"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
Colonel,
How do you classify the post invasion phase? If it is Stability Operations, could some of the operational methods outlined in COIN adapted to a Stability Operation, assuming we are not planning on staying long enough to create a mini-merica.
"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
Argh...not the "phase" word.
Better question, what is the natural human response to a foreign power invading their homeland and defeating their government and security forces? A blend of submission by some, collaboration by others, and resistance by the rest.
That means that those guys with the friendly faces welcoming you? They are high order traitors and opportunists in the eyes of most everyone else. The ones you'd actually respect are the ones who want to cut your throat. But we put the collaborators into power and then wonder why we are soon met with resistance insurgency against our foreign presence, and revolutionary insurgency against the de facto illegitimate regime we have put in power to serve our interests.
What do we call that phase? We delude ourselves that what we bring is so good, and that what we oppose is so evil, that there will be no resistance against us. We also believe that when we create a government that we think will be good for us and call it a democracy, there will be no revolution against it. But we are always wrong. Always.
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
Sir,
Don't think I am trying to inject COIN into other operations, but reality is that there will be something after the fight is done. I am a proponent of the WWII style Military Government until it can be turned over to civilian control. But I am not for the Bush/Rumsfeld "the locals can handle it" attitude that prevailed after we overthrew Saddam.
The Army is loath to accept this responsibility, even though it has been historically our job. "No, the Army fights and wins America's Wars, ... we do not enforce the peace!" Meanwhile, the Marine (the older and more mature fighting force) have been doing just this for years.
OK, now I am way off topic, but I think the concept needs to be a complete "soup to nuts" formula. No disrespect meant.
"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
You can't blame the Army for the President's and SECDEF's decisions. If you recall the Army Chief of Staff proposed a much larger ground force for invading Iraq to stabilize it post conflict. He didn't suffer the Wolfowitz illusion that Iraqis would simply welcome us and embrace a western form of government. The Marines weren't stabilizing the Balkans or conducting any other significant stability operations within the past 50 years.
The Army's new doctrine addresses the stability requirement, now we'll if they task organize and train for it. Even if they do it will mean little if policy makers continue to shy away from military governance. This is an example of point where we fail to use sufficient force or other means to achieve OUR objectives. Instead we do just enough to make it worse, and continue to do enough to make it worse instead of getting completely out of the way and letting locals settle it (it won't be pretty), or using sufficient force to impose our will. The lessons we'll take from this war are consolidated in a highly deficient COIN doctrine based on unsound theories. One could argue they are even based on political correctness.
While no one can predict the future, I hope we don't get involved in another long COIN operation. Frankly we suck at it, and it isn't the soldier or marine on point, it is our system. We just end up getting a lot of our kids killed and maimed, and prolong the suffering of the locals who are also killed and maimed. What do we have to show it for it anywhere? Why not try a different approach? Why are we afraid of implementing military governance when it is the right and humane thing to do?
Between "dominate the enemy" and "stabilize" there is a missing step :"prevent, resolve or defeat the resistance."
As I said up front, a resistance insurgency is a continuation of warfare, and the natural response of a population to a foreign invasion and occupation. One must either be very clear that this was a drive by punitive operation and that we are not staying for lunch, let alone to "stabilize"; or one must defeat or in some way deal with the resistance that will naturally result.
We tend to make matters worse by wishing away the resistance, and then putting an illegitimate government in place that motivates the rise of a revolution to go along with the resistance.
Robert C. Jones
Intellectus Supra Scientia
(Understanding is more important than Knowledge)
"The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)
Trying to return to the topic, and agreeing the the early stages of a revolution is not war, what type of assistance could an outside element provide?
"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
Bookmarks