Beyond Hearts and Minds: Perspectives on Counterinsurgency

Abstract

The classic British counterinsurgency approach is open to widely divergent interpretations. It is often seen as a `population-centric' attempt to win the `hearts and minds' of the local population and defined against the more violent, `enemy-centric' conventional warfare approach. This classic approach has been influential on the US military in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. The apparent poor performance of the British army in Iraq and Afghanistan has caused some to argue that what is required for the post-9/11 period is a neoclassical approach that adapts traditional principles to the era of a `globalised insurgency'. Neoconservatives argue for a more radical revision of counterinsurgency thought that seeks to defeat rather than `appease' insurgents. Both emphasise the domestic threat posed by insurgents and link this to multiculturalism and the failure to more robustly assert `British values'. Anti-imperialists, by contrast, are highly critical of British counterinsurgency's record and the lack of accountability of the military.