Cheryl Rofer identifies strategic paralysis at the heart of the Bush administration, for which she blames the president. I agree, though for different reasons. One reason would be the self-crippling, insularity of the information-flow around Mr. Bush and his key advisers (which ultimately, is also Bush’s fault. A president pretty much gets the national security process he really wants to have). Only part of this distortion is ideological, much of it is court politics to keep control of the king’s ear, so to speak. Hadley’s origins as a national security expert, for example, were in the Kissingerian-dominated Ford administration, yet he reputedly leads the pack to “shoot the messenger” on Iraq, among the inner circle.
That’s it!
Page 2 of 2 | Previous page
Charles Cameron:
November 4th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Shlok Vaidya’s Naxalite Rage article begins half way down page 9 of Pragati, and the entire issue can be downloaded in .pdf here.
Shlok Vaidya:
November 4th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
Thanks guys.
Anonymous:
November 4th, 2007 at 7:02 pm
Thanks for the recognition.
Court politics is always there. Bush’s weaknesses, his moralism above strategy, amplify it.
CKR
Anonymous:
November 4th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Um, and it’s really Michael Mazarr who put it all together so nicely.
CKR
Curtis Gale Weeks:
November 5th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
Mark,
With your prodding, I’ve been led to ask whether “fog of war” and “open souce [guerrillas/war]” are compatible terms. Previously, I’ve used the general and vague term static to suggest that they are, limiting the scope of any sort of open source-enabled activity; but I wonder if everyone else using the idea of open source warfare has made that leap.
mark:
November 6th, 2007 at 2:45 am
Hi Charles,
Much thanks – I was posting at light speed on Sunday morning.
Hi Cheryl,
I should have identified/differentiated Mazarr. I can only plead undue haste in trying to get at least some post up last weekend.
Regarding court politics: Yes, that is always with us but the Bush administration stands out for self-imposed isolation like few others. Compared to Bush II., the Nixon White House had a revolving door on the Oval Office.
Despite his paranoid insecurities and dark grudges, Nixon forced himself to engage with a range of people and reflected on what they said, even if only to disparage them, that analytical mind was working. I get no sense that outside views, even conservative ones, penetrate the “bubble” to be considered at all.
Curtis,
I view ” fog of war” as the degree of uncertainty present in a scenario of conflict and a variable that can be reduced or increased depending on the interactions of the belligerents and/or third parties.
“Open-Source warfare” is not the same thing, IMHO, but as a modality it would increase the level of uncertainty present compared to, say 2GW which was more predictable.
mark:
November 6th, 2007 at 2:46 am
BTW – nice extension of the FM discussion at Dreaming 5GW!
Sean:
November 6th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
wow. thanks for the link, Mark! you are marvy 🙂