How Much Peace Can the Military Instigate? Anthropological Perspectives on the Role of the Military in Peace Intervention

  • Maren Tomforde
Chapter
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

The last two decades have seen a normalised involvement of military actors in peace operations, as Afghanistan exemplifies. This chapter analyses the military point of view, and its emic assessments and experiences in peace interventions. Ethnographic Peace Research (EPR) conducted among important players, like the armed forces, working in conflict areas at the local level towards stability and development can help gain a more profound understanding of the taxing path towards sustainable peace. Ethnographic research accentuates that the military, such as the German Bundeswehr, is not simply an armed and neutral force that “merely” provides security in the initial stages of a mission. Instead, it is deeply intertwined with (inter)national and local partners during general training, pre-deployment preparation and in the course of a mission.

References

  1. Ali-Cina, Fahimi. 2014. The Truth behind Germany’s Intervention in Afghanistan: A Case Study on the Ground. Hamburg: Anchor Academic Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Beerenkämper, Florian, Marcen Bohnert, Anja Buresch, and Sandra Matuszewski. 2016. Der innerafghanische Friedens- und Aussöhnungsprozess: Folgerungen für die künftige deutsche Beteiligung an internationalen Operationen zur Krisenbewältigung in fragilen Staaten. Berlin: Miles Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. Ben-Ari, Eyal. 2011. Anthropology, Research, and State Violence: Some Observations from an Israeli Anthropologist. In Dangerous Liaisons: Anthropologists and the National Security State, ed. Laura McNamara and Robert Rubinstein, 167–183. Santa Fe, NM: SAR Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bhaba, Homi. 2012. Über Kulturelle Hybridität: Tradition und Übersetzung. Wien/Berlin: Turia & Karl.Google Scholar
  5. Biehl, Heiko, and Maren Tomforde. 2005. Quantitative und Qualitative Methoden in der Militärsoziologie am Beispiel von Einsatzbefragungen. In Militärsoziologie: Eine Einführung. Lehrbuch, ed. Nina Leonhard and Ines-Jacqueline Werkner, 310–329. Wiesbaden: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birckenbach, Hanne Marie. 2014. Friedenslogik und Friedenslogische Politik. Wissenschaft & Frieden: Friedenslogik statt Sicherheitslogik: Theoretische Grundlagen und friedenspolitische Realisierung, Dossier No. 75. Accessed November 4, 2016. http://wissenschaft-und-frieden.de/seite.php?dossierID=079
  7. Bohnert, Marcel. 2014. Feinde in den eigenen Reihen Zur Problematik von Innentätern in Afghanistan. if. Zeitschrift für Innere Führung 2014: 5–12.Google Scholar
  8. Bräuchler, Birgit. 2015. The Cultural Dimension of Peace: Decentralization and Reconciliation in Indonesia. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cufaj, Beqe. 2012. Project@party. Zürich: Secession Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Duffey, Tamara. 2000. Cultural Issues in Contemporary Peacekeeping. International Peacekeeping 7 (1): 142–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fluehr-Lobban, Caroly. 2006. Ethical Challenges, New and Old: National Security and the Global War on Terror. Anthropology Newsletter 47 (3): 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Giegerich, Bastian, and Gerhard Kümmel. 2013. The End of the World as We Know it? On Interventionist Overstretch, Post-Interventionism and Neo-Interventionism: An Essayist Introduction. In The Armed Forces: Towards a Post-Interventionist Era? ed. Gerhard Kümmel and Bastian Giegerich, 11–14. Wiesbaden: Springer VS-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gonzalez, Roberto. 2015. The Rise and Fall of the Human Terrain System. Counterpunch. 29 June 2015. Accessed November 1, 2016. http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/06/29/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-human-terrain-system/
  14. Gusterson, Hugh. 1996. Nuclear Rites: A Weapons Laboratory at the End of the Cold. War. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  15. Haltiner, Karl, and Gerhard Kümmel. 2008. Die Hybridisierung der Soldaten: Soldatisches Subjekt und Identitätswandel. In Streitkräfte im Einsatz: Zur Soziologie militärischer Interventionen, ed. Gerhard Kümmel, 47–54. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hohe, Tanja. 2003. Justice without Judiciary in East Timor. Conflict, Security & Development 3 (3): 335–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Horowitz, Irving Louis. 1967. The Rise and Fall of Project Camelot: Studies in the Relationship between Social Sciences and Practical Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hughes, Caroline, Joakim Öjendal, and Isabel Schierenbeck. 2015. The Struggle versus the Song—the Local Turn in Peacebuilding: An Introduction. Third World Quarterly 36 (5): 817–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jorgensen, Joseph G., and Eric R. Wolf. 1970. Anthropology on the Warpath in Thailand. New York Review of Books 19: 27–35.Google Scholar
