Site icon Fabius Maximus website

Advice about our long war – “It’s the tribes, stupid”

Larry Kummer, Editor

Today’s post examines advice to us from historian Steven Pressfield:

“The real enemy in Afghanistan isn’t Islamism or jihadism. It’s tribalism. … Can we Westerners impose ‘citizen values’ on a tribal society?”  (from his website)

Some people say our real enemy in Afghanistan is their religion.  Pressfield says our enemy is their form of society.  Both sides agree that they cannot be left alone, since they are “the enemy”.  This debate goes to the heart of our Long War, as both sides usually ignore the question of why we fight — and exactly how these people threaten us. 

This post examines Pressman’s work, as an educated and articulate advocate in this important debate.  Pressfield is the best-selling author of Gates of Fire, The Virtues of War, and The Afghan Campaign.

Contents

  1. Pressfield’s essay about our tribal enemies
  2. Another perspective, the big picture about our war with tribes
  3. Today’s featured viewing selection:  Pressfield’s videos about our tribal enemies
  4. Reviews and rebuttals on other sites, plus background info
  5. A brief profile of Pressfield
  6. Reviews of his books
  7. Afterword and for more information

(1)  Pressfield’s essay about our tribal enemies

“It’s the Tribes, Stupid“, Steven Pressfield, posted at Defense and the National Interest, October 2006 — Excerpt:

Forget the Koran. Forget the ayatollahs and the imams. If we want to understand the enemy we’re fighting in Iraq, the magic word is “tribe.”

Islam is not our opponent in Baghdad or Fallouja. We delude ourselves if we believe the foe is a religion. The enemy is tribalism articulated in terms of religion.

For two years I’ve been researching a book about Alexander the Great’s counter-guerrilla campaign in Afghanistan, 330-327 B.C. What struck me most powerfully is that that war is a dead ringer for the ones we’re fighting today – even though Alexander was pre-Christian and his enemies were pre-Islamic.  In other words, the clash of East and West is at bottom not about religion. It’s about two different ways of being in the world. Those ways haven’t changed in 2300 years. They are polar antagonists, incompatible and irreconcilable.

He then discusses the following:

He discusses this theory on his blog.

(2)  Another perspective, the big picture about our war with tribes

Presfield’s sociological analysis of tribes in general, and specifically in Afghanistan, I leave for relevant experts.  For a more sophisticated description of tribal societies I recommend reading Chapter One of Martin van Creveld’s magnum opus The Rise and Decline of the State.  Perhaps readers can cite other works, preferably online, in the social science literature.

Nor will I comment about his tactical advice for the Afghanistan War, which is beyond my competence to judge. 

However, we can all look at his essay in the broader context of American grand strategy.  Please consider this astounding statement:

“What struck me most powerfully is that that war is a dead ringer for the ones we’re fighting today. … the clash of East and West is at bottom not about religion. It’s about two different ways of being in the world. Those ways haven’t changed in 2300 years. They are polar antagonists, incompatible and irreconcilable.

Economist and businesspeople discuss the Competitive Advantage of Nations (as in Michael Porter‘s 1990 book of that title).  Social scientists and geopolitical experts discuss Samuel P. Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations theory.  But Pressfield goes beyond these.  In effect he calls for a long war.  War between “polar antagonists, incompatible and irreconcilable” — perhaps running until one side is exterminated or conquered. 

Using Alexander’s invasion of Afghanistan as a paradigm raises as many questions than it answers.  What were Alexander’s reasons for invading Afghanistan?  Nothing rational, little more than love of war, power, and loot.  Do we have such aggressive motives?  Or do we fight legally under the international laws we both promulgated and signed, which means acting only in defense? 

Answering that requires a clear statement of the threat the tribes of Afghanistan pose to us.  Victory is impossible without a clear understanding of the threat and our goals. How can the tribes be enemies without a strong understanding of this?

It is the missing link of the war, as I have not found anything like this from someone with actual area expertise (not just by COIN or geopolitical gurus).  The closest I have seen is Pakistan on the Brink by Ahmed Rashid (a Pakistani journalist) in the 11 June 2009 issue of The New York Review of Books, many of whose assertions are contradicted by other experts on the subject.

