Ingo Trauschweizer |
Review of Robert D. Kaplan, Hog Pilots, Blue Water Grunts:
The American Military in the Air, at Sea, and on the Ground.
New York: Random House, 2007. Pp. xii, 428. ISBN
978-1-4000-6133-4. |
Robert
Kaplan provides a panoramic account of his travels with American
servicemen and women all over the globe between summer 2004 and summer
2006. Imperial Grunts[1]
detailed his experiences with Army Special Forces and Marines in
counterinsurgency and irregular warfare. Hog Pilots, Blue Water
Grunts shifts attention to the bulk of American forces deployed
overseas and illuminates the daily tasks of Navy, Air Force, and
conventional Army and Marine Corps. As such, this extensive
travelogue, laced with both insightful and questionable analysis of
strategy and historical context, offers a window into the missions,
lives, and attitudes of men and women who project American power in
the far reaches of the world. This unabashedly imperialist book
rejects moral underpinnings of foreign relations and juxtaposes the
warrior spirit of American soldiers against the non-warrior democracy
they serve.
The resulting narrative moves back
and forth across the vast expanses of the Pacific and Indian Oceans
and considers issues ranging from four U.S. Marines providing military
training at a remote army base in Niger to 32,000 American troops
still guarding the demilitarized zone in Korea. On balance, Kaplan
celebrates the U.S. military--particularly lauding noncommissioned
officers as the backbone of the armed services--and embraces its fight
for stability in a world system led and defined by the United States.
If he is pessimistic about anything, it is the nation, not its
military or its global presence. Based on his observations, he argues
in a long afterword that the men and women of the U.S. armed forces
are far removed from a mainstream society that no longer entertains
the notion of service but greatly respects those who do. Throughout,
Kaplan shows the deeply held beliefs and fierce commitment of American
soldiers, their patriotism, moral hardiness, "and stubbornness
inspired by faith" (374). He admires their professionalism and sharply
contrasts their warrior ethos with what he considers decadence of
those who have lost confidence in their nation and its mission and
concludes that "our own lack of faith in ourselves … leads to an
overdependence of technology by our military establishment" (377).
There are
flaws in Kaplan's argumentation, which at once praises America's
imperial forces and doubts that a nation grown complacent in an
anti-war environment can sustain a decisive global presence. For one,
Kaplan does not analyze American public opinion; he merely assumes
that conservative critics of liberal society are right to detect a
degree of decadence and apathy reminiscent of the latter days of the
Roman Empire.[2]
His brief discussion of the interrelations of technology, power, and
security (or lack thereof) is based on a shared observation of Ralph
Peters, a controversial commentator on strategic and military matters,
and Rudyard Kipling: the suicide bomber is more effective than any
weapon in the arsenal of even the most highly developed and powerful
state. Instead of pursuing this line of argument, however, Kaplan
turns to a standard critique of the media as soulless, anti-American,
and guilty of providing the information technology that gives suicide
bombers an immediate global audience. Such a dichotomy between
American values and the global media is overdrawn and not supported by
evidence. On the other hand, Kaplan's consideration of nationalism as
a driving force in the foreign and defense policies of China, India,
Iran, and Pakistan--drawing on the work of political scientist Paul
Bracken--is more substantial and leads him to conclude that the
military may be the last vestige of nationalism in the United States.[3]
Since Kaplan, well known as a longtime Atlantic Monthly war correspondent
(and current national correspondent) and the author of a dozen books, is one of the foremost
observers of current threats to international security and American
responses to global instability, it would be short-sighted to dismiss
his analysis. His recent books, in treating the Global War on
Terrorism, point at a deeper problem, first identified in his long 1994
article on anarchy in the international system.[4]
Kaplan makes a compelling case for the significance of small-unit
operations in places that garner no media attention. His visit to
Mali, for instance, recounted in chapter 9, reveals the efficacy of
personal networks built by Special Forces. He suggests that stealthy,
lower-intensity military operations often succeed better than major
deployments that Americans actually become aware of. But such
small-scale endeavors, aimed at building lasting structures, lack the
immediate effects demanded by impatient politicians. Kaplan also
worries about resource allocation in, for example, his discussion of
the enormous cost of just one B-2 bomber ($1.1 billion), speculating
that the same expenditure would allow Special Forces teams to saturate
future trouble spots in all of Africa. While conventional and even
nuclear forces remain necessary to contain challenges from nation
states, the ultimate success of America's mission in keeping the world
secure and open for commerce rests on the sovereignty of national
governments in areas that might become failed states but for timely
military and economic assistance.