  20. Kappler, Stefanie. 2015. The Dynamic Local: Delocalisation and (Re-)Localisation in the Search for Peacebuilding Identity. Third World Quarterly 36 (5): 875–889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Koelbl, Herlinde. 2011. Bist du in der Lage, auf einen Menschen zu schießen? Das Konnte ich Klar mit Ja Beantworten: Zehn Junge Männer Erzählen, wie es ist, in den Krieg zu Ziehen. Oberleutnant Jens K. ist einer von ihnen. Zeitmagazin 49: 2–8.Google Scholar
  22. König, René. 1968. Beiträge zur Militärsoziologie. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kuehn, Florian. 2010. Sicherheit und Entwicklung in der Weltgesellschaft: Liberales Paradigma und Statebuilding in Afghanistan. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Langer, Phil C. 2012. Erfahrungen von ‘Fremdheit’ als Ressource verstehen—Herausforderungen interkultureller Kompetenz im Einsatz. In Der Einsatz der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan: Sozial- und politikwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, ed. Anja Seiffert, Phil C. Langer, and Carsten Pietsch, 123–141. Wiesbaden: Springer VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leonhard, Nina, and Ines-Jacqueline Werkner. 2011. Militärsoziologie: Eine Einführung. 2nd revised ed. Wiesbaden: Springer VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  26. Lowenhaupt-Tsing, Anna. 2005. Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lucas, George R. 2009. Anthropologists in Arms: The Ethics of Military Anthropology. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  28. Mac Ginty, Roger. 2015. Where is the Local? Critical Localism and Peacebuilding. Third World Quarterly 36 (5): 840–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Messner, Michael. forthcoming. Guys like me: Six Wars, Six Veterans for Peace. Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press.Google Scholar
  30. Millar, Gearoid. 2014. Disaggregating Hybridity: Why Hybrid Institutions Do Not Produce Predictable Experiences of Peace. Journal of Peace Research 51 (4): 501–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. ———. 2016. Local Experiences of Liberal Peace: Marketization and Emergent Conflict Dynamics in Sierra Leone. Journal of Peace Research 53 (4): 569–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Münch, Philip. 2015. Die Bundeswehr in Afghanistan: Militärische Handlungslogik in internationalen Interventionen. Freiburg i. Breisgau: Rombach Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Nadin, Peter. 2014. An Argument for More Focused UN Peacekeeping Mandates. Our World (2014), United Nations University. Accessed July 1, 2016. http://ourworld.unu.edu/en/an-argument-for-more-focused-un-peacekeeping-mandates
  34. Naumann, Klaus. 2012. A Troubled Partnership – Zum Verhältnis von Politik und Militär im ISAF-Einsatz. In Der Einsatz der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan: Sozial- und politikwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, ed. Anja Seiffert, Phil C. Langer, and Carsten Pietsch, 46–46. Wiesbaden: Springer VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  35. Odoi, Nana. 2005. Cultural Diversity in Peace Operations: Training Challenges. KAIPTC Paper 4.Google Scholar
  36. Paffenholz, Thanja. 2015. Unpacking the Local Turn in Peacebuilding: A Critical Assessment Towards an Agenda for Future Research. Third World Quarterly 36 (5): 857–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rubinstein, Robert A. 2008. Peacekeeping under Fire: Culture and Intervention. Boulder, CO: Paradigm.Google Scholar
  38. ———. 2011. Ethics, Engagement, and Experience: Anthropological Excursions in Culture and the National Security State. In Dangerous Liaisons: Anthropologists and the National Security State, ed. Laura Mc Namara and Robert A. Rubinstein, 145–165. Santa Fé, NM: SAR Press.Google Scholar
  39. Rubinstein, Robert A., Kerry Fosher, and Clementine Fujumura. 2013. Practicing Military Anthropology: Beyond Expectations and Traditional Boundaries. Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  40. Schell, Jonathan. 2003. The Unconquerable World: Power, Nonviolence and the Will of the People. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Company.Google Scholar
  41. Schut, Michelle, and Eva van Baarle. 2017. Breaking the Silence: Confronting the Bacha Bazi Issue in Afghanistan. In International Security and Peacebuilding: Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, ed. Abu Bakarr Bah, 132–148. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Seidler, Christoph. 2005. Opfer ihrer Erregung: Die deutsche Ethnologie und der Kolonialismus. Accessed October 17, 2005. http://www.boell.de/naviagtion/aussen-sicherheit-1991.html.
