Customer Reviews

Military Orientalism: Eastern War Through Western Eyes (Columbia/Hurst)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This is a GREAT book.

Taking on those who see a distinct "Occidental" way of war, the author demolishes Western notions of "the Orient". He shows how, in reality, those notions make a hopeless mess of Arab Islamic, Chinese, and Japanese ways in warfare. Next he demonstrates how, in reality, "Oriental" ways of war are often the expression not of some alien culture but of rational strategic thought; finally, he explains how the West has often used its notions concerning "Oriental" methods in order to define itself and justify its own brutal behavior.

Well written and easy to read, this slim volume has something original to say on practically every page. I wish I had the wit to write it myself.

Martin van Creveld

Patrick Porter's Military Orientalism provides an excellent analysis of the recent culturally-focused bent within western military thinking. "It is not a question of whether culture matters," writes Porter, "but how it matters, and how to conceptualise [sic:] it." This is expressed through several case studies: British perceptions and accounts of the Russo-Japanese War, interwar military thinking and the "lessons" of Ghengis Khan (particularly as expressed by Basil Liddell Hart), the United States and the Taliban in Afghanistan, and finally Israel's experience in the 2006 Lebanon War.

Almost without exception, Porter does a fantastic job outlining relevancies, misperceptions, and the 'trap' that is overawareness of an enemy's culture. While there are certainly traditions and beliefs that inform the actions of say, al Qaeda, they are equally willing to preserve their own lives at the cost of their perceived traditions. Porter also goes on to demonstrate how a group like al Qaeda might encourage such unchanging assumptions, as then any deviation from those expectations will easily surprise their opponents.

However, it is the last of the case studies that might be a stretch. While Israel is certainly to be considered a part and an ally of the west, the circumstances and nature of their war in Lebanon is a bit tricky to use as an example of military orientalism. More than some sort of cultural bias, what the Lebanese experience shows is perhaps an overreliance on Israeli military history - a case of generals preparing to fight the previous war.

Nevertheless, Porter's book is an excellent counterpart to those professing to understand the "Arab mind" and other such monolithic nonsense, and recommended reading for anyone engaged in study on the middle east and eastern military history in general.

Military Orientalism by Patrick Porter was a book that I wanted to read as soon as it arrived from Amazon. It was a book that I knew very little about and even a quick search on the web did not turn up much about either the book or the concept. Patrick Porter has borrowed the term 'Orientalism' from authors like Edward Said and tweaked it slightly, although in essence it is still the defining of ourselves by the perception of what the East is. For instance Orientals are duplicitous while we are honourable.

I think at times the book could be sub-titled beware the Cultural snake oil seller, as he does list a number of examples of where cultural 'experts' have got it wrong, including General MacArthur's claims to understand the Asiatic mind in regards to leadership. For me I thought that Patrick Porter was too forceful here, almost implying that culture has nothing to do with the way that nations wage war. He does not say that, in fact his argument is more complex, pointing out that cultures do approach war differently but that military interaction does bring about a degree of conformity. His comments on the Taliban are very insightful when he points out that a movement that was painted as primitive and anti-modern in some segments of the media has embraced technology to prosecute its war. In addition, it has used women as combatants despite its view on women when it was in power.

After reading this book you will look scornfully at the next expert that tells you that an ethnic group only understands force. While Patrick Porter does seem to be very negative on people who have put themselves up as cultural experts where it relates to a military context he does also write about those who got it right, or mostly right. On Japan he talks bout two works, The Psychology of the Japanese Soldier and the The Chrysanthemum and the Sword, as works that did a good job of actually analysing Japan's military from a cultural standpoint. I guess that was where I came away from the book thinking how we, the west, had got our understanding so wrong and Porter was light on explaining how we could avoid this mistake in the future.

As the militaries of the West 'weaponise' culture and discuss human terrain I think that this book is a good warning that cultural understanding is not a panacea, especially if that 'understanding' is based on a perception of 'they' are different to 'us' because they are them and we are us. I recommend this book for anyone interested in how culture does impact on military operations.