zenpundit.com

Just read this profile of Dr. (Gen.) Shimon Naveh, via Soob via Ubiwar.

….Naveh describes his last and perhaps most important military-academic project, OTRI, as a chronicle of failure. “It was a failure of the group and also my personal failure, but in a far deeper sense it was the IDF’s failure. The IDF has not recovered because it doesn’t have the ability, unless it undergoes a revolution.”Naveh, who established OTRI together with Brigadier General (res.) Dov Tamari, draws on imagery from the world of construction to explain the project. “We wanted to create an intermediate level between the master craftsman, the tiling artisan or the electrician, who is the equivalent of the battalion or brigade commander, and the entrepreneur or the strategist, the counterpart of the high commander, who wants to change the world, but lacks knowledge in construction.”Between the two levels, he continues, is the architect/commander-in-chief, whose role is “to enable the system to understand what the problem is, define it and interpret it through engineers.” In the absence of this link, he maintains, armies find themselves unable to implement their strategic planning by tactical means. “Entrepreneurs and master craftsmen cannot communicate,” he says.Already in his first book, “The Operational Art,” published in 2001 and based on his doctoral dissertation, he described the level of the military architect: “The intermediate level is the great invention of the Russians. [The military architects] occupy the middle, and make it possible for the other fields, from politics to the killers, to understand, plan and learn.”

An interesting and to me well constructed analogy by General Naveh that rings true to me from what I know of the Soviet history. Naveh perfectly describes the peculair adaptive requirements forced on the Red Army by the nature of the Soviet political system, especially as it existed under Stalin from the time of the Great Terror forward ( 1936 -1953). Stalin wiped out much of his senior military leadership of the Red Army during the Yezhovschina in 1937 and decimated the junior officer corps to boot, leaving it thoroughly demoralized and rigidly shackled to political comissars who were, like the military commanders, completely paralyzed with fear ( the Red Navy officer corps was basically exterminated en masse).

When Operation Barbarossa commenced in June, 1941, the dramatic Soviet collapse in the face of the Nazi onslaught was due in part to Stalin’s maniacal insistence that Germany was not going to attack and that assertions to the contrary were evidence of “wrecking” and “provocation” – crimes liable to get one immediately shot. Even a high ranking NKVD official, Dekanazov, whom Stalin made ambassador to Berlin, was personally threatened by Stalin for daring to warn the Soviet dictator about Hitler’s imminent attack.

That being said, Stalin quickly realized during the 1941 retreat that he had debilitated his own army by decapitating it and his own judgment as supreme warlord was no substitute at the front lines for what Naveh terms “operational art”. Stalin the entrepreneur-grand strategist needed competent military architects like Zhukov and Rossokovsky to plug the gap with the craftsmen and Stalin not only promoted and protected them, he tolerated their dissent from his own military judgment and sometimes yielded to their concerns. Very much unlike Hitler who could seldom abide criticism or deviation from his general officers or learn from them. Stalin improved as a war leader from interaction with his generals; Hitler did not and if anything grew worse over time – as did the Wehrmacht’s tactical-strategic disconnect.

The above anecdote represents the rich level of depth behind Naveh’s offhand and seemingly disjointed references. There’s a lot of meat there behind the dots Naveh is connecting but the uninitiated will have to be willing to dig deep. I’m cool toward Naveh’s reliance upon French postmodernism but I admire the breadth of his capability as a horizontal thinker and theorist. However, Naveh needs an “architect” of his own to translate for him and make his complex ideas more readily comprehensible to the mainstream. I will wager that few Majors or Lt. Colonels, be they U.S. Army, IDF or Russian, read much Focault these days.

ADDENDUM:

The SWJ had an interview with Dr. Naveh on his theory of Systematic Operational Design in 2007

Dr. Naveh’s book is In Pursuit of Military Excellence: The Evolution of Operational Theory (Cummings Center Series)

Joint Force Quarterly (via Findarticle) -“Operational art”

Jerusalem Post – “Column One: Halutz’s Stalinist moment“

The founder of the famous but now defunct PMC Executive Outcomes, Eeben Barlow has a blog and it will be interesting to most readers here ( major hat tip to Lexington Green but more to Adam Elkus). The link and some samples from Barlow’s posts:

Eeben Barlow’s Military and Security Blog

Putting an End to Piracy – The Only Way

…Surely, someone somewhere must have realised by now that using political correctness as a method of countering piracy has failed – and can never succeed. Water cannons and bean bags have never been a real deterrent – except maybe to ill-prepared rioters. Sending naval task forces into the pirate-infested areas is likewise a hollow threat. Yet, the taxpayers have to fund these navies in order to protect the shipping companies who don’t repay the costs of the naval task forces. In short, it is a great business deal for the shipping companies.Whereas many PMCs and individuals – myself included – have written concepts, plans, proposals and more on how to counter this menace, no one has yet had the courage to implement these plans for fear of international condemnation. International law is in this instance also a prohibiting factor as there is great uncertainty as regards the legalities of having weapons on-board a ship, something that is in reality very simple. But, it seems, no one likes a simple plan. The more complicated it is, the more people like it.

…Even more astonishing is that everyone is keen to give an excuse why the pirates are operating – from the failed-state theory to great poverty. That is, in a sense, much like condoning a bank robber and then making excuses for his criminal behaviour. As long as no one gets seriously hurt, it must be okay…

International Law activists attempting to enforce international law (more of a slippery concept than the MSM presents) are much like the drunkard looking for his car keys under the lamp post. It’s not terrorists, pirates, warlords, genocidaires or dictators or other dangerous and lawless men with guns who consume the attention, time and energy of these generally left-wing intellectuals but instead Western armies, intelligence agents and police who might try to fight stateless brigands. The light is better there, you see.

Fighting Organized Crime

….In South Africa, those that are supposed to police crime are very seldom keen to do their duty. Many of them are, indeed, part of the problem and not part of the solution. Whereas there are police officers trying to make an impact on crime, they are few and far between. Sadly though, success is not something that is evident in these counter-crime actions. Public regard for crime scene investigators and detectives is reaching an all-time low. Their lack of interest in attending to crime scenes is well documented with excuses as feeble as “we don’t have a vehicle…” Visible policing is seen by many to simply be a reconnaissance operation by men in police uniforms before they strike

A worthy add to your RSS feeder or blogroll.

Military historian Carlo D’Este had an inspiring piece up at HNN last week on Sir Winston Churchill, drawn from his book Warlord: A Life of Winston Churchill at War, 1874-1945:

“The Power of Oratory: Why Churchill is Still Relevant”

….From the time he became prime minister, until December 1941, when Pearl Harbor brought the United States into the war, Churchill’s strongest weapon was oratory. As a young army officer stationed in India in 1897 he wrote that: “Of all the talents bestowed upon men, none is so precious as the gift of oratory.”

His speeches of 1940 become legendary, not only for their magnetism but more importantly for their effect on public morale. To counter both the disastrous news in France and to put to rest any notion that Britain might capitulate, Churchill delivered one of his many patriotic speeches to Parliament on June 18 that was also broadcast by the BBC. He made no effort to sugarcoat the extent of the dire situation Britain faced. The struggle that lay ahead from the air and likely from invasion would be met with every means and would be rebuffed. Of Hitler and the nations now under the Nazi jackboot, he said, “If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free . . . But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States . . . will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age … Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will say, ‘This was their finest hour.’

Read the rest here.

Churchill was an inordinately creative military leader, deeply interested in all facets of warfare from intelligence to technological innovations in armaments ( famously a proponent of the development of the tank in WWI) to military tactics. The amphibious landing at Gallipoli was a disaster but Normandy a generation later, despite Churchill’s misgivings, was a providential success. When in political disgrace – mostly undeserved – as a result of Gallipoli, Churchill did not retire to the shadows but donned a uniform and went to the Western Front ! Moreover he demonstrated there exemplary bravery under fire.

Can anyone imagine a politician doing that today? Or the public expecting him to do so ?

In the Second World War, in 1940 -1941, Churchill was the  indomitible rock upon which Western civilization rested. A lesser man as Prime Minister would have taken easy terms from Hitler and made Great Britain a satellite empire of the Greater German Reich, akin to the Phonecians’ relationship to ancient Persia. Few people alive today realize how dire the situation was in the Spring of 1941 and how close liberal democracy came to vanishing from history. 

Thanks to Churchill and the bravery of the RAF, the West had a chance to catch it’s breath.