  43. Seiffert, Anja. 2012. Introduction. In Der Einsatz der Bundeswehr in Afghanistan: Sozial- und politikwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, ed. Anja Seiffert, Phil C. Langer, and Carsten Pietsch, 11–22. Wiesbaden: Springer VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Solmirano, Carina, and Jakob Hallgren. 2013. Assessing the Cost of Military Operations in Afghanistan and Juxtaposing Them to the Assessed Costs of Humanitarian Assistance (2008–2012). Accessed June 25, 2016. http://www.globalhumanitarianassistance.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Costs-of-military-operations-and-humanitarian-aid-Afghanistan.pdf
  45. Tomforde, Maren. 2006. The Hmong Mountains: The Cultural Spatiality of the Hmong in Northern Thailand. Hamburg: LIT Verlag.Google Scholar
  46. ———. 2009. Bereit für 3 Tassen Tee? Die Rolle von Kultur für Auslandseinsätze der Bundeswehr. In Auslandseinsätze der Bundeswehr: Sozialwissenschaftliche Analysen, Diagnosen und Perspektiven, ed. Sabine Jaberg, Heiko Biehl, Günter Mohrmann, and Maren Tomforde, 71–92. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  47. ———. 2010. How Much Culture is Needed? The Intercultural Dilemma of the Bundeswehr in ISAF. International Peacekeeping 17 (4): 526–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. ———. 2011. Should Anthropologists provide their Knowledge to the Military? An Ethical Discourse taking Germany as an Example. In Dangerous Liaisons: Anthropologists and the National Security State, ed. Laura Mc Namara and Robert A. Rubinstein, 77–100. Santa Fé, NM: SAR Press.Google Scholar
  49. ———. 2015a. Good Shot: Gewalterfahrungen von Bundeswehrsoldaten im Auslandseinsatz. In Einhegung und Legitimation militärischer Gewalt in Deutschland: Stand und Perspektiven, ed. Jürgen Franke and Nina Leonhard, 213–250. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  50. ———. 2015b. Einsatzkultur und die Deutung von Gewalt beim Militär. In Krieg und Frieden: Kulturelle Deutungsmuster, ed. Samuel Salzborn and Holger Zapf, 109–136. Frankfurt a. Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  51. ———. 2016. Mein neuer Stamm: Ein Ethnologischer Blick auf die Bundeswehr. In Am Puls der Bundeswehr: Militärsoziologie in Deutschland zwischen Politik, Bundeswehr und Gesellschaft, ed. Angelika Dörfler-Dierken and Gerhard Kümmel, 235–256. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wagner, Armin, and Heiko Biehl. 2013. Bundeswehr und Gesellschaft. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 44: 1–3.Google Scholar
  53. Welsch, Wolfgang. 1995. Transkulturalität. Zeitschrift für Kulturaustausch, Schwerpunktthema Migration und kultureller Wandel 45: 1–45.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maren Tomforde
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Staff and Command College of the German Armed ForcesHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of AnthropologyMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations