mag@colby.edu | subscribe
Spring 2008
Features
A Fine Line
Different Prescriptions
Having a Ball in Japan
Alumni
Profiles & Class Notes
Obituaries
Editorials
From the Editor
Contributors
Letters
The Editor's Blog
Colby News
Colby Increasing Aid
Snowboard Accident
Emergency Preparedne...
Diamond to Speak
Collecting Stories
Hathaway Progress
Construction Roundup
Bursting the Bubble
360 Degrees of Learn...
Bryant on MLK
Wit & Wisdom
Bubble Bath
Alumni Trustee Nomin...
Colby Online
Life on Mars?
Eben Dorros '96 | Mi...
Women's Lax Success
Haunted Hearts
My Tainted Blood
Telling the Katrina ...
From the Hill
Celebrating Alfond
Q&A: Pakistani Stude...
Too Close for Comfor...
Open-Door Policy
The Whole Truth
Ghost Story
Recent Releases
Point Spread
Women's Hockey
Skiing Success
Sports Shorts
Wrong Track, Right T...
Egypt’s Rise
Search This Issue
 
Search Past Issues:
Search For:

In:


Browse Past Issues
Jump to Another Issue:
 
 
 

Too Close for Comfort?
Anthropologists question new use of their discipline by U.S. military in Iraq

By Gerry Boyle '78
Photos by: David Furst/AFP/Getty Images
Photo:US Military in Iraq
Photo by David Furst/AFP/Getty Images

Critics and supporters of the Iraq War agree that, early on, the coalition effort was hampered by a profound lack of knowledge of Iraqi culture on the part of the U.S. military. Four years after the U.S. invasion, military planners decided to “embed” anthropologists in combat units to help American soldiers in Iraq better understand the place and culture.

Good move?

No, according to Catherine Besteman, Colby professor of anthropology and a founding member of the Network of Concerned Anthropologists, which has led vehement opposition to the U.S. military’s $40-million Human Terrain System program.

“What they’re asking,” Besteman said, “is for us to be embedded in military units in the front lines of war where they will be gathering information to be used against civilian populations. That’s not ending the war. That’s not using our knowledge in a way that saves lives.”

That is one side in a debate that has spread like wildfire in the anthropology community. It has led the American Anthropological Association to come out strongly against the embedded-anthropologist program and its practice of using uniformed and sometimes armed anthropologists to gather intelligence in a war zone.

The association’s executive board concluded that the Human Terrain System program is likely to lead anthropologists to violate their own code of ethics, which stipulates that anthropologists may not harm the persons they study. The program also may endanger anthropologists and their subjects in other parts of the world by linking them to military objectives.

“Many anthropologists say, ‘We have no problem working with the military, consulting with the military,’” Besteman said. “‘We have no problem teaching the military, we have no problem having soldiers in our classes. We have no problem presenting cultural orientation briefings for soldiers who are about to embark to foreign areas. Let us do that. We would be happy to do that. That’s different than gathering information covertly about people that’s going to be used to dominate them. That we cannot do.’”

next page >>
Comments
Be the first to comment on this article.
Comment on this article

Colby invites readers to post comments about stories. We ask that comments be signed and that writers supply an e-mail address so they may be contacted for verification purposes. Colby reserves the right to edit or remove postings deemed inappropriate.

Fields labeled with * are required.
*Comment:
*Your Name:
*Email Address: (will not be displayed)
Where do you live?
Colby Magazine Home | Colby.edu | Search Colby.edu | Contact Colby
© 2004-2008 Colby College | 4000 Mayflower Hill | Waterville, ME 04901-8440
t: (207) 859-4354 | f: (207) 859-4349 | comments