zenpundit.com

To continue the review of the  Boyd and Beyond 2013 Conference, Day II. ForDay I go here.

0800-0900 Major Jeremy Renken “A Theory of Strategy”

“War is a communicative act”

The theoretical heavy lifting of the conference was done by Major Renken, who filled an enormous whiteboard with diagrams and notes, an address about the nature of strategy that needs to become a journal article. Declaring that “theory must be more than categories” and “explain and predict”, Renken methodically laid out a paradigm he described as a “prism of efficacy” for constructing strategy and engaged in a lively Q&A for more than an hour.  One of the best presentations at Boyd & Beyond 2013 and I hope that Renken goes on to fully develop and publish his thesis or work it into a book. There needs to be more questioning of old assumptions

0915-1000 LTC Bob Weiman ” Strategic Legalism: Indicator of Bad Strategy According to Boyd

” If I had a dollar for every time in this room when we talked of ‘commander’s intent’ I could have retired on the Commandant’s pay”

Another controversial brief. Bob Weiman, one of the original “Dirty Dozen” , blasted the politicization of the military justice system under the Bush and Obama administration and the effects of illegal command influence to try to  secure the “right” verdicts to satisfy domestic civilian political needs – a doctrine he called “Strategic Legalism”. This is a kind of lawfare waged by national leadership against their own troops, defined as “…the use of laws or legal arguments to further larger policy objectives regardless of the facts or laws”. Numerous case studies, but especially the Haditha trials were examined.

1015-1115 Carlos Balarezo & Robert Paterson ” Get inside your own OODA Loop: A Practical Tool”

 “With the world wide web,what happened 100,000 years ago in a tribe of 35 ppl is now happening globally.”

Balarezo and Paterson discussed the meta-history of human society in terms of revolutions in energy systems and their corresponding evolution in institutions and the death or downward spiral  that comes when a tipping point is reached of approximately 15% their prime flows ( revenue, talent etc.) are removed.  The Social network can be leveraged to empower individuals under the thumb of old, machine age, bureaucratic institutions and Balazero and Paterson are developing such a network for health, diet and preventive medicine.

1145 -1245 Dave Diehl “Boyd and the Cyber Domain”

” The tools behind the tools move mountains…..what deep strategic errors have we made?”

Diehl, the self-described “tool-using primate’ at his software enterprise ( a post above chief software architect) gave a strategic overview of the inherent tensions in designing cyber security between providing a high assurance system ( incredibly hard, very expensive, constraining) and a low assurance system that permits user creativity and evolving capabilities ( easier, flexible, cheaper but far less secure). Diehl also explained that this mismatch had to be addressed with active defense over three time frames, human, cyber and digital with a correct ( but counter-intuitive to industry) alignment of design capabilities with problems.

1300-1400 Dr. Jim Roche “Boyd, Neuroscience and the Decision Cycle”

” Implicit guidance and control…..is about trust” 

Roche put the history and structure of Boyd’s OODA Loop in the context of recent findings of neuroscience  and brain research, the automaticity of some decision making, chunking of information and other aspects of neural processing.

1415-1515 Pete Turner and Dr. Rich Ledet ” Mass Communications in Support of Political Development”

“You have to win politically, culturally and socially….we did not test our message with the locals” 

Offering a serious dose of “ground truth” at the village, district and provincial level in Afghanistan, Turner and Ledet made a sharp critique of US programs in Afghanistan that was congruent with LTC Dziengeleski’s perspective from Kabul. The interaction between ISAF commanders and local political authorities, provincial notables and elders have been marked by conflicting messages, poorly designed incentives, social distance and insular orientation to satisfying faraway military bureaucracy.  Turner and Ledet call for genuine and independent empiricism in evaluating and modifying assistance programs based on F2F, often qualitative, assessment.

The conference then, after a wrap-up by Colonel Stan Coerr,  adjourned for a tradition known as “Boyd& Beer” graciously hosted by J. Scott Shipman and his lovely wife Kristen, where the convo continued long into the night over delicious food and drink.

One of the best Boyd conferences ever.

[ by Charles Cameron — a brief meditation on word and image ]
.

Flags have been in the news quite a bit recently. There were the Marine Corps and Confederate flags carried by the protester outside the White House in the upper panel below:

and the flag some protesting Native American (Lakota?) grandmothers took from the white supremacists who hoped to establish a community of the like-minded in the tiny town of Leith, North Dakota — in what one account called an improv “game” of “capture the flag”.

