June 8, 2006
Charlotte Hunter
Training for Diversity: Religious Issues in U.S. Military Operations
Project Report Summary
While the U.S. military still spends much of its training time and dollars toward learning to fight conventional wars, there exists increased acceptance that wars of the twenty-first century are becoming increasingly unconventional or asymmetrical. As the military becomes more involved in counterinsurgencies, knowledge and understanding of allies' and insurgents' religious issues magnifies in importance for all military planners and leaders.
A significant portion of the struggles for success in Iraq and Afghanistan are, in fact, a result of a deficiency in such understanding. While combat training remains the most essential element in U.S. forces' success, there is also a need for training in religiously informed diplomacy to help ensure that hearts and minds are won—or, at the very least, not offended—at the same time that insurgents and allies are engaged. Through demonstration of appropriate religious and cultural knowledge of an indigenous population, suspicion, fear, and the potential for insurgent support can be greatly diminished.
Chaplain Hunter gave a number of examples to illustrate the U.S. military's attitude towards religious and cultural training. The first described a Vietnam-era program devised by Marine Lieutenant General Victor Krulak. When he was put in charge of the training and readiness of all Marines in the Pacific region, including those going to Vietnam, he incorporated counterinsurgency and cultural training and, at the urging of U.S. Navy Chaplain John Craven, ensured that a significant portion of this training addressed indigenous religious beliefs. Craven and Krulak believed that religious and cultural instruction were of the utmost importance in the Marines' future success in Vietnam. The training they put together—which facilitated the Civil Action Program initiated by Marines serving in I Corps, Vietnam—resulted in what numerous commentators have declared the one small, bright spot in America's efforts in that beleaguered country.
Other chaplains continued this training strategy, leading Chaplain Richard A. McGonigal to produce the Unit Leader's Personal Response Handbook. This text took a practical approach to counterinsurgency operations and included explanations about cross-cultural communications. Thanks to this handbook, the Marines helped Vietnamese villagers dig wells, re-establish schools, build clinics and a marketplace, and eventually won their trust and support.
Although the Marines were successful in winning the hearts and minds as a result of General Krulak's training, neither the United States Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) nor the Department of Defense believed the military had time to adopt it on a large scale. General Westmoreland and Secretary of Defense McNamara rejected Krulak's approach, recommitting U.S. forces to a costly war of attrition that hardened Vietnamese attitudes toward the U.S. and contributed to the loss of that war.
Another case study focused on U.S. involvement in Iraq. After the U.S. victory over Saddam Hussein, the U.S. Army failed to secure Iraq and win the hearts and minds of the general population. Several authors have since written about the Army's lack of cultural and religious training, which they believe increased the severity of the failures in Iraq. The Army underestimated the growing insurgency due to the fact that military strategists and educators tend to ignore insurgencies and have not been willing to learn from past mistakes.
Civilian scholars of the military also claim that the U.S. military mission was damaged as a result of insufficient knowledge about the enemy. Some scholars with a military background have even attempted to convince military leaders of the importance of cultural training for all members of the military. As a result, a modicum of cultural training has finally been adopted; yet, religion remains a little studied phenomenon therein and most members receive little training on the religions of the enemy they are fighting.
Chaplain Hunter recommends that military education on religion do three things:
- Emphasize the common values shared by many religions,
- Impart factual knowledge of other faiths' tenets, taboos, and practices, and
- Emphasize the strategic and tactical importance of this knowledge in military planning, both international and domestic.
Religious and cultural communications should constitute a part of this religious training in an effort to find a common language between U.S. forces and the indigenous (or enemy) population.
The U.S. military must adapt its training and tactics to the realities of the twenty-first century, in which religion and culture are more powerful and enduring than weapons and soldiers. Military leaders and planners must be educated about these pertinent topics so that those they lead may, in turn, grasp the importance of religion and culture and the role they play in successfully carrying out the military mission.
Archived Audio
To listen to audio or to view video, please click on the links provided below. You also can right click on the links and choose "Save Target As" or "Download Linked File." This will save the file to your computer and then allow you to play it in your media player directly. More Audio Help.
Related Resources