David Axe of War is Boring has a piece in World Politics Review on 5GW that summarizes the extended journal article “Fifth-Generation War: Warfare versus the nonstate” in the Marine Corps Gazette by LTC Stanton Coerr that I linked to previously:

War Is Boring: U.S. Wages First Battles in New Generation of War

War has evolved rapidly in the last 100 years, prompting historians and strategists to come up with new terms for new ways of fighting. They call mechanized warfare, which originated in the early 20th century, the third “generation” of war, and ideological warfare waged by guerilla groups the fourth.But what about guerilla-style warfare waged by non-ideological groups against traditional states — pirates, for instance, whose attacks can destabilize trade-dependent nations, but who don’t have strategic goals beyond just getting rich? Free-for-all violence, with indirect global effects, represents a fifth generation of war, according to some experts. And when it comes to defeating fifth-gen enemies, “the old rules of warfare do not apply,” declared Marine Lt. Col. Stanton Coerr, writing in Marine Corps Gazette, a professional journal.

So the U.S. military and its government partners are writing new rules, and putting them to the test on the first of the fifth-generation battlefields emerging in Africa.

Fifth-gen enemies do not have traditional “centers of gravity” — armies, governments, factories, charismatic leaders — that can be destroyed by military attacks. By their mere survival, these enemies undermine the notion that nation-states, their ideals and their economies are viable in the modern world.

To the extent that 5GW can be characterized at all, I think both Axe and Coerr are incorrect here because the term “Fifth-Generation War” makes little sense except in relation to “4GW” and the strategic school of thought associated with William Lind, Col. Thomas X. Hammes and others in the circle of DNI. As Axe and Coerr use “5GW” it is indistinguishable from how Lind has described “4GW” since 1989. To follow the logic of the 4GW theory, as Hammes did in The Sling and the Stone: On War in the 21st Century
, 5GW would be the strategy and tactics that developed in opposition to 4GW as 3GW “Blitzkrieg” emerged from the “Stormtroop tactics” used to counter static and linear 2GW of the Western Front in WWI. Without this context “5GW” is just a placeholder term.

That said, the articles by Coerr and Axe are otherwise praiseworthy for bringing the many nuances and potential dangers of rapidly evolving irregular warfare and associated concepts to describe it, to the attention of a wider audience. That’s useful for generating further debate and bringing more sharp minds to the table.  Complex, “hybrid” wars of mixed regulars, insurgents, terrorists and criminals will be here for some time to come and the entire panopaly of the national security establishment needs to come to grips with that threat, regardless of what we ultimately choose to call it. Labels matter less than substance.

Dan of TDAXP, who has voiced his own skepticism about Coerr’s and Axe’s pieces, has issued a call for papers on behalf of Nimble Books to debate the scope and legitimacy of 5GW which will be assembled into an anthology on this subject. It would be nice to have those people who have writtten previously on fifth -generation war a list that includes Thomas P.M. Barnett, John Robb, Thomas X. Hammes, William Lind as well as myself, the cast of Dreaming5GW and others, contribute old or new pieces to that project. Let’s bring it all under one roof for interested readers instead of having posts and articles scattered all over the internet.

ADDENDUM:

Bibliography – The Timeline of 5GW Theory

 Sunday begins The Clausewitz Roundtable hosted at Chicago Boyz, starting with commentary on “Book I.” from On War (Oxford World’s Classics) by Carl von Clausewitz. We have a distinguished list of participants and I am going to crib from the latest post of our host, Lexington Green:

THE CLAUSEWITZ ROUNDTABLE: 

Mathew Borton is a Graduate student of technology at Purdue University Calumet, studying rules of engagement and law of war as they pertain to cyber-warfare. He served with 3d Marines in the late 90s before returning to the civilian world and a variety of technical consulting jobs. Mathew has a strong interest in all things geek as well as a mild addiction to military history and science.

Shane Deichman has spent nearly two decades in the national security field as both a scientist and a manager. He is a 1994 graduate of the U.S. Naval War College, where he was first introduced to “On War”. He spent four years in the Fleet Marine Force as a science and technology advisor. He founded his own company in 2008 (EMC2 LLC, a consulting company focused on emergency management and disaster preparedness). He blogs at Wizards of Oz, Dreaming 5GW, Antilibrary and ChicagoBoyz.