So that’s two protests, right there. But the title of this post suggests it will concern “four flags and two tees” — and thus far I have mentioned three flags. The fourth is the flag worn as a tee-shirt decoration by one of the Grandmothers, and as shown below (upper panel) it is in fact the flag of the American Indian Movement:

while by way of contrast, the tee worn by the confederate-and-marine-flags chap is a logo rather than a flag — it’s a Southern Thread Men’s Special Deluxe Art Tee to be exact. As the ad says:

Alone or under a snap front shirt or a button down, you can show your southern roots or the vintage inspired western look.

**

My mind is a side-winder, as you know, so all this thinking about flags and logos got me thinking too about the Logos (or Word of God) and his standard.

When the Emperor Constantine, for better or worse, co-opted Christianity or converted to it or both, his battle cry in hoc signo vinces (or in this sign you will conquer in late Barbarian, in case that’s your maternal tongue) raised the chi-rho as the sign, ensign, or battle flag — the logo if you will — of the newly baptised Roman Empire. The chi-rho — ☧ — combining the first two letters of the Greek word Christos, and meaning the Anointed One.

**

Flags and mottos are consequential things. Which comes first: the image, or the word?

“I was an up-and-comer in the Air Force. I was selected early for Major. I was selected early for Lieutenant Colonel. And then I met John Boyd….”
– Jim Burton

In terms of depth and intellectual firepower, Boyd & Beyond 2013 was among the best of the conferences dedicated to the memory and strategic legacy of Colonel John Boyd. Every presentation was good and at least four ventured into the realm of outstanding.  Spanning two roughly twelve hour days, there was enough time for speakers to engage in a genuine give-and-take with the audience and for general debate to flow.  Conference organizers LTC  Colonel Stan Coerr and J. Scott Shipman deserve thanks and recognition for the success of the conference that saw participants from all service branches, the intelligence community, the defense industry, academia, the professions, scientists, private sector, retirees, students and special guests Col. Jim Burton and Mary Ellen Boyd, daughter of Colonel John Boyd.

See a superb photographic presentation of Boyd & Beyond 2013 by John Davis here.

The two day agenda:

0730 Introduction – Stan Coerr, master of ceremonies…. 

Stan kept everything focused and moving, kept us fed and did much of the behind the scenes trouble-shooting

0800-0900 Michael Niehuser  ” The Colonel John R. Boyd Oral History Project”

“Do something strikingly original…”

This was a fantastic kick-off to the conference. Niehuser is interviewing Boyd acolytes, associates and adversaries and creating transcripts of their recollections of John Boyd as a theorist, fighter mafia guru and military reformer. Niehuser discussed his interviews and then let the stories speak for themselves.  This needs to become a book!

0920-1020 LTC Francis J. H. Park, PhD ” How the USMC Came to Maneuver Warfare” 

“Maneuver warfare is a religion….”

Park, an active duty US Army strategist spoke for an hour plus without notes on the evolution of maneuver warfare in the USMC from an idea to an insurgency by the “Dirty Dozen” ( a group including presenter Bob Weiman and future General James “Mad Dog” Mattis) to doctrine. Then came the test of battle – coalition operations during the Gulf War – and the degree to which a Boyd influenced concept was involved in the first defeat of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. A tour de force brief!

1040-1140 Col. Jim Burton “Recollections of John Boyd”

“[John Boyd] made generals very nervous” 

Col. Burton is the man who famously challenged the Pentagon over the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and whose dramatic resignation in protest caused Congress to force a re-design on the Department of Defense so that the carrier would be something more than a rolling crematorium for the men inside. A close associate of John Boyd and the subject of nightly Boyd phone calls, Burton spoke on the occasion of his donation of  his private papers to the John Boyd Archive located at the Al Gray Center.

1215-1315 Michael Moore “Boyd and the Big Picture”

“Magicians fool us when we accept their starting points. Boyd was not fooled; he did not accept that the superior MiG15 was beaten by the F86 because of some ‘magic’. Boyd dug. And he came up with the OODA. With one way of re-picturing the OODA, we can go beyond what Boyd has left us…” 

British psychologist Michael Moore’s presentations nudge his listeners to insight, parceling out clues modeled on Boydian theory, moving from physical periphery to moral center.

