Dilemmas of the involvement of Anthropology in War: The case of the Human Terrain System

The involvement of anthropology in warfare has a long history. Anthropologists’ performance helps to bridge the gap of cultural awareness of the military in wartime, providing soldiers an understanding of foreign local cultures where they deploy. The establishment of the Human Terrain System is also within the purpose, aiming to fulfill the need of conducting anthropology research on the life of Iraqis and Afghans for the sake of wars in which the United States has involved. This paper attempts to provide a deep look at dilemmas of the involvement of anthropology in wars through systematically reviewing criticism imposed on the Human Terrain System, which is seen as the most controversial program in the history of American anthropology. The Human Terrain System was put under pressure on nine aspects comprising: organizational, financial, institutional, professional, military-strategic, methodological, scholarly, ethical, political. Ethical debates have focused on whether the Human Terrain System achieves golden principles “do no harm” and “informed consent” in anthropology research on battlefields. The advocates claimed that what the organization did is consistent with codes of ethics, whereas the majority of anthropologists violated the codes. Furthermore, what the Human Terrain System did has been considered as challenges for anthropologists and generated negative effects on the anthropological profession.