Dear Editor,
I doubt whether many Jamaicans will deny that the USA is one of the most generous countries in the world --- always quick to respond to the needs of other countries, especially after natural disasters.
It's a nation that has stood up to some of history's most brutal dictators, at great sacrifice, to ensure freedom and respect for human rights. It is also a country that has 'adopted' many of our brothers and sisters. In light of the USA's record regarding human rights, its failure to establish sustainable peace and workable systems of governance overseas is puzzling.
Failures in Afghanistan and Iraq come to mind as the two most recent casualties of US intervention efforts. It is tragic that after the loss of thousands of young American lives and millions of dollars in those countries, the US today shows no semblance of proper governance or advancement in respect of peace.
What is it about the American way of doing things that suggests they always choose losers? One has to concede that although the US intervention to restore democracy in Grenada in 1983 was nowhere near as complex as the Afghanistan or Iraq situations, one is left to ponder whether the success was because the original British systems were restored after the fall of the Maurice Bishop regime. In other words, was that success due to the fact that the US was not imposing a system of its own?
What about military bodies or security personnel? They, too, appear to suffer the same fate as US-imposed or assisted political systems. In future, the US should understand that armies cannot be established overnight; that there is no such thing as an instant army. Advanced weaponry, equipment and funding do not make an army; it takes time and much devotion to produce a worthwhile and professional outfit.
Armies are built gradually with proud, motivating traditions and customs and a form of super team spirit. Without this traditional motivation and cohesive camaraderie, men will abandon their weapons and flee at the first sign of danger, even when pitted against a poorly equipped or disorganised outfit.
Perhaps US military training colleges need to reassess their tactical training doctrine for overseas intervention, especially principles related to sustaining peace and ensuring good governance. The US could take a leaf from the British in this regard.
Colonel Allan Douglas
alldouglas@aol.com
I doubt whether many Jamaicans will deny that the USA is one of the most generous countries in the world --- always quick to respond to the needs of other countries, especially after natural disasters.
It's a nation that has stood up to some of history's most brutal dictators, at great sacrifice, to ensure freedom and respect for human rights. It is also a country that has 'adopted' many of our brothers and sisters. In light of the USA's record regarding human rights, its failure to establish sustainable peace and workable systems of governance overseas is puzzling.
Failures in Afghanistan and Iraq come to mind as the two most recent casualties of US intervention efforts. It is tragic that after the loss of thousands of young American lives and millions of dollars in those countries, the US today shows no semblance of proper governance or advancement in respect of peace.
What is it about the American way of doing things that suggests they always choose losers? One has to concede that although the US intervention to restore democracy in Grenada in 1983 was nowhere near as complex as the Afghanistan or Iraq situations, one is left to ponder whether the success was because the original British systems were restored after the fall of the Maurice Bishop regime. In other words, was that success due to the fact that the US was not imposing a system of its own?
What about military bodies or security personnel? They, too, appear to suffer the same fate as US-imposed or assisted political systems. In future, the US should understand that armies cannot be established overnight; that there is no such thing as an instant army. Advanced weaponry, equipment and funding do not make an army; it takes time and much devotion to produce a worthwhile and professional outfit.
Armies are built gradually with proud, motivating traditions and customs and a form of super team spirit. Without this traditional motivation and cohesive camaraderie, men will abandon their weapons and flee at the first sign of danger, even when pitted against a poorly equipped or disorganised outfit.
Perhaps US military training colleges need to reassess their tactical training doctrine for overseas intervention, especially principles related to sustaining peace and ensuring good governance. The US could take a leaf from the British in this regard.
Colonel Allan Douglas
alldouglas@aol.com