1335-1405 LTC Andrew Dziengeleski “Operational Planning in Afghanistan or How John Boyd Rolled Over in his Grave”

“What we have done in Afghanistan has made zero difference….our orientation was wrong…”

In what was the most controversial address of the conference, LTC Dziengeleski spared no one in his blistering critique of American failures in Afghanistan and it’s costs, including himself, apologizing at one point to the audience for not having been able to have done more. His examples were legion and the debate provoked was the most vigorous of the conference and continued online.

1420-1450 Mark Hart “A Graphics Version of Operating Inside Adversary’s OODA Loops”

This was different.Previously, use of Power point had been strongly discouraged at Boyd & Beyond but here Hart used animation to elucidate aspects and dimensions of the OODA Loop, including the famous aerial maneuver used by “Forty Second Boyd” to best adversaries in dogfight practices. Hart has an upcoming book soon to be published, Developing Winners.

1605-1650 Alexander Olesker ” Counter-Deception in the Information Age

“Deception and counter-deception are the same….channels are really important”

In a brief about the principles of deception in the cyber world, Alex discussed “Hacking the OODA Loop” with unexpected inputs, influencing action,  “Bending the map” and the deception cycle, illustrating his points with humor and case studies.

End of day 1 – more to come!

[ by Charles Cameron — two learnings about Hezbollah, in process and with one question each ]
.

.

The trouble with this internet thing is that it offers nonstop opportunities for learning.

I hope my readers here at Zenpundit know by now that I’m an amateur (a lover) of the topics that I write about, learning as I go. I have long thought fard ‘ayn or individual obligation was the key phrase in religious recruitment to the jihad, conveying as it does divine sanction for the deeds properly committed under that license. I believe I first encountered the phrase in the context of Muhammad Abd al-Salam Faraj and his book, The Neglected Duty. It’s my (strictly amateur) hunch that the neglected (pun intended) Faraj should be the object of as much of our study as the far better known Sayyid Qutb.

**

Just yesterday Phillip Smyth posted an extended piece on the Brown Moses blog, Hizballah Executing Syrian Prisoners? – Analyzing the Video, which in turn introduced me to the concept of taklif al-sharii. The key paras read:

In a June USA Today article which covered Hizballah’s involvement in Syria, a Hizballah fighter noted, “Everyone who is sent to fight in Syria has received a ‘Taklif Sharii'”. USA Today added the taklif sharii is “a religious command that means he will go to heaven if killed.” Nevertheless, the taklif sharii is more than just a religious edict which guarantees a martyred fighter’s spot in heavenly paradise. It is a religious obligation put forth by a cleric and must be followed. In fact, it is a form of religious ruling which underpins the Khomeinist ideology guiding Iran, Hizballah, and all of the main Iraqi Shia organizations sending militiamen to Syria.

Augustus Richard Norton noted that Hizballah’s adherence to taklif sharii is a theological legal ruling, “as though commanded by Allah”. According to Mohammed Sherri, an Al-Manar (Hizballah’s official TV channel) commentator, “once a taklif is issued, violating it is similar to any sin, like murder or adultery, or not praying or fasting.” In traditional Shi’ism, the taklif sharii was rarely issued and normally did not deal with political issues. The concept was actually revived as an important Shia idea by the father of Iran’s Revolution, Grand Ayatollah Khomeini and as an important support for his form of clerical rule, Wilayat al-Faqih (in Persian it’s known as Velayat e-Faqih). In effect, the issuing of a taklif sharii by a high ranking Shia cleric, in this case Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei—The “Spiritual leader” of Hizballah and the other Iraqi Shia groups, is a direct order coming from Allah.

So — here are my amateur — still learning — questions: does taklif sharii serve the same function among Shia jihadists as fard ‘ayn does among Sunnis? Are both terms used in both communities? The parallel between the two terms, and the differences between the kinds of authorities who control Sunni and Shiite discourses in matters such as these, would make for an interesting exploration I think.

Okay, that’s the “About taklif” section of this post.

