9 THE “NEW WAY OF WAR” DEBATE ........................................................................................................... 9 The Need to Remember the Past ........................................................................................................... 9 The New “New Way of War”?...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]