McChrystal Method
Like a lot of media observers, I began seeing the Pentagon's campaign to get 40,000 more American soldiers into Afghanistan ramp up several weeks ago in the mainstream media, at about the same time Disney began rolling the heavy promotional artillery on its November release of A Christmas Carol.
Like the Disney flick, which features state-of-the-art motion capture animation and stars Jim Carrey, the campaign for The 40,000 is built around visual effects like drone spy planes and night vision cameras, and features a star player, General Stanley McChrystal.
I'm pretty sure A Christmas Carol is going to have a happy ending like it has every other time it has been produced. I'm much less certain about The 40,000. It looks like a remake of Russian-financed disaster epic from about 20 years ago that sank the Soviets, which was itself an updating of a series of three Anglo-Afghan campaigns waged by the British Empire from 1839 to 1919, all with less than happy results for their producers.
The General McChrystal character is what you'd call problematic. Ads and PR for The 40,000 depict the General as reading books by the truckload, being fiercely driven, setting a pace no mere mortal can maintain. The Pentagon production notes tell us that his character sleeps four hours a night, eats one meal a day, and runs twelve miles daily in the desert sun.
This is not what you call aspirational behavior by a main character. Sleeping four hours a night and eating one meal a day is something not even the grungiest Afghan goatherd wants for himself. And even the most tyro screenwriter knows that eating and sleeping scenes bog a story down. The Pentagon's star-making machinery is confusing obsessive with heroic. Overeating and oversleeping are problems we should be fighting in America, they do not appear to be issues in Afghanistan.
There's a potentially interesting quirk to the McChrystal character: He played a role in the Pat Tillman friendly-fire cover-up. But the campaign glosses over this, and any other human traits for that matter. A character like Stanley McChrystal cannot afford to show vulnerability to his enemies, and by enemies I mean anyone who would prevent The 40,000 from going into production with him as its star.
Another problem--these 40,000 troops--are they CGI, like the Armies of Middle Earth in Lord of the Rings?-- nameless algorithms meant to march in sync and impress enemies and audiences by their sheer number? Or are they real human beings with jobs to do, and wants and desires and faults just like you and me? Purely on the math, if a story like 300 had 5 characters we got to know in the course of the campaign, that means the Pentagon needs to acquaint us with 600, or 1.5%, of the 40,000 troops it claims it needs to win its war. Are we, the paying audience, not to be apprised of anyone's role before the story unfolds? Is General Stanley McChrystal the only character we're supposed to care about? Is there no love story? No rival? No enemy who sleeps three hours a night and eats zero meals a day? If so, the Pentagon's marketing department is not doing its job. Or is it covering up a dud, as marketing departments are so often asked to do?
If the Pentagon really wants The 40,000 to succeed where others attempting to sell a similar story have failed, here are a few suggestions:
First, ditch the genre. We have worn out the war stories. Our enemies are all around us. We copy. Bad things will happen. That's a big 10-4. Precautions must be taken. Check. 3.9 ounces of liquid is dangerous, 3.5 not so much. Roger that. But war is an exhausted and exhausting genre, one accompanied by incomprehensible depths of sadness and depression, as if there isn't enough of that in the world already. When we're waging war, we are not doing all the more productive and rewarding things we could and should be doing. A change of genres is in order. The destruction has gone far enough, it's time to build.
Second, if you must have a cast of 40,000, give them roles that allow for expressions of the better part of human nature.
My friend Oliver Percovich, founder of Skateistan.org, built a skate park in downtown Kabul and is now expanding it into a school where Afghan children will study Math, Science and English for a minimum of three hours a day to earn skateboarding privileges. In addition, Ollie is working to outfit and train an Afghan Team for the 2012 Olympic games. Connie Duckworth, a former Goldman Sachs trader, founded Arzu Rugs. Arzu imports the exquisite handiwork of the Afghan rugmakers. Before they can sign a contract with Arzu, weavers are required to take courses in literacy, math, health, hygiene, nutrition and human rights. Arzu has championed women's rights, piloted community sports programs, built catchbasins to provide villages with healthy drinking water, and given educations to the children of hundreds of Afghan families. So there. That's two. 39,998 to go.
Third, give the Stanley McChrystal character a makeover. As anyone who's read Joseph Campbell knows, the hero's journey begins when the hero is yanked out of his or her normal world and thrust into an extraordinary new set of circumstances. Stanley McChrystal was born into the military. In war, he is quite literally in his element. His heroic journey cannot begin, his destiny cannot be fulfilled, until he turns his back on war and faces what a career soldier like him fears most. Peace.
Mike Bonifer is the author of GameChangers -- Improvisation for Business in the Networked World. His company's website is www.gamechangers.com
Follow Mike Bonifer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Bonifer
Arianna Huffington: Why Joe Biden Should Resign
The vice president has long opposed escalating in Afghanistan. So if the president decides to escalate, Biden, for the good of the country, should escalate his willingness to act on his "deep reservations" and resign.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
There is no objective nor metrics for winning in Afghanistan, just another never ending war with endless back to back deployment for the troops. If this crummy war is worth fighting then support the troops and start the draft.
Delicious article, Mr. Bonifer. Funny but serious too. What about "Forty thousand-the Musical." Get out your tap shoes and start hoofin" . McChrystal- he "could have been a contendah.
Fortunately for our military. McChrystal is a contender.
What a beautifully written piece.
It is hard to say how much I wish the decision makers would take a look at how these quiet and productive actions have done more good and will last so much longer than all our bombing, macho military industrialization complex has been able to achieve.
It is time for all of our citizens to rise up and demand more of our decision makers than being led the the nose like a quiet herd of sheep into this quicksand which will sink us all.
See Joe The Nerd Ferraro's Profile
as much as i hate to say it, these decsions about the 40,000 should have been more developed behind closed doors.
I want obama to deliberate and think about what he's doing. i like the fact the were running live test scenarios quietly at the end of the summer for a better idea of what is going on.
get the input of as many in the military and congress as possible, with the caveat that we don't go public with these plans because we have troops in theater. too many open discussions put them at risk until we go with what we need.
objections should be thought of and the answers ready to go.
the discussion then should have been opened to the public when were close to deployment so that if something glaring were missed it could be corrected before the full commit.
that gives security to our people under fire and allows for an open discussion to get the best possible solution.
This article presents a great perspective. Afghanistan has been botched beyond repair. The smart thing for the US to do is pull out and leave the Karzai goverment to it's own devices. If the goverment falls to the Taliban, so be it. Should the Taliban's return to power result in another attack on US oil, then the US should return to Afghanistan to eliminate the Taliban. If the Taliban is as oppressive as reputed, then the people of Afghanistan should be ready to support the US (winning hearts and minds in one fell swoop, rather than village by village). Lessons learned should help us get it right the second time around.
vdaview
If the Taliban's retutn to power results in another attack on the USA I hope it is at your house. You have to be an idiot to think this way. You are willing to have more American civilians killed to prove what? If this is really what you want done, will you allow a few nukes to be used in Afghanistan?
And just who do you consider all our fighting men and women but Americans. Do not their deaths and mutilization count as just more we have given over to the terrorists.
No wonder we have reached this point in America. Bring back the Draft so all you gung ho rah rah cheerleaders can put your butt in the wind.
Thank you Mike for your insightful article. I don't trust McChrystal or what he's advocating. Afterall here is a man whose entire life is dedicated to war. Who would he be without it? It's time to cut our losses and get out of Afganistan and Iraq, and time for Dick Cheney to get out of Washington, D.C. where he no longer belongs.
devadasi
Maybe you should lead our troops. Your life is not dedicated to war and you would not miss it. I am sure you are highly qualified to make military decisions. I experience this type of reasoning once before and all it did was get more of us killed.
Yeah it is difficult to comprehend or even appreciate someone with that kind of character. It is no wonder he is often so criticized. Few have met a man in their entire lives as fiercely driven and as effective as this man. We should be so lucky to have him as our commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan.
