DoD ends its social science program (Human Terrain System). Was this a good idea?

2015-06-30T10:51:34-04:00

I worked with these teams in Iraq and still in contact with one of them. I think the asymmetrical nature of our wars called for enormous resources in this area which the DoD and Dept of State were unprepared for. Could it have been better executed? Perhaps. There was a need that needed to be filled quickly and I personally found the HTT's I worked with to be a great asset.

Curious how others HTT experiences were? Was pulling the plug on this a good thing or no?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/29/human-terrain-system-afghanistan/29476409/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=usatodaycomworld-topstories

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 30 at 2015 11:08 AM

2015-06-30T11:08:11-04:00

As someone with a background in Anthropology these teams always seemed interesting to me. I remember when they were recruiting in newspapers back in 2005 or so and the academic anthropology world was in an uproar about it. Certainly seems like a useful concept but I think the lessons learned should be taken and absorbed back into the Intel/PSYOP/Civil Affairs world to have the capabilities in an organic fashion. If anything cultural awareness and understanding will not be going away as an important part of warfare any time soon. Just my 2 cents.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Jun 30 at 2015 2:55 PM

2015-06-30T14:55:12-04:00

"A key concern for them was the militarization of their field and the potential that their work would be used to target insurgents, a violation of their ethical code not to hurt those they study."

Are you kidding me, cry me a river! War is not a game and these contracts paid 3/4 a BILLION DOLLARS! You can't run with the big dogs......I bet they were NOT crying when they were balancing their bank accounts.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Jun 30 at 2015 3:01 PM

2015-06-30T15:01:15-04:00

I served as an HTT leader in Baghdad in 2008-2009 as mobilized USAR officer. I enjoyed our work and felt we made somewhat of a difference which I wrote about twice in Army publications. That being said, I was very critical of the hiring process at that time. BAE had the contract at the time and seemed to be rushing people into the program regardless of true qualifications. Some of these were people I called serial contractors because they went from contract to contract and many left HTS in 2009 when the decided to convert the contractor positions to Term GS positions. Several others had no business being in the training much less being down range. Overseas, we could not do the social science research with any academic rigor because that would have required team members to live with the locals. But we did the best we could by talking to people from all socio-economic strata and I directly attribute one of analysts with preventing a kinetic action in the Rusafa zone of Baghdad because she understood the local populace reactions when the ISF went into arrest a local Sunni warlord. I believe we need the capability and hate to see it go away as it is even more important now in simmering areas before conflict actually begins. But HTS did this to themselves.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2016 5:53 AM

2016-06-03T05:53:41-04:00

This was the most misunderstood and under utilized program that of which I am aware.