Summary of The Hearts-and-Minds Myth

Looking for the article?
We have the summary! Get the key insights in just 5 minutes.

The Hearts-and-Minds Myth summary

Editorial Rating

7

Qualities

  • Eye Opening
  • Concrete Examples
  • Hot Topic

Recommendation

America’s efforts to promote democracy through nation building have, for the most part, failed, writes professor Jacqueline L. Hazelton. Her timely essay relates how, in managing to quell insurgencies and achieve relative stability, Western powers have often had to strike Faustian bargains that furthered local elites’ interests at the expense of civil rights and the rule of law. Outcomes in Vietnam and Afghanistan bear out that, in future responses to “small wars in distant lands,” the United States would do well to adopt a less aggressive, more cautious approach.

About the Author

Jacqueline L. Hazelton is an assistant professor at the US Naval War College.

Summary

Nation building sounds good in theory.

The idea that democracy would quash insurrections within small countries underpinned the US military’s campaigns in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

Helping locals establish proper governance and the rule of law would – so the thinking went – foster representative government and human rights, lessening the appeal of any insurgency. A more democratic environment would improve a country’s economic prospects and security for the long term.

But nation building often fails in practice.

The...


Comment on this summary

More on this topic

Ill Winds
8
What Happens in Sudan Doesn’t Stay in Sudan
8
The Narrow Corridor
8
The Arab Winter
9
America’s War for the Greater Middle East
9
The Shadow War
8

Related Channels