Plowing the Human Terrain Toward Global Ethnographic Surveillance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Dilemmas of the involvement of Anthropology in Wars: The case of the Human Terrain System
Article, 2020
The involvement of anthropology in warfare, in which anthropologists' performance helps to bridge the gap of cultural awareness of the military in wartime and provide soldiers understandings of foreign local cultures where they deploy, has a long history. The establishment of the Human Terrain System is also to fulfil the need of conducting anthropology research on the life of Iraqis and Afghans for the sake of wars in which the United States has involved. However, the Human Terrain System has been seen as the most controversial program in the history of American anthropology involving in wars. This paper, by systematically reviewing criticism imposed on the Human Terrain System through a desk study, attempts to provide a deep look at dilemmas of the involvement of anthropology in wars. The study found that the Human Terrain System was put under pressure on nine aspects comprising: organizational, financial, institutional, professional, military-strategic, methodological, scholarly, ethical, political. Among others, ethical debates have been heavily taken into account, in which the focus was on whether the Human Terrain System achieves golden principles "do no harm" and "informed consent" in anthropology research on battlefields. The advocates claimed that what the organization did is consistent with codes of ethics, whereas the majority of anthropologists violated the codes. Furthermore, what the Human Terrain System did has been considered as challenges for anthropologists and generated negative effects on the anthropological profession.
Dilemmas of the involvement of Anthropology in War: The case of the Human Terrain System
Article, 2020
The involvement of anthropology in warfare, in which anthropologists’ performance helps to bridge the gap of cultural awareness of the military in wartime and provide soldiers understandings of foreign local cultures where they deploy, has a long history. The establishment of the Human Terrain System is also to fulfill the need of conducting anthropology research on the life of Iraqis and Afghans for the sake of wars in which the United States has involved. However, the Human Terrain System has been seen as the most controversial program in the history of American anthropology involving in wars. This paper, by systematically reviewing criticism imposed on the Human Terrain System through a desk study, attempts to provide a deep look at dilemmas of the involvement of anthropology in wars. The study found that the Human Terrain System was put under pressure on nine aspects comprising: organizational, financial, institutional, professional, military-strategic, methodological, scholarly...
Full Spectrum The Military Invasion of Anthropology
Anthropologists are widely aware of "the issue ofsecUlity engagement." The cause celebre, with reason, is the Human Terrain System, with its goal of embedding anthropologists in combat units. Also widely known is Field Manual 24, Counterinsurgency, republished by no less than the University of Chicago Press. The HTS has been discussed by many authors (e.g. Kelly et a1. 2010; Lucas 2009), and FM-24 recently got its own Counter-Counterinsurgency Manual (Network of Concemed Anthropologists 2009). But HTS and FM -24 are parts of a much larger story, and wi1lreceive only passing mention here. Instead, this chapter draws on a flotilla of other manuals, reports, and proposals, to demonstrate just how deeply entrenched and programmatically wide-ranging are the military's cultural demands. Anthropologists need to understand that the Dep31iment of Defense and other security agencies are already taking what they want from anthropology, and their appropriation of people and knowledge could transform the discipline in the years to come.
Anthropology and Global Counterinsurgency
2010
"Global events of the early twenty-first century have placed new stress on the relationship among anthropology, governance, and war. Facing prolonged insurgency, segments of the U.S. military have taken a new interest in anthropology, prompting intense ethical and scholarly debate. Inspired by these issues, the essays in Anthropology and Global Counterinsurgency consider how anthropologists can, should, and do respond to military overtures, and they articulate anthropological perspectives on global war and power relations. This book investigates the shifting boundaries between military and civil state violence; perceptions and effects of American power around the globe; the history of counterinsurgency doctrine and practice; and debate over culture, knowledge, and conscience in counterinsurgency. These wide-ranging essays shed new light on the fraught world of Pax Americana and on the ethical and political dilemmas faced by anthropologists and military personnel alike when attempting to understand and intervene in our world."
Knowledge is For Cutting: Waging War on the Human Terrain
TransMissions: Journal of Film and Media Studies, 2017
The notion of war as a social problem is derived from a troubled legacy in the social sciences. Whereas the discipline of anthropology has a multifaceted and comprehensive record of engagement with war studies, sociology’s efforts have been less robust and critical. Previous work in anthropology looks at the history of military anthropology studies and area studies within counterinsurgency operations. The article builds on that critical work as it presents observations and findings from research conducted in 2011, where the author worked with the U.S. Army Human Terrain System (HTS). Research was conducted using traditional participant-observation methods to document how HTS conducted research operations. Findings and analysis draw from the critical tradition to consider what HTS research practice might tell us about what Bruno Latour referred to as “science in the making” and to shed light on a contemporary social phenomenon—the problem of “alternative facts”, “fake news”, and “fake science”.
Anthropology and the Military: AFRICOM, "Culture," and the Future of Human Terrain Analysis
Anthropology Today, 2010
This article updates new developments in the evolution of the US Army's controversial Human Terrain System program (HTS). Building upon the recent report on the HTS program by the American Anthropological Association's Commission on the Engagement of Anthropology with the Security and Intelligence Communities, this article discusses how HTS-type arrangements are becoming part of the US Department of Defense's (DoD's) newest Combatant Command for the continent of Africa, or AFRICOM. Of particular note is the way “human terrain” no longer refers simply to the HTS program, but has acquired expanded reference to describe a broader array of approaches to the leveraging of socio-cultural knowledge within DoD. Most notably for AFRICOM, this includes moving beyond rapid assessment ethnography to incorporate cultural data into the predictive work of cultural modelling, as this informs the implementation both of counterinsurgency doctrine as well as military humanitarianism in Africa and elsewhere. This article explores the ethical, practical and cultural implications of such a turn.
Annual Review of Anthropology, 2007
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.