“Fester” is a paper-thin pseudonym. He graduated with a masters in public policy with a strong focus on urban economics and policy analysis. He is interested and fascinating by boundary condition problems and non-traditional analytical approaches, although he worries about the ‘gnossis’ effect of this approach on my thought process. “Counter-insurgency can often be conceptualized as decentralized neighborhood development” is a great beer bash discussion starter. Fester blogs at Newshoggers.

“josephfouche” is a software engineer and system administrator slaving away for a technology startup somewhere in flyover country. He’s been reading military history since age nine and talking about it since his fourth grade teacher, asking a pro forma question, inquired if any student in the class knew anything about the Crimean War. (She got more than she bargained for.) He blogs at The Committee of Public Safety, a group blog dedicated to understanding the subtle interplay of human nature, culture, war, and power.

“Lexington Green” is a lawyer in Chicago. Lex blogs at ChicagoBoyz and Antilibrary. Lex graduated with an overall GPA of 2.9 from the University of Chicago. He has been reading military history his entire life.

“Historyguy99? is a historian, and U.S. Army veteran of the war in Vietnam. After having a 30 year career in global logistics, he earned an advanced degree in history and began to teach. Currently he is an adjunct history professor with the University of Phoenix and Axia College. He blogs as historyguy99 and hosts HG’s World, a blog devoted to history, connectivity, and commentary. He is a co-author of soon to be published, Activist Women of the American West and contributing author to The John Boyd Roundtable.

Critt Jarvis is a former U.S. Army medic (91B), airborne, Korean/Russian linguist (98G), with tactical and strategic assignments in Korea (Det L) and the former East Germany (Field Station Berlin.) Today, a social media platform and communications expert, he is best known publicly for helping NYTimes best-selling author Thomas PM Barnett establish his personal brand as an international thought leader in the field of national security. Now 59, founder of Conversation Base LLC, he works quietly in the background, reducing cost opportunity and general friction for innovative entrepreneurs. Critt blogs at crittjarvis.com, scans Twitter, and has a presence on LinkedIn and Facebook. His personal goal for 2009 is to establish a physical presence in Basra, Iraq, and initiate a conversation that might “educate, inspire, and entertain, fostering citizenship and culture, the joy of learning, and the power of diverse perspectives.”

“Kotare” is a New Zealander with interests in global affairs, outdoor pursuits, reading, and single malt whisky. As a government official he has worked in the national security and nation-building fields. He blogs at The Strategist and is a contributor to Antilibrary.

Nathaniel T. Lauterbach is a Captain of Marines. He fought in Afghanistan in 2004, and in Iraq in 2005-6, each time deploying with the 22d Marine Expeditionary Unit. While on deployment he was responsible for air support operations. He has led three platoons, filled several staff assignments, and served as a detachment commander. In 2006 he was selected by the Field Accession Board to transfer from a ground officer’s MOS to aviation. After completing Naval Flight Training he was designated a Naval Aviator, and is currently flying the UH-1Y Huey. He graduated from the University of Wisconsin in Madison. He is an avid reader of all things military. Nathaniel is married and lives in southern California.

Samuel Liles is a tenured associate professor at Purdue University Calumet, and he is currently attending Purdue University (West Lafayette) as a PhD student. Samuel started his career in the Army National Guard, was inter-service transferred to the Marine Corps, and has worked in two different sheriff department correction divisions. In 1993 he left law enforcement and embarked on a consulting career in information technology and started up the ladder of academia. Samuel is interested in the spectrum of information operations and how cyber warfare realistically impacts the broader scope of conflict. Samuel blogs at Selil blog.

Jay Manifold attended the University of Chicago as a physics major in the late ’70s and became a co-blogger at ChicagoBoyz after attending a blogbash in November of ‘03. His relevant interests are complex adaptive systems, organizational behavior, and risk management; his irrelevant but often predominant interest is amateur astronomy. He is a board member-at-large of the Astronomical Society of Kansas City and a keyholder at Powell Observatory; an alarmingly active member of Covenant Chapel Evangelical Presbyterian Church; and an alarmingly inactive member of the Project Management Institute. He feigns productivity as an IT project manager at an unnamed but easily guessed telecommunications company and resides in Kansas City, Missouri. Jay blogs at A Voyage to Arcturus and ChicagoBoyz.