In eleven chapters, Kaplan
crisscrosses the developing world from West Africa to Colombia and
from Georgia to South Korea, giving readers an impression of America's
global presence, the scope of its deployment and military-logistics
networks, and the crises that may emerge anywhere at any time.
It would have been helpful, however, if the author had provided a
clearer sense whether the challenges to state sovereignty within
distinct geographic regions were related. For example, following the
discussion of military advisers in Niger, Kaplan turns to the Pacific
Rim before returning, in chapter 5, to Algeria and, in chapter 9, to
Mali. Lost in the process is any indication whether U.S. efforts in
the countries of the Sahara-Sahel region are in response to a
coordinated threat or to rebellions bred by local conditions.
In his wide-ranging chapter on the Pacific, a journey from Alaska to
headquarters and logistics bases of Pacific Command in Hawaii, Guam,
Okinawa, Thailand, and the Philippines, Kaplan introduces two
fundamental issues. First, on U.S. global strategy, he agrees with
German journalist and scholar Josef Joffe that the United States is
the hub of a global system of pragmatic alliances and partnerships--a worldwide version
of German chancellor Otto von Bismarck's late nineteenth-century
alliance system based on realist assumptions of shared needs
and common enmities. Kaplan believes that the clumsiness of the George
W. Bush administration destroyed this ideal vision for a global
system.[5]
In the Pacific, however, it "still survived and prospered for the
United States, helped along by the pragmatism of Hawaii-based military
officers five time zones removed from the ideological hothouse of
Washington, D.C." (47). This aptly illustrates Kaplan's position on
the constraints of civil-military relations. Second, Kaplan explores
the deep roots of public and private interaction with the
military-industrial complex: for example, a missile defense base in
Alaska operated by employees of Boeing and small private outfits of
former American servicemen in Thailand and in the Philippines who
service U.S. planes--thus giving domestic administrations a degree of
separation from the U.S. military--and help American soldiers and
sailors navigate the challenges of bustling Asian cities.
Though the Pacific is the
geographic core of the book's vision of world order and future
threats, Kaplan's travel schedule has taken him to North and West
Africa, Georgia, Iraq, and Colombia, and led him to a conclusion worth
pondering:
Indeed, it seemed that the ultimate
strategic effect of the Iraq
war might be to speed up the arrival of the Asian Century not just in
economic terms, but in military terms, too. While the American
government was distracted by Iraq, and Europe's defense establishments
continued to be budget-starved, Asian militaries--China's, Japan's,
India's, and so forth--were quietly enlarging and modernizing, even as
their economic leaders became more and more integrated among
themselves and with the rest of the world. If the development of Asian
militaries was anything to go by, the Middle East was now, the
Pacific the future (11, author's emphasis).
This raises two significant issues
Kaplan could have explored more fully: the rise of East and South
Asian powers and their potentially global reach.
Still, the centrality of the
Pacific--and by extension the eastern Indian Ocean--emerges in
chapters 3 and 4, which see Kaplan travel on a guided-missile destroyer
(USS Benfold) and a nuclear submarine (USS Houston). His
experience on the Benfold in winter 2005 is particularly
important for highlighting the alternation between military and quite
frequent relief missions. Kaplan boarded the destroyer just as it was
moving from a humanitarian assistance effort in Indonesia following
the devastating tsunami of December 2004 to its observation station in
the Strait of Malacca, a critical chokepoint for global
commerce. Indeed, he entitles the book's prologue "The Better They
Fought, the Better Relief Workers They Became" (3).
