Dear Roger:

You asked some very good questions. PDF attached that has proper formatting

First, as you know the Army has an excellent Manual on
Counter-Insurgency (final draft June 2006)
<www.fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm3-24fd.pdf>, a manual that is
definitely a change from the past and one that makes for meaningful,
positive results in conflict theaters like Afghanistan. In addition,
there are some excellent thoughtful scholarly papers now on
counter-insurgency and human rights (Stigall, Dan, “Human Rights and
Military Decisions: Counterinsurgency and Trends in the Law of
International Armed Terror”, 30 University of Pennsylvania Journal of
International Law 1467 (2008-2009, free download at
<http://ssrn.com/abstract=1433513>), that are a breath of fresh air
when the debates on military intervention appear to be centered on who
to blame for torture or who made the decision to send troops to a
specific location, or can we win.

Second, there is little doubt now that the Afghanistan mission is not
going well.

Third, looking at the behaviors of some of the National Guard troops
in the field, as well as the behavior of some of the National Guard
troops in the United States, it is obvious that some of the troops are
still practicing war and conflict from a pre-Manual of
Counter-Insurgency mind-set. The reasons might be that they have not
read the Manual of Counter-Insurgency, they may not like what the
Manual states is best military practice, or they do not understand
what the Manual states is what they are supposed to be doing.

Fourth, while it may not be much safer examining historical and
current National Guard practices in the southern states of the United
States than in examining current National Guard practices in conflict
areas of operations in foreign countries, such as Afghanistan and
Iraq, the examination is a necessary preliminary to a Truth Commission
(as in South Africa or El Salvador) or an on-going Historical Enquiry
Team approach (Northern Ireland) for events that occurred in the
United States.

I don’t know if you are old enough to remember that “whiteness” was a
requirement to join the National Guard, but in some states it was also
expected that a National Guardsman be a member of, or a supporter of
the ku klux klan. One reason we might be having recurring problems
with race in civilian populations in the United States, as well as why
we continue to experience unacceptable behaviors by the National Guard
in foreign conflicts is that the residuals of the past are still very
much with us. In effect, the argument that the unacceptable National
Guard behaviors are caused by the stresses of war is weak until we can
determine the observable current unacceptable behaviors, so we can at
least attempt to covary out the residual effects of discriminatory
practices that today would be considered bullying behaviors.

I want to emphasize that the questions that need to be answered are
not about post-traumatic stress syndrome caused by military
confrontations but are about how some National Guardsmen are
frustrated in expressing bully-behaviors upon any civilian or group of
civilians who do not respect the privileged position of the National
Guard, or who are primarily from a different subculture of the United
States. We need to know how much and what levels of the unacceptable
behaviors are present before individuals joined the National Guard and
how much and what levels of unacceptable behaviors are expressed by
individuals within the United States in their home communities before
and after any conflict assignments, or in the absence of any military
conflict assignments.

Examining vehicular behaviors as they relate to the State National
Guards today, be it the Georgia National Guard that conducted regular
drive-byes of the community known as Koinonia in Americus, Georgia,
shooting at the buildings with ammunition bought by tax money in the
1950s and into the 1960s, or be it the Florida National Guard
vehicular behaviors such as blocking the car of Dr. Hayling, a dentist
who was active in civil rights in St. Augustine, taking him and his
friends out of the blocked car and using a military issue rifle to
break all the fingers in his hands, but were unable to set him and his
colleagues on fire before the police finally got there, in 1964, may
account for some of the variance in aberrant vehicular behaviors that
are continuing today.

I addressed the letter to the man I spoke with at a National Guard
building as a civilian because I doubt if he has any jurisdiction over
activities by National Guardsmen. His jurisdiction is limited to
civilians. Specialization is at a peak in the military with detailed
descriptions of who is responsible for what and when and where but
that specialization can become part of a very effective delay and
avoidance system.

It’s key to remember that the military is fighting in Afghanistan for
specific rights that we believe we have in the United States. To
observe the National Guard do a dance of avoiding open records
requests is astounding and those hypocritical acts are not missed by
the people we are characterizing as “the enemy” in Afghanistan or in
the domestic areas. Delegating open records requests to someone who is
not qualified or trained or experienced and who does not have
authority to answer such questions also is not missed by the rank and
file National Guardsmen. Impunity Watch is now examining these types
of dodges and illegal avoidances of accountability in third world
countries and it does not make me proud to see these behaviors in the
United States.

Finally, the basic premise of state supported bully behaviors has been
negated in so many countries (Poland, East Germany, South Africa, see
Ash, T., The Polish Revolution, 1993, 2002), for the state National
Guards to fail to notice or take action against bully guardsmen is a
strong indicator of a failure of discipline or leadership with respect
to what the Manual of Counter-Insurgency requires and sends a signal
to newly, and not yet completely enfranchised minority groups that
there are those who still operate above and outside the boundaries of
the Bill of Rights.

The people who are most negatively impacted by the bully behaviors are
the bullies, but until they recognize that, and until the military
recognizes that fact, we’ll continue to need civil rights enforcement

DH


**********************************************************************
For Listserv Instructions, see http://www.lawlists.net/cyberia
Off-Topic threads: http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cyberia-ot
Need more help? Send mail to: Cyberia-L-Request@...
**********************************************************************