“Carl Ortona” received his BA from the University of Chicago (still a point of pride) and his PhD from the University of Toronto (including a year in Germany at LMU in Munich). Both degrees were in political science with an emphasis on political philosophy. He has since taught at several universities in Canada as well as in Louisiana. Much to his chagrin and surprise as a stern, joyless Midwesterner, he has found living in the ‘Deep South’ to be pleasant and enjoyable. He is excited about the prospect of re-acquainting himself with (to quote Mark Twain) “the awful German language” and Clausewitz.

William F. Owen is a former British Army. Middle East Editor for the Shepard Group, and military theorist. He is a Clausewitz adherent, and a Liddel-Hart, Sun-Tzu, Boyd, MW and EBO sceptic. He posts on Small War Council.

Jay Parker is a project coordinator who lives in and works from Vermont. His interests include foreign policy, politics, history and generally theorizing about the state of global affairs. He blogs at Soob, Dreaming 5GW and Antilibrary.

“PurpleSlog” lives in the Milwaukee area. He has interests in pop culture, economics, Information technology, information security, national security issues and US public policy (though he does not blog about them all equally). Purpleslog says: “To put it the Ann Althouse way, I am an IT guy and sometimes I blog about IT.” He blogs at PurpleSlog and Dreaming 5GW.

Chris Rasmussen is a social software knowledge manager and trainer within the US Intelligence Community (IC). Chris says “I may be a ‘tech guy’ during the day now, but my educational background is History and National Security Studies. I want to balance social science back into my life.” See this and this about Chris.

Cheryl Rofer’s career has moved from the hard sciences to the social sciences, the hard sciences informing her analysis of international relations. With an A.B. from Ripon College and an M.S. from the University of California at Berkeley, both in chemistry, she has worked on the nuclear fuel cycle, fossil fuels, lasers, technologies for destruction of hazardous wastes and decommissioning of nuclear weapons, and management of environmental cleanups from New Mexico to Estonia and Kazakhstan. Her travels have taken her to both countries, and she is learning Estonian. She blogs at WhirledView

Mark Safranski, holds an MA in diplomatic history and is a teacher, educational consultant and an adviser to a privately held internet platform company, Conversationbase, LLC. He was the editor of The John Boyd Roundtable: Debating Science, Strategy, and War, published by Nimble Books as well as having been a contributor to Nimble’s soon to be released, Threats in the Age of Obama. Mark blogs at Zenpundit. Mark can also be found at several well-regarded group blogs including, ChicagoBoyz, Progressive Historians and at a U.K. academic site, The Complex Terrain Laboratory. Mark is a free-lance contributor to Pajamas Media.

“Seydlitz89” is an American male over 50. He is a former Marine Corps officer and US Army intelligence officer who served in a civilian capacity in Berlin during the last decade of the Cold War. He was involved as both an intelligence operations specialist and an operations officer in strategic overt humint collection. This experience sparked his serious interest in strategic theory. He is now involved in education. He has published two papers on Clausewitzian strategic theory, both at the DNI website. He is also involved in the theoretical application and case studying of Clausewitzian strategic theory and Max Weber’s social action theory to education. He will be presenting at a conference in Cardiff Wales, UK in March of 2009. He is interested in the many connetions between not only Clausewitz and Weber, but also between Clausewitz and Svechin. He attended the Clausewitz conference at Oxford in 2005.

Tim Stevens is a postgraduate student in War Studies at King’s College London, researching strategic aspects of information environments. Aside from studying, and his day job at the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation & Political Violence, he helps run the Insurgency Research Group, is managing editor at the Complex Terrain Laboratory, and writes his own moderately unsuccessful blog, Ubiwar. He’s old enough to know better but young enough to still say “yes”.

Aled Roberts Tien is a graduate of the University of Chicago in economics. He has been working and living in Asia (HK, China and Singapore) for the past 14 years in the high technology sector. He has always been interested in the history and politics of war.

“Sir Francis Younghusband” is a contributor to the current affairs group blog ComingAnarchy.com. Since accepting that assignment in 2004, he has gotten altitude sickness in the Pamir Plateau, suffered through gastrointestinitis in the Tonle Sap basin, been subjected to “exploding” chicken in Chinese Turkestan, wandered lost and moneyless through Shiraz, and most recently obtained a master’s degree in War Studies from the Royal Military College of Canada. Younghusband currently lives in Japan and is preparing diligently for his next adventure

Join us at Chicago Boyz tomorrow!