Kaplan writes from the perspective
of men and women from a disappearing America of small, rural towns
with a farming mindset, as in this description of the relationship of
American trainers and Algerian forces:
The most well-educated,
well-traveled and linguistically adroit noncoms were precisely the
ones most critical of the diplomatic and relief aid
establishments. After all, they
knew much of what the diplomats and NGOs knew, occasionally more. But
because of their hardscrabble backgrounds and military experience,
they just interpreted reality differently. Rather than a disadvantage,
the hands-on circumstances of their own upbringings helped break down
barriers with host-country nationals….This was an economically tenuous
existence not far removed from the men of the Algerian Special Forces
company. Over lamb couscous one day with Master Sgt. Butcher, Maj.
Brahim noted a truth familiar to classicists: "The best soldiers have
been farmers" (195).
Kaplan's time with an eleven-man
Army Special Forces team in southern Algeria again showed him the
benefits of a small footprint: such cooperation with Algeria's effort
to defeat al-Qaeda affiliates in the Sahara has helped bring a onetime
hotbed of Third World radicalism into the pool of states that reliably
maintain regional stability.
From Algeria, Kaplan traveled to
Nepal, where he observed the declining fortunes of government forces
against Maoist rebels. He concludes that American demands for
democracy as a precondition for assistance--though not invariably
applied--in this case impeded successful cooperation between the
military wing of the U.S. embassy and the Royal Nepalese Army. He
observes that "only at sea, from what I had seen so far, were we still
relatively unfettered by global and domestic politics" (225). And even
at sea, as he cautions in an earlier chapter, surface ships are
restrained by political considerations; only submarines are truly free
to act out of sight of public opinion.
In chapter
7, on Iraq, which he visited in fall 2005, Kaplan observes the
difficult counterinsurgency against tribal insurrections often
structured around close-knit families. Drawing on the work of Samuel
Huntington, he reiterates his plea for strengthening of institutions rather
than insisting on immediate democratization.[6]
He contends that the experience of American soldiers in building local
and national institutions in Iraq makes junior and noncommissioned
officers the most likely future elected leaders of the United States.
Such leaders might equally reject intervention for the sake of
transplanting democracy and defeatism or isolationism, instead
becoming "internationalists of a very pragmatic sort" (264).
Robert
Kaplan offers a perceptive narrative bringing to life the conditions
American soldiers and marines toil under in deserts and jungles and
depicting the claustrophobic environment that sailors and submariners
endure to keep the Pacific an American lake. He is particularly good
at giving readers a sense of who serves in the modern military. Hence,
military sociologists and those seeking to understand the scale of
America's global presence and the day-to-day challenges of maintaining
international security and stability will find Hog Pilots, Blue
Water Grunts a useful source. Those desiring careful assessments
of the costs, benefits, and limitations of an informal American empire
or answers to the questions raised in Kaplan's afterword about
technology, power, and security will find this book thought-provoking
but no substitute for more trenchantly analytical works.[7]
Ohio University
trauschw@ohio.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Imperial Grunts: On the Ground with the
American Military (NY: Random House, 2005).
[2] For American public opinion in wartime, see,
e.g., Adam J. Berinsky, In Time of War: Understanding American
Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq (Chicago: U Chicago
Pr, 2009).
[3] Paul Bracken, Fire in the East: The Rise of
Asian Military Power and the Second Nuclear Age (NY:
HarperCollins, 1999).
[4] "The Coming Anarchy: How Scarcity, Crime,
Overpopulation, and Disease are Rapidly Destroying the Fabric of
Our Planet," Atlantic Monthly (Feb 1994) <link>,
rpt. in The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Cold
War World (NY: Vintage, 2000) 3-58.
[5] Oddly, Kaplan's conclusion closely mirrors
Joffe's observation that the United States was destroying the
system because Washington was taking out much more than it was
investing. See Joffe, "Hubs, Spokes and Public Goods,"
The National Interest 69 (Fall 2002) <link>.
[6] Samuel P. Huntington, Political Order in
Changing Societies (New Haven, CT: Yale U Pr, 1968).
[7] See, e.g., Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power: The
End of American Exceptionalism (NY: Metropolitan Books, 2008),
Thomas G. Mahnken, Technology and the American Way of War
(NY: Columbia U Pr, 2008), Walter Russell Mead, Power, Terror,
Peace, and War: America's Grand Strategy in a World at Risk
(NY: Knopf, 2004).
|