From the British Journal of Strategic Studies comes this comparison of American and British counterinsurgent strategies-
Hearts And Minds- Paul Dixon/Journal of Strategic Studies
"The ambiguity of British counter-insurgency theory may be useful in public relations terms but it undermines the theory as a guide to operations because it can be interpreted in such divergent ways."
How ambiguous is the term "hearts and minds"? How is it understood on both sides of the Atlantic? Is sincerity accurately conveyed by the use of the term "hearts and minds" or is this an intentionally vague, ill-defined media manipulation to mask more conventional strategies?
A very interesting paper...
Hearts And Minds- Paul Dixon/Journal of Strategic Studies
"The ambiguity of British counter-insurgency theory may be useful in public relations terms but it undermines the theory as a guide to operations because it can be interpreted in such divergent ways."
How ambiguous is the term "hearts and minds"? How is it understood on both sides of the Atlantic? Is sincerity accurately conveyed by the use of the term "hearts and minds" or is this an intentionally vague, ill-defined media manipulation to mask more conventional strategies?
A very interesting paper...
Comment