Most Popular War and Peace Posts
America's Veterans Deserve A Healthy Homecoming
Published November 11, 2009 @ 05:00AM PT
Scott Quilty is a Retired US Army Captain and veteran of the Iraq War.
This Veterans Day, as we continue to try to make sense of what happened last week at Fort Hood, one thing is clear: our country has been deeply scarred by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And, unless we act now, war will continue to reverberate in our communities.
Soon, more than 1.8 million Americans who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan will be back home. Along with their duffel bags and their service awards, they'll bring the baggage of their experience: physical injuries and psychological trauma.
Remarkably, there's been no national effort to fully reintegrate these veterans into our communities, and the consequences—veteran unemployment, substance abuse, domestic violence, and higher-than-ever suicide rates—are hurting us all.
I know, I came back the hard way.
In 2006, I stepped on the roadside bomb in Iraq’s “triangle of death.” I can't remember the flight home, but when I woke up—minus an arm and a leg—at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, DC, I realized that my homecoming wasn't going to be defined by a parade, or a kiss of the tarmac.
Indeed, for all veterans, the homecoming process doesn't last a day, or a week. It's a constant effort that involves peers, entire families, and involved communities.
Starting today, Veterans Day, I am asking you to be a part of this effort by joining the Campaign for Healthy Homecoming.
Together, campaign members are collaborating on the first national plan that details the steps we can take to improve the homecoming process.
We're calling this plan a roadmap, because we're convinced that once all of us look at the complete landscape veterans face upon returning home, we'll be able to map the best route to thriving communities.
Whether you're concerned with the GI Bill and veteran education, or PTSD and veteran suicide, you have the power to influence the discussion that will help guarantee a healthy homecoming to those who have served.
It's time to change the way service members come back. That change starts with you.
Vicarious Trauma Real, But Factor in Homicide?
Published November 10, 2009 @ 05:59PM PT
After the Fort Hood murders this past week, three big questions about post-traumatic stress are revived in the media. Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a psychiatrist who had carried out research at Walter Reed Army Medical Center on post trauma treatment and cared for soldiers returning from overseas, decided to purchase a small variety of weapons and shoot more than thirteen people. And it was not the first time Fort Hood had experienced post-trauma violence around the base.
First, the case has revived discussions about how powerful secondary or "vicarious" traumatization can be. Vicarious traumatization is when a care-giver, psycho-therapist, or interviewer is traumatized from prolonged exposure to their patients' or clients' emotional stories about trauma. It can also arise from living near a fighting area and absorbing indirectly the suffering of others. Professionals, spouses and friends simply want to know what they can do to prepare or treat themselves to make sure that they move forward comfortably or intact. Second, those who live or work with people who have war-related Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) may wonder what factors lead to a manifestation of violent behavior. Fort Hood alone has seen domestic murder, suicide, and mass killing related to soldiers returning or preparing to disembark for the war front.
Finally, and this is the most delicate one, the broader public is wondering to what extent someone like Major Hasan may be linked to external influences which may have encouraged violent behavior. In this case, although in the early days it was seen as an isolated incident, there is new suspicion that Major Hasan was linked to a Yemeni-American jihadist named, Anwar al Alwaki, who not only preached anti-Americanism before the attack at Major Hasan's former mosque, but then celebrated the murders on his website. Fortunately, the Pentagon has already come out in support - at least in spirit if not yet in resources, pressure is needed on that side - to soldiers who may experience not only PTSD but vicarious PTSD. The leadership has also been careful to treat the Hasan case as isolated, not to assume any links to jihadists are sure until proven, and to encourage soldiers not to pre-judge fellow servicemen and women. Stay tuned for more on these subjects here on War.Change.org.
[Photo: US Army]
Coming Soon: War Video Game Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder?
Published November 10, 2009 @ 11:50AM PT
[REVISION: After the first two responses below, I revised this post slightly to clarify the question posed. I've added some notes below on sources and will follow this tomorrow with a post reviewing psychological research on the subject.]
