Sebastian Junger at the Commonwealth Club

"Sebastian Junger (left) and Tim Hetherington in eastern Afghanistan’s Korengal Valley. Photo courtesy of Tim Hetherington"

Source: Sebastian Junger on War, and the Edge

President Obama was also in San Francisco tonight; how many protesters showed up for that?

I had planned to see Mr. Junger on Sunday, but his appearance in San Jose was canceled. If I had known, I would have made an attempt to go to Kepler's right after Mass. Last night he was in Berkeley, but by the time I got out of work, I was not inclined to make the trip. So I decided to go to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco today to hear him speak. (Fortunately I was alert enough to see if tickets were required for the event. I probably could have purchased tickets there, but it was a rather full audience, which was mostly senior citizens. There was a young brunette there -- a Junger fan? Or someone with a relative or loved one in the military? Two older men sitting near me were talking about tomorrow's event at the Commonwealth Club -- a debate about open carry in California and elsewhere:

Guns in Public: Exploring California's Open Carry Policy

Chief Ken James, Police Chief, Emeryville, CA
Sam Paredes, Executive Director, Gun Owners of California
Professor Franklin Zimring, William G. Simon Professor of Law and Wolfen Distinguished Scholar, UC Berkeley
John Diaz, Editorial Page Editor, SF Chronicle - Moderator

The gun debate is more heated than ever. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled against a sweeping ban on handguns in Washington, D.C., and affirmed an individual's right to self-defense and gun ownership. Numerous analysts believe that this year, the court might be poised to overturn Chicago's strictest-in-the-nation handgun ban. In a majority of states, law-abiding citizens may openly carry a loaded handgun with no license or permit required. In much of California, it is legal to openly carry firearms as long as they are unloaded and visible.

Open carry policies are now being hotly debated. Here in the Bay Area, in communities such as Walnut Creek and Antioch, open carry groups have been congregating at different locations to demonstrate their right to carry unloaded, unconcealed firearms in public. Opponents have come out en masse to protest. There is now even a proposed bill that would make it a misdemeanor to openly carry an unloaded handgun in specified public areas.

As the state struggles with what's right - constitutionally and morally - we take a close look at this controversy from many sides. How do you feel about people carrying guns in public places? Does it matter if they're loaded or unloaded? Is this a justifiable assertion of second amendment rights or a potential disaster waiting to happen? Should open carry be the law of the land?

I was considering attending the debate, but I probably won't. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the audience was against open carry (or guns in general), but the two men talking about it seemed to be more open to the idea. Or at least they seemed "conservative" on gun rights.

Mr. Junger reminds me a bit of Dwayne Johnson, aka the Rock. I don't think he played football for his school, but he said he was a competitive runner. He looks younger than his age. (A photo from 1997 in People magazine.)

He was introduced by Robert Rosenthal of the Center for Investigative Reporting. Mr. Junger talked a bit about his background -- he started off as a war report in the early 90s. He was in Bosnia and Sierra Leone. On 9/11 he was in Moldova. He commented on his attitude towards the U.S./Western militaries, as he was appreciative of what they had done a lot to intervene in foreign wars, for humanitarian reasons. (Including the changes it brought to Afghanistan, which he witnessed. He had seen the tragedies taking place in these lands before Western militaries had put an end to them.) In 2000 he was with Ahmad Shah Massoud, and in 2002 he was with his fighters when they took Kabul.) He think the liberation of Afghanistan was a good thing, but the problem was that the war was "undermanned, under-resourced," as we walked away from Afghanistan for a war in Iraq.

He admitted knowing nothing about the military before being embedded with 2nd Platoon, Battle Company of the 173rd Airborne Brigade. This unit had seen 1/5 of all the combat in Afghanistan. During the course of its deployment it was involved in 500 firefights. Everyone in the unit had come close to dying, and this was true of Mr. Junger himself. He was shot at and a bullet came close to hitting his head. He recounts that during combat he himself did not feel fear, but was instead strangely calm, to the point that he wondered if there was something wrong with him psychologically. But the fear and the accompanying emotional responses came 6 hours later -- PTSD is this phenomenon taken to a greater extreme.

When the outpost known as Restrepo (named after a medic who was killed in action) was being built, the platoon came under attack 13 times. The soldiers lived in their clothes, had no running water or hot food, just MREs. In many ways it was the anti-paradise. There was the threat of death and other unpleasant things. But the book sought to address the question of how men who are subjected to combat and deprivation miss it?

Soldiers are often said to want to go back to a combat zone because they are adrenaline junkies. When soldiers are ramped up and there is nothing happens, they have to release this somehow, and this often came in the form of tension and strife with other soldiers. Combat was not necessarily negative psychologically -- in fact, one feels the most "alive" during combat. What was demoralizing was the downtime, when nothing was happening. Hence, there was a lot of value placed on humor, which helped alleviate these times. (The soldier who was both brave and funny was king of the hill.)

