COIN is politics by all means

Austin Bay interviews David Kilcullen who is working with Gen. Petraeus in developing the new Iraq strategy:

...

Here’s part of his analysis from that article:

“Since counterinsurgency is a competition to mobilize popular support, it pays to know how people are mobilized. In most societies there are opinionmakers: local leaders, pillars of the community, religious figures, media personalities, and others who set trends and influence public perceptions. This influence—including the pernicious influence of the insurgents—often takes the form of a “single narrative.” This is a simple, unifying, easily-expressed story or explanation that organizes people’s experience and provides a framework for understanding events. Nationalist and ethnic historical myths, or sectarian creeds, provide such a narrative. The Iraqi insurgents have one, as do al- Qaida and the Taliban. To undercut their influence you must exploit an alternative narrative: or better yet, tap into an existing narrative that excludes the insurgents. This narrative is often worked out for you by higher headquarters—but only you have the detailed knowledge to tailor the narrative to local conditions and generate leverage from it.”

If it sounds something like a political campaign, that’s because it is –politics, including politics by other means. The Madison Avenue mogul would call it advertising.

I think the Bush Administration has done a mediocre to miserable job of countering “enemy narratives.” Why even give it a mediocre rating? Because battlefield victory counters a lot of hot air. Our enemies have been exposed as weak and limited – which is one reason they primarily target the “softest” targets: Iraqi civilians.

I asked Kilcullen: “What is the single narrative (or alternative narrative) in Iraq? And this is a two-part question. Could you gives us an example of a narrative in a Baghdad neighborhood?”

...

You need to go to the link above to see his rather long answer. Part of the message is that militias are not the way to security. There is much more. I agree with Austin on the ineffectiveness of the Bush administration in countering the enemy narrative. However, the media bears much of the responsibility for following the enemy script on reporting on violence and not on the wickedness of the enemy's war crimes against non combatants. The failure to report on the al Qaeda torture manual is just one example of this failure. Don Surber looks at how the mainstream media "reported" this story.

Wretchard comments at the Belmont Club:

...

One way to restate Dr. Kilcullen is to say 'the enemy has been telling his story. We have not been telling ours.' And that I am afraid, is not the enemy's fault. The wound is entirely self-inflicted. Somewhere in the last forty years the West's favorite cultural activity changed from telling it's story to disparaging it: to mocking its faith, describing its economic system as inhuman, ridiculing the continuation of its family life as bovine. This trend came under many colors: anti-establishmentarianism, sexual liberation, cultural rebellion. It occasionally described itself as avante garde, though whither this advanced contingent was heading no one could say, except that it led away.

...

Also check out Blackfives discussion of the conversation of several bloggers with Kilcullen.