March-April
2000
"A Dangerous Alienation: Citizen
vs. Soldier"
Six years ago, Peter Feaver,
Alexander F. Hehmeyer Professor of political science
and public policy, was busy researching "the civilian-military
gap," the cultural divide between civilians and
military officers and personnel.
In 2001, the study yielded a book, Soldiers and Civilians.
Three years later, Feaver and Christopher Gelpi, an
associate professor of political science at Duke, wrote
Choosing Your Battles, a second volume more narrowly
focused on military and civilian attitudes toward the
use of military force.
Perhaps the most controversial element of the research
was a chapter that cited survey data suggesting the
public would accept casualties during a military conflict,
as long as ultimate success seemed likely. "It
captured more interest than the other stuff," among
scholars, military officers, and politicians alike,
Gelpi says.
The two briefed the Bush and Kerry teams on the findings
of their research during the 2004 presidential campaign
and drafted a new book manuscript and two articles
co-authored with graduate student Jason Reifler A.M.
'02.
In June, Feaver, who had worked for the National Security
Council in 1993 and 1994, was tapped for a second stint--this
time as special adviser for strategic planning and
institutional reform. In November, President George
W. Bush delivered a speech at the U.S. Naval Academy
in which he famously used the word "victory" fifteen
times.
A thirty-five-page document, "National Strategy
for Victory in Iraq," released by the White House
the same day, originated with Feaver, according to
The New York Times. Although the extent of his input
into the final draft could not be determined, The Times
drew a connection between the president's rhetoric
and Feaver's research into public opinion on success
and casualties. (Feaver says the report was the product
of a collaborative effort between NSC staffers and
officials in various agencies.)
Gelpi, a Democrat, says that the document and several
concurrent Bush speeches demonstrate "elements
that are consistent with our research." For instance, "the
focus on specific benchmarks and the more candid appraisal
of what has gone right and what has gone wrong." However, "Neither
Peter nor I interpret our research as saying, If you
just say 'victory, victory, victory,' the public will
support you." In fact, Gelpi says, "I think
that our research promotes a careful and thoughtful
approach to foreign policy that takes public opinion
seriously."
In his current role with the NSC, Feaver, on leave
from Duke, is involved in identifying mid- to long-range
issues for the administration and developing contingency
plans. "It is daunting," he says, "to
stay sufficiently abreast of the avalanche of information
that crosses my desk, while also preserving the step-back,
important-rather-than-urgent perspective that is my
explicit mandate." He is involved in drafting
most of NSC's strategy documents, including an update
to the National Security Strategy document to be released
this spring.
|