Fraid not. The world doesnt need a gritty cowboy commander. Thats the reason (8 years later btw) we're still there and things are Worse. I understand that war is great for business, curtailing human rights etc but I must break with you here. I have met more military men and veterans than I could ever recount, and the one thing they all had in common (despite the facts that I liked most of them very very much and keep many as friends) is that they were damaged goods. The armed services destroys humans, and more specifically its training processes. If you cannot get on board with that then you are ignorant to how the game is played and the history of said game.
But you bajed, you know. Hey what article are you going to next so I can bust you there too? You are a continuing source of entertainment for me.
Come on Earl. The reason we are in the mess in Afghanistan after 8 years isn't because of military men with unfathomable character, it is because of policy makers who didn't weigh strategy against resources to determine the risk of their endeavors. Men like Dick Cheney who allowed their ideology to drive their strategy instead of allowing the assessment on the ground to drive their strategy were and are the problem. I too have met many a military men and women in my lifetime and I would not go so far as to say they are damaged goods. Of all the military men I have met few if any have had the character, foresight, and innovative mind of General McChrystal. He is the kind of man who would follow the president even if he decided to implement a full withdrawal from Afghanistan. He is not the kind of man to allow politics to force greater risk on the men and women he commands. He has developed a strategy with a sliding scale based on troop levels equivalent to what he feels can be accomplished with each increase in troops. Like any commander he would like the president to go with the course of action that he feels will be most successful but as we know war is an extension of politics and we cant always get what we want.
The USA like most great powers in history has had many go-getting smart hard driving military leaders - but so wot? In a conventional highly advanced industrial nation state war like WW2 - these qualities might be invaluable. Unfortunately to paraphrase Mr Rumsfield - you don't always get the kind of war you would like. You don't have a cohesive enemy nation state with mechanized armies to fight - but a patchwork of tribes and warlords with transient and expedient loyalties that no country or empire has been able to retain control of in over 2000 years. Rather than repeat the VietNam and Russian war experiences - it might be worth looking at other options.
When General McChrystal is given an actual GOAL a real definition of "victory" then it wil be time to carp at his implementation or non ...... Pr. Obama seems to have learned little form about 2000 + of history of Afghan quagmires ( Alexander any one? How bout the English -- who never really did get the part right about where Pakistan is either) So..... Let's get a truly aritculated and publicly discussed goal and definition of what our afghan adventurism (inherited from the thoughless, and thoroughly discredited bush cheney wolfowitz axis) so the civilians can try to slough it all off on the miIitary
Get your head out of your shorts bike. The definition and goal are available and have been for two months. http://www
Sleeping four hours a night and eating one meal a day... no wonder the man is delerious. He needs to be relieved of his duties immediately and put in for permanent r&r.
McChrystal seems like a pretty rigid character, but surely what we need in Afghanistan is insight, creativity, and flexibility.
none of which he can offer. Lets use our bullets to get them to like us. Of course the guy running the war wants more troops. His mission is not to end the war, but to advance himself. Obama can hardly bend over quick enough to take the pentagons injection.
Earl, that is not at all the plan McChrystal has developed. I think we have let the MSM push this image of McChrystal to the extreme and it is unwarranted. There is also an extreme element on the left that despises the fact that our military should ever be held up as heroes. The military are selfless public servants and give up far more than anyone living on K street could ever imagine. Here is McChrystal's plan. Please read it and let me know what you think when you are done. http://www
Read his recommendation http://www
I think his plan is the only one that could work. The plan is two pronged. First, fighting the Taliban is not the focus. The focus is fighting the corrupt, predatory, widely despised government. The second, is to return jurisprudence to the traditional Shuras. The British, the Soviets, the US, and the current government have all tried to dismantle the Shuras, yet they are the very foundation of Afghan culture regardless of ethnic background. I was flabbergasted when I saw that in his plan.
But, I do not believe our troops could possibly pull it off. If we sent 40,000 National Guard, maybe. But our professional Army does not contain soldiers who have intimate experience with how a civil society actually works (which is why one joines a professional Army). McChrystal envisions 40,000 soldiers acting as police, not with the population, but with the government.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