With the holiday launch of Infinity Ward's Call of Duty 2 and Bungie Studio's HALO 3, you might want to prepare your kids for more than their new game boxes. Prepare them for dealing with potential trauma, and reality. While the US military uses war video games to help returning combat veterans cope with post-traumatic stress as they ramp down from the psychological challenges of war, many adolescents are ramping up with exciting and tense shooting games of a different nature.
For starters, watch the many long trailers game makers offer on the sites to get a feel for what players see. The games are more powerful, life-like and gorgeous than ever. A scrawny thirteen-year-old with keen eye sight and a nimble thumb can now very quickly master the Mark-19 automatic grenade launcher, rapel from a helicopter, and kill about three hundred and fifty strangers without leaving the comfort of his Harry Potter bean bag chair. But what will be the toll?
The Next 12 Months in Afghanistan: The Highest Stakes
Published November 09, 2009 @ 08:00PM PT
UPDATE: The post below the fold was my response to the report, earlier today, that the Obama Administration had decided to send 40 thousand additional American troops to Afghanistan. The White House is now denying a decision has been made.
Would NATO Withdrawal from Afghanistan Promote Peace, or Catastrophe?
Published November 09, 2009 @ 06:59PM PT
Over the past couple weeks, I've been reading and corresponding with people who have scrolls of wonderfully colorful criticism about the NATO role in Afghanistan, but few of us have been able then also to recommend a practical strategy which improves upon those options considered by the Obama Administration.
"Jobs for Afghans," a plan posed on a previous post by Ralph Lopez, aims for the Afghan government to win over those who fight for the Taliban for income by having the Afghan government outbid the insurgents and build respectful positions for those who change sides. It's one of the best options brought up here, already something NATO has considered in various forms, but it is only one part of a strategy.
One of the most inspirational voices among progressives these days is Malalai Joya, who was the youngest person ever elected and one of the few women in the Afghan parliament. One of her recent speeches is posted here on a progressive online magazine called, The Mantle.
We can celebrate Ms. Joya, agree with her criticisms that the US-led war to prop up the Karzai Administration has led not to a quelling of the Talaban and Al Qaeda threats and an enhancement of democratic values but to much of the opposite. We can shudder at the thought that NATO aerial bombardments have killed civilians, that continued fighting has destroyed too many communities, and that such mistakes are simply fueling retaliatory violence.
But this criticism, as well as calls for NATO withdrawal, does not necessarily present a path forward for Afghans. Once NATO leaves, the Karzai government will remain without a watchdog, with weakened security, and without funding. There would be an enormous, lawless vacuum. If the current government toppled, what would replace it? How violent would that fight be?
A Crash Course in Palestinian Presidential Politics
Published November 08, 2009 @ 04:37PM PT
For newcomers, here's a crash course in Palestinian presidential politics before the potential election on January 24th, 2010. It will help to demonstrate why the peace process is not only about Israel and Palestine, but also about internal debate. The Palestinian authority has two parties dominating races:
Fatah (the formerly militant, some say corrupt party of Yassir Arafat, now considered relatively moderate and the best hope for peace) and Hamas (the currently militant antagonist to Israel, which encourages attacks against Israelis but at the same time does better at providing Palestinians with social services, jobs, etc, which is why they get votes). There are plenty of other parties in parliament, but none can yet match the voter turn out of Fatah and Hamas...
Rally Behind Palestine's Abbas, Israel's Best Hope
Published November 08, 2009 @ 02:37PM PT
Palestinian President Mahmoud "Abu Mazen" Abbas has reached the apex of his value to the Middle East peace process. He knows it and he's betting everything he has. By threatening to quit.
This week Abbas, the moderate Fatah party candidate who succeeded Yassir Arafat as head of the Palestinian authority in 2004 and is the US government's most consistent partner in the West Bank, has announced that largely due to Israel's persistent refusals to halt all construction in West Bank settlements, that he might not run for President in January. Say what?
From a pro-Israel viewpoint, this may appear like Abbas is playing a political game, bluffing, to try to earn concessions before potentially facing down a hardline, uncooperative Hamas about an alreadly delayed election. Probably true, and aggrevating. But given the alternative candidates available for the Palestinian presidency, this writer strongly encourages participants in the peace process to consider the advantages of conceding to Abbas' slightly painful demands versus losing him, and the peace process with him.
