1
   

FOREIGN "THOUGHTWORLDS"

 
 
Reply Wed 7 Apr, 2004 12:38 pm
INSIGHT INTO FOREIGN "THOUGHTWORLDS" NEEDED

Policy makers require greater insight into the "thoughtworlds"
of adversaries -- their culture, motivations, and
characteristic modes of perception and behavior -- in order to
advance national interests by means other than the blunt
instruments of force, according to a new study from the
Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), a defense contractor.

The problem is that "A strategy of using [military or economic
force] to compel desired outcomes... is poorly suited to many
present challenges, notably in the strategic war against
terror, a number of taxing regional crises, and in countering
a global wave of anti-U.S. sentiment."

"There are alternative strategies that, instead of seeking to
compel or force, actively engage foreign partners or
adversaries in a way that recognizes their interests,
perspectives, will, and energies and that seek to effectively
communicate, influence, channel extant dynamics, or sometimes
effect more fundamental changes in thought or action."

"Such strategies, not without their own limitations, should now
receive relatively more consideration and emphasis in U.S.
national security affairs."

In an astute and literate analysis, the author is careful to
place bounds on his argument, observing, for example, that
improved communication and understanding can sometimes
exacerbate conflict rather than relieve it.

And he notes the obstacles to his own proposals, including a
cultural predisposition that is unfavorable to the kind of
insight he says is needed.

"A nuanced understanding of how people in other societies think
-- their thoughtworlds -- ... has not been commonly reflected
in U.S. national security affairs, and is not prominent in
U.S. society generally." (The very word "thoughtworld" is not
normally used in American English and is apparently borrowed
from the German "Gedankenwelt.")

See "Insight Into Foreign Thoughtworlds for National Security
Decision Makers" by J.W. Barnett, Institute for Defense
Analyses, HERE (pdf-file!)
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 567 • Replies: 0
No top replies

 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » FOREIGN "THOUGHTWORLDS"
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/29/2024 at 12:57:56