Mr. Junger concedes that adrenaline is a component but it is not a major factor. What they really miss is group inclusion. Adrenaline is a transitory narcotic. What is stable and abiding is the identity of a soldier: the role one plays and his relationship to everyone else, and perceiving that one has a purpose and is a necessary part of the group. There is a security to having that identity. One doesn't have to worry about one's worth and value, so long as one is a good soldier. The soldiers saw their base in Vincenza, Italy as a "coward's land" -- here they were given orders by men who had not experienced combat, and it was disconcerting to them. In Afghanistan what was important was that one was a good soldier, everything else, bad character traits, etc., were just footnotes that didn't really matter. Part of the reason why soldiers can make jokes about mothers and sisters is that they know that these jokes won't destroy the bond they have with one another. They can count on the others to put their lives at risk for each other.

Mr. Junger pointed out that there are guys in the unit who hate each other but would die for each other. What explains this readiness to sacrifice one's self for another? This willingness is more common to family members. Combat experience also made men more emotional -- somehow it enabled them break whatever was holding their emotions back. (According to Junger's explanation.) This happened to Junger himself, who remarked that he could now understand why women cry at weddings.

Junger does have his own opinions about politics and the war in Afghanistan, but he wanted to write about American soldiers. He went to Afghanistan in part to learn more about fear, which the military also studies. He found that the levels of fear are not connected to levels of danger, but to perceived control. The military also studies courage, but this is a more difficult thing to study than fear because soldiers refuse to admit its existence. It is part of a soldier's identity to take care of their own, to risk their lives for their comrades -- "it's part of the definition." A soldier is distinguished from a non-soldier, and being a good soldier is also the minimum requirement for friendship (in the foxhole). What did soldiers fear the most? Causing the death of a friend and fellow-soldier (through negligence or some other mistake). This is why soldiers feel guilty when they go on leave -- they worry that because they are absent, unit strength (and survivability) is affected.

In a combat zone things are rather simple -- one's relationships with everyone else are well-defined, the social dynamics or rules are black and white. He contrasted this with marriage, in which a spouse can get in trouble if they miss the small things (or cues.) In a combat zone any problems affecting relationships are readily understood. People will be straight-forward about their grievances and so on. And when they are not in combat the men will be rather laid-back. Maybe that's why life in a combat zone appeals to the male brain, because it is so simple. (The audience got a laugh from this joke.)

From the Q&A session:
Junger thinks that if the US had enough manned outposts on high ground, things would have turned out better. He believes that a battalion would have succeeded where a company could not, in the Korangal Valley.

There are two options: pull out or do it right. Mr. Junger favors doing it right. He claims that the number of civilian deaths now (due to the U.S. military) are much less than the number of civilian deaths during the 90s, when the Taliban was in control. He doesn't understand why the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom are supplying 90% of the troops. If he could give Obama advice it would be this: the President should give the coalition allies an ultimatum -- the U.S. will stay in Afghanistan for one more year, and if other allies, including Muslim countries like Jordan and Egypt, do not contribute more troops, then the U.S. will pull out, regardless of the consequences.

As for his opinion about whether victory is possible in Afghanistan? He thinks the war is winnable, if there are enough boots on the ground.

He also thinks the rationale for Don't Ask, Don't Tell is circular [poor] logic, because in the units to which the argument about unit cohesion would most apply, combat units, the soldiers do not really care if someone is a homosexual or not, as long as they do not show sexual interest, etc.

The Q&A session concluded with Mr. Junger telling the audience that regardless of their politics, they should embrace the soldiers when they come back. It was reemphasized that the soldiers are a rather apolitical lot--they leave the decision-making and justification up to the politicians; they joined the military to serve their country and their fellow citizens, and this is how they view it.

Re: the sense of purpose and the boredom that soldiers feel when they are not in combat and so on -- would this be helped if they had a better spiritual life? I can understand why members of our society feel like they do not have a purpose. Is the true of pre-modern psychology?

I've read the first 30 pages or so of the book. Junger does not devote much attention to the hardware or the war-making -- it seems that he focuses primarily on the soldiers and their stories. It's written for a wide audience, and not for military geeks, but it is appropriate -- civilians should be reading more about the experiences of soldiers fighting wars overseas.

Restrepo will be in wide release in June -- I plan on seeing it and I hope I won't be alone. The DVD will be out later this year. I asked him if there'd be extra footage, and maybe it seemed like a stupid question to him, but I didn't have an opportunity to clarify since there was a long line of people waiting to get books signed. I wanted to know if there'd be extra footage, since the two directors took 150 hours of footage and made a 90 minute movie out of it. I should ask my friend RHK if he'd be interested in going.



More:

Sebastian Junger on 'War' in the Valley of Death
Sebastian Junger's War by Claire Martin
Vanity Fair: Into the Valley of Death
When Uncle Sam met the Taliban
Sebastian Junger On The Thrill And Hell Of 'War'
Sebastian Junger is embedded with a combat platoon
Restrepo Directors Sebastian Junger and Tim Hetherington: The Movieline Interview

I could have been caught by the CHP as I went home, but the officer decided not to take any of us in. Then I was put in a somber mood by the occasion of something, something pertaining to RHK...

Related: Winners of 79th Annual California Book Awards Announced
Rebecca Solnit, A Paradise Built in Hell
William T. Vollmann, Imperial