典型的失败:西方在阿富汗,2001-2021

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
J. Honig, Ilmari Käihkö
{"title":"典型的失败:西方在阿富汗,2001-2021","authors":"J. Honig, Ilmari Käihkö","doi":"10.1177/0095327X221101364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Western defeat in Afghanistan was due to an inadequate process of strategic reflection informed, first, by an overestimation of the attractiveness of the Western political agenda to Afghans and, second, by overconfidence in the effectiveness of its military approach. As a corollary, popular support for the Taliban was underestimated. The insurgents possessed a degree of what we term strategic cohesion—a sociopolitical and military embeddedness within society—that produced a far stronger strategic effectiveness than we could replicate in our Afghan allies. Furthermore, a military-professional mindset underestimated the degree to which political considerations permeated the battlefield. The political effect of military actions was insufficiently integrated into strategic practice. Specifically, the linchpin officer in staff planning and field operations in Western armies struggled to act as what we term strategic colonels. In both respects, the war continues to offer important lessons for Western involvement in future conflict, including with Russia and China.","PeriodicalId":47332,"journal":{"name":"Armed Forces & Society","volume":"18 1","pages":"989 - 1000"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Exemplary Defeat: The West in Afghanistan, 2001–2021\",\"authors\":\"J. Honig, Ilmari Käihkö\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0095327X221101364\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Western defeat in Afghanistan was due to an inadequate process of strategic reflection informed, first, by an overestimation of the attractiveness of the Western political agenda to Afghans and, second, by overconfidence in the effectiveness of its military approach. As a corollary, popular support for the Taliban was underestimated. The insurgents possessed a degree of what we term strategic cohesion—a sociopolitical and military embeddedness within society—that produced a far stronger strategic effectiveness than we could replicate in our Afghan allies. Furthermore, a military-professional mindset underestimated the degree to which political considerations permeated the battlefield. The political effect of military actions was insufficiently integrated into strategic practice. Specifically, the linchpin officer in staff planning and field operations in Western armies struggled to act as what we term strategic colonels. In both respects, the war continues to offer important lessons for Western involvement in future conflict, including with Russia and China.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Armed Forces & Society\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"989 - 1000\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Armed Forces & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X221101364\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Armed Forces & Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X221101364","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

西方在阿富汗的失败是由于战略反思过程的不足,首先是由于高估了西方政治议程对阿富汗人的吸引力,其次是由于对其军事手段的有效性过于自信。因此,民众对塔利班的支持被低估了。叛乱分子拥有一定程度的战略凝聚力——一种社会政治和军事嵌入社会——这产生了远比我们在阿富汗盟友身上所能复制的更强大的战略效力。此外,军事专业人士的心态低估了政治考虑在战场上的渗透程度。军事行动的政治效果没有充分融入战略实践。具体来说,西方军队中负责参谋规划和野外作战的关键军官努力扮演我们所说的战略上校的角色。在这两个方面,这场战争继续为西方参与未来的冲突提供重要的教训,包括与俄罗斯和中国的冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Exemplary Defeat: The West in Afghanistan, 2001–2021
The Western defeat in Afghanistan was due to an inadequate process of strategic reflection informed, first, by an overestimation of the attractiveness of the Western political agenda to Afghans and, second, by overconfidence in the effectiveness of its military approach. As a corollary, popular support for the Taliban was underestimated. The insurgents possessed a degree of what we term strategic cohesion—a sociopolitical and military embeddedness within society—that produced a far stronger strategic effectiveness than we could replicate in our Afghan allies. Furthermore, a military-professional mindset underestimated the degree to which political considerations permeated the battlefield. The political effect of military actions was insufficiently integrated into strategic practice. Specifically, the linchpin officer in staff planning and field operations in Western armies struggled to act as what we term strategic colonels. In both respects, the war continues to offer important lessons for Western involvement in future conflict, including with Russia and China.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Armed Forces & Society: an interdisciplinary journal publishing articles on military institutions, civil-military relations, arms control and peacemaking, and conflict management. The journal is international in scope with a focus on historical, comparative, and interdisciplinary discourse. The editors and contributors include political scientists, sociologists, historians, psychologists, scholars, and economists, as well as specialists in military organization and strategy, arms control, and peacekeeping.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信