I believe that America’s greatest enemies are not Afghanistan’s tribes, or fundamentalist Islam.  Pressfield’s explicit assumption that the Afghanistan tribes are our enemies show the core threat:  our own hubris and paranoia.  For more about this see

(3)  Today’s featured viewing selection

Pressfield’s videos, from the website War and Reality in Afghanistan

This five-part series is about war in Afghanistan, ancient and modern. Each video is 5 minutes long. I’m not doing this for money. I have no political axe to grind. I’m a Marine and I don’t want young Marines and soldiers going into harm’s way without the full mental arsenal of history and cultural context.

What’s my thesis? That the enemy in Afghanistan today (and in Iraq and Pakistan) is not Islamism or jihadism. It’s tribalism.  The tribal mind-set (warrior pride, hostility to all outsiders, perpetual warfare, the obligation of revenge, suppression of women, a code of honor rather than a system of laws, extreme conservatism, unity with the land, patience and capacity for hatred) permeates everything in Afghanistan and its neighboring Islamic republics. For war-making or peace-making, it cannot be ignored.

Think of these videos as a crash course in tribalism. Start with Episode 1. I invite discussion. Tell me I’m crazy, tell me I’m out to lunch. If you agree, tell me too.

Episode 1: “It’s the Tribes, Stupid”

The real enemy in Afghanistan isn’t Islamism or jihadism. It’s tribalism. Mr. Pressfield compares Alexander the Great’s Afghan campaign (330-327 BC) to our own wars today.

Episode 2: “The Citizen Vs. The Tribesman”

Citizen = Western. Tribesman = Eastern. These are two different breeds of cat, who see the world in diametrically opposed ways. Can we Westerners impose “citizen values” on a tribal society?

Episode 3: “Tribes Are Different From You and Me”

What qualities define tribes? Warrior pride, hostility to all outsiders, perpetual warfare, the obligation of revenge, suppression of women, a code of honor rather than a system of laws, extreme conservatism, unity with the land, patience and capacity for hatred.

Episode 4: “Fighting a Tribal Enemy”

Lessons from Alexander, the Brits, the Russians. What qualities make tribal fighters such formidable opponents—and how can they be beaten?

Episode 5: “How to Win in Afghanistan”

History’s lessons point to a radical method of war-fighting and peace-making, quite different from what the U.S. currently has in play. As Rod Serling used to say, “submitted for your approval.”

Hat tip on these videos to Winslow Wheeler, a Director at the Center for Defense Information.

(4)  Reviews and rebuttals on other sites, plus background info

A.   Joshua Foust gives a rebuttal

These are posted at Registan — “All Central Asia, all the time.”

  1. Steven Pressfield Thinks All Wars in South Asia Are The Same, 9 June 2009
  2. Steven Pressfield on “The Tribesman”, 9 June 2009
  3. Argh. More Praise for Pressfield, 12 June 2009

He posted a comment at Pressfield’s blog, the best brief analysis I’ve seen of Pressfield’s theory.  I recommend reading it.  Excerpt:

“The Taliban is not tribal. In fact, it is explicitly NON-TRIBAL, and explicitly pan-Islamist. They fight for their version of Islam, to convert Afghanistan into a Islamist state. Ditto al Qaeda: their ultimate ideology isn’t some animalistic sense of tribalism the way you describe it, but pan-Islamism.”

{Update: I deleted the 2 comments from at Registan that were shown here}

B.  An analysis by Zenpundit

“Pressfield’s Reified Tribalism”  (well worth reading).  His analysis is at the end of the post.  Excerpt:

What Pressfield gets horribly wrong is the discounting of the religious radicalism aspect as being superceded by atavistic, superempowered, Ur-tribalism. Umm, no and not at all. The neo-fundamentalist Salafi and Deobandi Islamist radicals are, as Josh correctly argued, pan-Islamist militants who are deeply hostile to tribal customs and authorities they view as “jahiliyyah”, un-Islamic or even blasphemous apostasy. … Tribesmen and Islamist radicals are not natural allies unless we put them in that position …

