VIDEO BLOG
Episode 1: “It’s the Tribes, Stupid”
The real force in Afghanistan isn’t Islamism or jihadism. It’s tribalism. Mr. Pressfield compares Alexander the Great’s Afghan campaign (330-327 BC) to our own wars today.
View the credits and transcript for Episode 1.
Steven, I think you are spot on. And I appreciate very much that you would invest time and money to put this message out. Keep up the good work my friend.
How right you are that the cast of characters hasn’t changed in two thousand years! Your extraction of tribalism as the central problem is thought-provoking. I’m eager to watch the remaining four installments.
Great stuff Steven…incredibly thought provoking. I really think you are on to something significant. When I read The Afghan Campaign, all I could think about was how incredibly similar my experience in Afghanistan was to the Macedonians’ experience…thanks for the great work you’re doing.
Stretch,
You are right on point! I can’t wait to see the rest of the tapes. I hope that you hit the importance of patriarchy in maintaining the tribal mentality. It’s all about might making right, and the alpha males dominating the rest of the culture. They get the chicks, the land, the spoils–not because of a moral imperative–or a religious one–but because they are simply stronger and can dominate either an opposing tribe, or through coalitions and alliances, opposing tribes.
As they have no ethical ideological grounding (except power) they switch sides at any time–depending upon the benefit to their tribe, clan or family. What we call ethical is completely situational to them.
That being said, since most of these tribes are either poor or nomadic (that is they have few possessions), the code of Honor is their most valuable possession. They don’t have “things” but they can have their reputaions. They can’t be disrespected, or humiliated without retaliating. Respect is the key word. They keep their word (as long as it benefits them) and–again due to necessity–have complex codes of hospitality. Hosts have duties to protect their guests at all costs, while they are under their jurisdiction. That adds an interesting element to the making and breaking of alliances of convenience.
Can’t wait to see the other videos.
Go Bears,
Jeffrey
Outstanding, and thanks for producing such a quality product on the subject. I just did a promotion of this site over at my blog Feral Jundi. Semper Fi. -matt
For starters, let’s work on being able to tell the difference between Iraq and Afghanistan. Once you get that down, then we can work on whether or not comparing Ancient Bactria to the Taliban is even remotely appropriate for a serious person.
@Jeff, @ John, thanks, you guys, for logging on and chipping in. One point I’m getting taken to task for in various e-mails and correspondence is probably my fault for being unclear. It’s the distinction between tribes literally and the tribal mind-set. Let me see if I can make clear what I’m trying to say.
I don’t mean to suggest that tribes literally are the enemy. (In fact, I’m convinced they can be our friends if approached and communicated with in the proper way). The point I’m hoping to make is that our antagonists in much of the East share the tribal mind-set–hostility to outsiders, a code of honor rather than a system of laws, respect for elders, adherence to the traditional ways, the obligation of revenge, etc. And that even though they may express their hostility in religious terms (or in modern or post-modern terms), the underlying psychic dynamic is tribal. At the level of the brain stem, that’s where it’s coming from. In my opinion, we need to recognize that reality and recognize the intractability and unchanging nature of that reality. We’re not going to change it. Western forces have been trying to do that for 2500 years. It’s not going to happen. So, if we hope to succeed at all in that part of the world whose emotional and psychological basis is largely tribal, we need to work with the tribal mind-set or work around it. Where our troops have done that successfully, as in al-Anbar province with the Sunni Awakening, things have actually changed for the good. (And Alexander did this too.) Anyway, that’s my rant for today.
Stretch,
I wasn’t taking you to task. I think you articulated it well. It is the Tribal mind-set. What
I didn’t articulate well is that without Patriarchy, the tribal mind set collapses. Therefore, if we abolish the patriarchlal aspect of any society, the tribal-mind set collapses, almost by definition. That’s why I fundamentally disagree with your thought that we cannot change them or defeat them.
We can–but we don’t have the will. How? By playing their game–that is by using force. Now I know we do not have the stomach for this, but if we, in Afghanistan or Iraq, went in with the same mindset that Macarther used in Japan, we could develope over time a democracy. But it takes police to do it.
Send women to school, break up the clans (by force), insist on free elections, allow for changes in styles and dress, bring in modern technologies and sure enough their worst nightmares would come true–freedom of the individual and a desire for liberal democracy would grab hold–eventually.
Remember, all kids like drugs, sex and rock and roll. Bring in good music, mini skirts, levis and hot cars, and you’ll see the new generation toss of the old in a nano second.
I’m not sure that makes it a better world or a better culture, but it is what would defeat tribalism.
It’s certainly what brought down the Berlin Wall. People can only be subjugated as long as they assume that they don’t have any other choices.
The Montegues and the Capulets would be feuding today if not for the fact that Romeo was able to get a little from Juliet. Youngsters will through off the old, if they can.
Tribes prevent this through brutal force–and that’s the only thing that can defeat it.
So there’s my rant.
Can’t wait for tape #5.
Go Macedonians,
Jeff
We do have tribes here in the west. The United States government calls them outlaw motorcycle gangs. Although they are a small, fringe element of our society, they do nonetheless exist.
@ Steve, Could you please elaborate on your comment? How does this match your October 2006 essay (posted at DNI) and the first tape? It seems contradictory (which means I don’t understand). Also, here are two minor details in reply.
(1) I assume the following is a metaphor, but it evokes unpleasant historical echos of people assuming others are fundamentally — even biologically — different: “At the level of the brain stem, that’s where it’s coming from.”
(2) Your analogy with al-Anbar shows the tribes commonality with us! We bought (more accurately, leased) the Sunni Arab’s support, just as we did when helping the Northern Alliance initially. That’s commerce. It works alike for tribes and 21st century techocultures, showing that successful deals can be built on our similarities. Which seems to blur the strong citizen-tribal duality your describe.
Here is a review of your 2006 essay and the first video: “Advice about our long war – ‘It’s the tribes, stupid’”, posted at the Fabius Maximus website. Rather than discuss the nature of tribalism or the Pressfield’s tactical recommendations, it considers the broader context of his theory.
Excerpt:
Economist and businesspeople discuss the Competitive Advantage of Nations (as in Michael Porter’s 1990 book of that title). Social scientists and geopolitical experts discuss Samuel P. Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations theory. But Pressfield goes beyond these. In effect he calls for a long war. War running until one side is exterminated or conquered.
Using Alexander’s invasion of Afghanistan as a paradigm raises as many questions than it answers. What were Alexander’s reasons for invading Afghanistan? Nothing rational, little more than love of war, power, and loot. Do we have such aggressive motives? Or do we fight legally under the international laws we both promulgated and signed, which means acting only in defense?
Answering that requires a clear statement of the threat the tribes of Afghanistan pose to us. Victory is impossible without a clear understanding of the threat and our goals. How can the tribes be enemies without a strong understanding of this?
It is the missing link of the war, as I have not found anything like this from someone with actual area expertise (not just by COIN or geopolitical gurus). The closest I have seen is Pakistan on the Brink by Ahmed Rashid (a Pakistani journalist) in the 11 June 2009 issue of The New York Review of Books, many of whose assertions are contradicted by other experts on the subject.
(I don’t post excerpts on other folks sites, but Callie Rucker Oettinger said it was OK to do so)