A Perspective on Religious Leader Engagements (RLEs)

Regarding Army Chaplains performing RLEs as part of their duties, I'd like offer some thoughts on if and how they could be done...

Should chaplains perform RLEs? Yes (but with caveats I'd like to discuss). The importance of somebody in the command understanding and relating with the power brokers of the country/region in which we find ourselves operating requires a degree of strategic engagement with local civil and religious leaders. We've paid the price already by NOT doing these already. As a CGSC student, I've noticed an increased effort to teach students the merit of understand and engaging the culture of the host nation. Should the chaplain be the person to conduct these? I believe they should be chaplain FACILITATED, but not chaplain LED for the following reasons.
- Besides the Civil Affairs (CA) teams at the BCTs, many unit chaplains have more experience and understanding in regards to relating to other religions and world views than anyone else one the staff. In addition to the title of "Holy Man" which normally earns immediate respect in most of the Middle Eastern countries, chaplains are trained listeners, understand the importance of showing honor, and have an understanding of the commander's intent and unit mission. Although they should not be a "negotiator," a chaplain should be used as key player and "combat multiplier" on the strategic engagement team.
- Regarding the additional time required for RLEs, chaplains are primarily responsible to provide for the Title 10 religious obligations of our service members. So, the question is this: Do we view Title 10 as a start point or end point? Some commanders task their chaplains with multiple additional duties because they view Title 10 as an end point. In other words, Title 10 requirements should be the starting point and RLEs should not detract from providing our soldiers with quality religious service. The chaplain needs to ensure he/she is meeting their obligations before taking on the additional mission of RLEs.
- It's been said that Army Chaplains should not be used to target, be the sole negotiator, or intelligence gatherers for the unit. Keeping the chaplain as a facilitator will help in keeping them in their lane, not becoming an instrument for targeting, and true to their role as the "Holy Man."
- Chaplains can be extremely helpful in catching the idioms or non-verbal communication occurring during RLEs. For example, I heard a story of a conversation in Iraq involving an Iraqi and American general. The American general was communicating to the Iraqi general through an interpreter. In the course of the conversation, the American general use the phrase "carrot and stick" to talk about a possible method to motivate Iraqi troops. The interpreter paused for a moment, translated the phrase, then kept moving on. When asked about the discussion later, the translator said that the Iraqi General was troubled about being threatened by the American. When asked why, the translator said that for lack of understanding, he translated the "carrot and stick" phrase something like, "If you don't do what we want, we'll hit you with a vegetable." Chaplains, having training in cultural communication, can assist commanders in more effective communication with influential civil and religious leaders. It seems a shame to waste not to leverage an asset like the chaplain if he/she can be used to strengthen relationships and understanding between the Army and host nations.
- I've had a couple good chaplain pals take part in RLEs with huge success. A Muslim Chaplain I know especially made a difference in Iraq given his common cultural and religious understanding. American lives were saved and communities were restored as these chaplains engaged the local religious leaders in their respective towns.

That's all for now. Again, these are my perspectives, not official US Army Chaplain doctrine or policy. I look forward to reading the thoughts of others.

Pro Deo et Patria!
Dave Bowlus
US Army Chaplain
Student, Command and General Staff College
Fort Leavenworth, KS

First Blog Topic

     OK, first topic, and it's a hot one: Religious Leader Engagements (RLE).  (We need to try to draw a quick audience.  Maybe starting with a hot topic will help.)   Ton's of discussion going on about this around the Corps.  My thought is that we chaplains should be doing RLE, when appropriate.(I think there's a DA directive out there regarding RLE, but I don't have it.)   In a counterinsurgency fight, the key to the conflict is earning the trust of the local populace.  RLE's can be an important aspect of that effort.  Success in earning the local populace support can also save the lives of our soldiers.  

     HOWEVER, I do believe that there are some powerful caveats to chaplains conducting RLE's.  The governing principles for chaplains and RLE should be the following: 1. The Commander's decision regarding his chaplain and RLE and, 2. METT-TC.  First, does the CDR want the chaplain to do RLE?  If so, then the chaplain does RLE.  If the CDR doesn't want the chaplain to do RLE, then the chaplain doesn't do RLE.  The CDR makes his decision based upon his experience, his visualization of the battlefield and his assessment of his chaplain.  

     METT-TC also governs whether a chaplain should do RLE's.  Does RLE on the part of the chaplain positively impact mission success?  Does the "enemy" set lend itself towards chaplain RLE's?  Are there bridges to peacemakers out in sector that chaplains can help build?  Is the terrain such that chaplains can be utilized in a somewhat safe manner for both him and the supporting detail?  Regarding troops, are there troops available to support RLE without robbing combat power?  Since the chaplain is a troop, I think this is a good point at which to ask the following questions:  is the chaplain capable of conducting RLE.  Does he have the necessary maturity?  Is he trained?  Does the unit and CDR have the time available to flex the chaplain for RLE?  Does the chaplain have the ability to manage the time available to conduct RLE without sacrificing troop ministry time?   Finally, do the civil considerations, especially the human terrain and culture, create a set of conditions that are favorable to RLE's?  RLE's may work in Al Anbar, but not in Afghanistan, or even in Mosul.       

     I totally understand that chaplains doing RLE assumes that we are engaged in a just war and that RLE's can rub us up next to combatant status.  Chaplains who conduct RLE's have to stand firm against pressures, both internal to them and external to them, to cross the line into becoming an intel gatherer.  That's a difficult line to walk at times, but I don't think it means we shouldn't conduct RLE when the conditions are right and when our bosses tell us to.  

     Bottom Line:  I contend that with the right checks and balances like those listed above, chaplains should conduct RLE.  The ideal may be that RLE is a BCT-level chaplain's job viz. a battalion chaplain, but if the boss says "Do it," and the effort meets the METT-TC checks, then I think we can make a huge contribution to the unit mission in addition to our internal RS mission.       Chip Huey

Thoughts??