C.  Valuable background reading about tribes

  1. “How to work with Tribesman” by W. Patrick Lang (Colonel, US Army, retired), posted at his blog, Sic Semper Tyrannis. The date of writing is not stated, but it was included as an large DOD-funded study “Iraq Tribal Study – Al-Anbar Governorate“, completed in June 2006.  (Hat tip on this to Major Scarlet)
  2. “Tribal Alliances: Ways, Means, and ends to Successful Strategy“, Richard L. Taylor, student paper published by the Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College, 1 August 2005 (Hat tip to Slapout9)
  3. Glatzer, Bernt (2001). “War and Boundaries in Afghanistan: Significance and Relativity of Local and Social Boundaries.” Weld des Islams, 41, 3, pp. 379-99
  4. Glatzer, Bernt (2002). “The Pashtun Tribal System.” in Pfeffer, G., and D.K. Behra (eds.), Concept of Tribal Society (Contemporary Society: Tribal Studies, Vol 5), pp. 265-282.
  5. Giustozzi, Antonio (2007). Koran, Kalashnikov and Laptop: The Neo-Taliban Insurgency in Afghanistan 2002-2007.
  6. Shahrani, Nazif (2002). “Factionalism, and the State in Afghanistan,” American Anthropologist, Vol. 104, No. 3.

Nbrs 3 -6 are from Foust at Registan.

(5)  About the author

From Wikipedia:

He is an American novelist and author of screenplays, principally of military historical fiction set in classical antiquity.

His historical fiction is well-researched, but for the sake of dramatic flow, Pressfield may alter some details, like the sequence of events, or make use of jarring contemporary terms and place names, his stated aim being an attempt to capture the spirit of the times. To enhance his readers’ immersion in ancient times, Pressfield typically writes his novels from the point of view of the characters involved. For instance, The Virtues of War is told from the first-person perspective of Alexander.

His epic novel Gates of Fire is required reading at the U.S. Military Academy and the Virginia Military Institute, and according to the L.A. Times, “has achieved cult status among Marines.”

Pressfield served in the United States Marine Corps in the 1960s, and later graduated from Duke University.

T.X. Hammes (Colonel, USMC, retired), author of The Sling and the Stonesays this about Pressfield (source):

Steven Pressfield is known to a generation of Marines for his book The Gates of Fire. In that work, he captured the essence of why western soldiers fight. With this video series, Pressfield draws on his research for The Afghan Campaign to provide essential insights into why tribal warriors fight. He discusses the unchanging aspects of two millenniums of western experiences fighting Afghan tribal warriors. He explains why, for very good reasons, western ideas about government simply do not apply to these tribal peoples.

(6)  Reviews of his books

Reviews by Chet Richards (Editor of DNI, Colonel, USAF, retired):

(7a)  Afterword

Please share your comments by posting below.  Per the FM site’s Comment Policy, please make them brief (250 words max), civil, and relevant to this post.  Or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com (note the spam-protected spelling).

For information about this site see the About page, at the top of the right-side menu bar.

(7b)  For more information from the FM site

To read other articles about these things, see the FM reference page on the right side menu bar.  Of esp interest these days:

Posts about our wars in Afghanistan:

  1. Scorecard #2: How well are we doing in Iraq? Afghanistan?, 31 October 2003
  2. Quote of the day: this is America’s geopolitical strategy in action, 26 February 2008 — George Friedman of Statfor on the Afghanistan War.
  3. Another perspective on Afghanistan, a reply to George Friedman, 27 February 2008
  4. How long will all American Presidents be War Presidents?, 21 March 2008
  5. Why are we are fighting in Afghanistan?, 9 April 2008 — A debate with Joshua Foust.
  6. We are withdrawing from Afghanistan, too (eventually), 21 April 2008
  7. Roads in Afghanistan, a new weapon to win 4GW’s?, 26 April 2008
  8. A powerful weapon, at the sight of which we should tremble and our enemies rejoice, 2 June 2008
  9. Brilliant, insightful articles about the Afghanistan War, 8 June 2008
  10. The good news about COIN in Afghanistan is really bad news, 20 August 2008
  11. Stratfor says that our war in Pakistan grows hotter; Palin seems OK with that, 12 September 2008
  12. Pakistan warns America about their borders, and their sovereignty, 14 September 2008
  13. Weekend reading about … foreign affairs, 19 October 2008
  14. “Strategic Divergence: The War Against the Taliban and the War Against Al Qaeda” by George Friedman, 31 January 2009
  15. America sends forth its privateers to pillage, bold corsairs stealing from you and I, 9 February 2009  
  16. New bases in Afghanistan – more outposts of America’s Empire, 21 May 2009
  17. The simple, fool-proof plan for victory in Afghanistan, 1 June 2009
Exit mobile version