Tribe Building

As Sir Rupert Smith emphasizes we are facing a paradigm change. Most of current conflicts are fought “amongst population”, war as an armed struggle between Nation-States is fading. Thus the ability to understand the human terrain becomes a key factor towards stabilization of a given country. How to take into account this critical change in a defence transformation endeavour ? Our paper will stress the need to develop new tools in order to implement human sciences teachings in the defence field (conflict's analysis and forces format). We contend that a relevant human sciences concept must be formalized enough to enable Modelling & Simulation (M&S) efforts and intelligence data organisation. This modelling analysis foster the knowledge of insurgent’s behaviour and can be implemented to help “rational decision making” at all levels. In this paper we will argue that a classical human science concept, the traditional to modern transition, may be formalized enough to deliver an operational concept, relevant for Coin’s stakeholders on the field : tribe building. It is noteworthy that we are not only intervening in failed states contexts but also in "detribalize" areas, "eroded by conflict or population displacement". In this case, our article states the need to repair tribal structures first. It is an interesting paradox that restoring the traditional fabric of society is the best way to achieve peaceful transitions toward democracy. In conclusion, this article proposes to carry state & nation building activities coherently with tribe building activities. INTRODUCTION As a result of the current trend for wars fought “amongst the population”, the professional study of population during war is growing: human science disciplines such as economics, sociology, political sciences, anthropology and religious studies are becoming increasingly relevant. An important example is the Human Terrain System (HTS), a deployment of 150 anthropologists in Afghanistan and Iraq designed to help field commanders with intelligence collection. Another example is the Counter-Insurgency (COIN) field manual FM 3-24, partly written by McFate, a professional anthropologist, and the Stability field manual FM 3-07 and UK JDP 3-40 inspired by political science works such as Fukuyama's. 1 The views and opinions expressed in this article are strictly those of the authors. 2 “The Utility of Force: The Art of War in the Modern World”, Rupert Smith, Penguin Books. 3 “Knowing the Enemy, Can social scientists redefine the “war on terror”?”, George Paker, The New Yorker, December 18, 2006 4 Incidentally, leading voices in COIN leverage a strong background in HS: for instance, Kilcullen has a PhD in anthropology and Petreaus, a PhD in Political Sciences. 5 An initial draft of the current FM3-24 had a full section reserved for ideological warfare (following McFate, Jackson, “The object beyond war: counterinsurgency and the four tools of political competition”, Military Review, Jan-Feb 2006). It was later erased for reasons unknown to the authors. Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE APR 2010 2. REPORT TYPE N/A 3. DATES COVERED 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Tribe Building 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER