My friend Judah Grunstein of World Politics Review sent me a thoughtful email on my Demand-Side Security post, and so with his permission, I’m publishing them here.

In some ways, there’s already been a bit of COIN integrated into domestic policing since at least the mid- to late-nineties. I worked on the social work side of a joint juvenile probation-children’s mental health gang intervention program in Santa Cruz/Watsonville in 97-98, and the idea was already to integrate an “armed social work” approach into gang intervention, mainly as a cost-cutting measure. (Keeping kids at home is cheaper for the county than juvie hall.)

I remember insisting at staff meetings that the best way to get kids off the streets is to help them find ways to make money legally. I also proposed integrating some of the more responsible gangbangers into civilian neighborhood watches, sort of a Sons of Watsonville approach. It got laughed at back then, but it was just ahead of its time.

The other point Nathan’s response makes clear is that, as progressive an advance over kinetic ops as COIN is, it’s still hardcore intrusive on the population it’s protecting. You framed it the other way around, as in, it would be unacceptable Stateside. But it’s something to keep in mind when we adovcate for it far from home.

I’m going to think about this and the comments made in the previous post and elaborate a little later.