**

As you might imagine, though, Smyth’s post set me reading Augustus Richard Norton‘s piece, and there I discovered another interesting snippet, on another topic entirely:

From the Israeli withdrawal of May 2000 until the eruption of war in July 2006, there was aggressive patrolling, heated rhetoric and periodic episodes of violence by both sides. Most of the armed attacks were in the disputed Shebaa farms. By historical standards, however, this was a relatively quiet period. In general, clashes respected “rules of the game”, which had been codified in writing in 1996 and specified that Israel would not attack civilians in Lebanon and Hezbollah would not attack Israel. As Daniel Sobelman notes, the rules were so well established that officials were sometimes quoted as saying that such and such skirmish was ‘‘within the rules’’.

The Sobelman reference points us to:

Sobelman, D. New Rules of the Game: Israel and Hizballah after the Withdrawal from Lebanon. Tel Aviv: Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, Tel Aviv University, 2004, pp. 67–82.

Okay, here’s second my question, the one about “parawar”. What’s the Clausewitzian term for something of this kind, far beyond politics, “within the rules” yet still not quite war — parawar? The duel comes to mind, too.

So: is there a word for such things?

Is underway – growing longer than I anticipated – which is a good thing.

Be finished sometime Tuesday

UPDATE:

LTC Bob Weiman, who had a presentation on the question of the Laws of War vs. Rule of Law paradigms, that particularly  resonated with me given my diplo history background, had a great review of his impressions that I did want to get lost in the comments section:

Boyd and Beyond 2013…ideas, discussions and breadcrumbs

Another Boyd conference has come and gone at Quantico and this is the fourth held aboard the Marine Base in that many years. The presentations are thought provoking, discussions enthusiastic and the Boydian commandeer excellent.

The conference opened with Michael Niehuser and his work on: “Colonel John R. Boyd Oral History Project: A Search for The Truth”. Yes! About time and long overdue. I believe I spent a little more time with Michael then most and he is definitely hooked on the Col Boyd story and those earlier followers we call acolytes. When he is done with this project it will prove to be exceptional. The Boyd, von Mellenthin and Balck re-invasion of Russia story was priceless.

In my mind, two basic issues are associated with Col Boyd and his compendium of briefs. The first is the existing institutional resistance and skepticism. The second is the incompleteness of Col Boyd’s work. I say incomplete because he did not write his book and that is a criticism I hear frequently from across the informal debating podium. These two issues provide opportunities or gaps that the Boyd Conference participants exploit. As Boydians, the more we discuss, debate, investigate and evolve the more likely we overcome the institution resistance.

Concerning the incompleteness; as Boydians, we find ourselves on the horns of a dilemma. We recognize the robustness and utility of his work and at the same time have an endless stream of questions on his meaning and intent, especially concerning the practical application within our particular professions.

The good news is Col Boyd’s work drops trails of breadcrumbs across everyone’s mental “tapestry” that shows the least interest. These breadcrumbs trails are the guide to completeness. On military side, when I listen to that first incoming salvo of “Patterns of Conflict”, Col Boyd talked about “Tiger Jack”. Major General John Shirley Woods 4th Armor Division led Patton’s Third Army across Europe. The second time I heard “Patterns of Conflict “ the Colonel spoke about Major General “Terrible” Terry Allen Division Commander of the 104th Infantry Division. When asked why the General Allen stressed night attack training when it confuses his own troops, his reply was; “because it confuses the Germans more”. Detailed battle studies of these men and their tactics are needed to determine why they got Colonel Boyd’s attention as good examples.
Another example is Michael G. Moore’s (Integrity Psychologist) work and presentations. Michael has presented for the past three years and he has moved from tracking bread crumbs through the forest to a full exploitation of a gap. I believe Michael is executing (what we call in the military) a “rollup” using Boyd within his own professional field.
During the conference, Scott Shipman mentioned that when he went into the Boyd papers at the Alfred Gray Library, he saw pages of yellow legal pad where Boyd had written a line or phrase over and over and then suddenly changed one word. Here the breadcrumb is the “word” and the trail is the why he choose that particular word.

I think Colonel Boyd would be excited observing us on this mental gymnastic dilemma of chasing breadcrumbs. He would be thrilled because we have all left the role of witness and ventured into the realm of thinkers, analyst and implementers. Well done Boydians, hope to see where you are on your breadcrumb trails next year and a special thanks to Stan and Scott for their time, efforts and hospitality.

Semper Fi, Bob Weimann

Thanks Bob!