Kinetic vs Empathetic Warfare

[TROUFION]

"Meeting with his North Vietnamese counterpart, described by McNamara as "a wonderful man named Thach," almost 30 years after pulling out of Vietnam, Thach still insisted that America's mission was to colonize and enslave the Vietnamese. Thirty years later, McNamara couldn't convince his former enemy that we believed we were there to protect them from Communist control. In all those years of conflict and killing on both sides, we had never successfully communicated to our enemy why we were fighting and killing them, and we were unable to empathize with what they were experiencing as a civil war. Thach felt they were fighting for their independence and we were fighting to enslave them. Total misunderstanding is the result of failure to empathize. We must learn to find out why we're so hated and make an attempt to understand each other."--Dr. Wayne W. Dyer

Empathetic vs Kinetic Warfare

Kinetic Warfare: warfare that resembles weapons which achieve their
destructive effect by the shear force of their impact; distinguished
in the terminology of modern warfare, from those which do damage by
blast and heat or arrival at the target. (U.S. Joint definition).

Empathetic warfare: To attack the willpower and resistance capacity of
an opponent through the capacity to understand, being aware of, being
sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts,
and experiences of an enemy of either the past or present without
having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in
an objectively explicit manner. (Definition taken from NPS Thesis Progressive Reconstruction).

My intent here is to discuss a potential difference in warfighting technique. Although it could just be a fancy way to say know thy enemy.
-T

[Rob Thornton]

On page 125 of Ori Brafman's and Rod Beckstrom's The Starfish and the Spider, the term Emotional Intelligence is introduced. The chapter its found in focuses on describing the hidden power of the catalyst.

I found this concept an interesting way to consider empathy - as a tool for understanding the situation as the other guy sees it within the context of its application to security matters (or anything you choose to apply it to).

When dealing with people, who are subject to emotions and rationalize with some degree of bias, I think this is very useful. In some jobs it may be critical (such as an advisor) as it helps you understand the "why" of certain actions, build trust and possibly help divine intent and.... advise.

[Jedburgh]

....from a NPS thesis hosted on SWJ: Progressive Reconstruction: A Methodology for Stabilization and Reconstruction Operations

...At issue is the fundamental nature of the American way of war. In a traditional war, or a conventional military expedition, with a major peer competitor, where the object is purely self-defense of the United States, our national interests, or our allies, decisive combat operations are designed to rapidly destabilize and destroy the enemy’s capacity to wage offensive war. This is often referred to as kinetic warfare, which denotes warfare that resembles and utilizes weapons that achieve their destructive effects by the shear force of their impact. However, in more common low-intensity conflicts that may or may not involve conventional warfare, such as Somalia and Kosovo, an approach that relies on kinetic force as the principle activity is not appropriate. A different approach is needed, one that must account for the realities of conventional warfare but where the end state is to stabilize and reform the state vice destroy and destabilize an adversary. This is an “empathetic warfare” approach that denotes warfare that attacks the willpower, the moral and physical capacity for resistance of an opponent through the cognitive dimension, the knowledge and understanding of who he is and how and why he fights.

American forces are experts in kinetic war, but far less so in empathetic war. In the post-September 11th era, a lack of understanding of the opposition has generated new problems for nation states intervening in failed or failing states and regime change characterized by a loss of government control....

[TROUFION]

Full disclosure, I wrote the NPS Thesis Progressive Reconstruction, didn't think anyone actually read it!

I only utilize TROUFION because I do not want anything I write here to be misinterpreted as a statement for my service. These are my opinions only. That and because I like the idea that it means 'footslogger' and also 'fool' all in one. Sometimes I can be a bit of both.

That said I am interested in what folks think of the concept of Empathetic War. I just didn't want to create an excess of circular logic by not stating my involvment with its generation.

-Karl Rohr aka TROUFION

[astyanax]

Interesting.

There has been an on-going debate between these two fellows on how to defeat Islamicism:

Robert Spencer, Jihadwatch.org
Spengler, Asia Times

R. Spencer seems to argue for the Kinetic approach, whereas Spengler argues we must understand not just our opponent's context but also his psychological state. In other words, Spengler also argues for an 'Empathetic' approach.

He particularly advocates using the mediums of poetry and theology to better understand one's enemy.

[TROUFION]

Expanding the argument--

Empathetic warfare or "warfare that attacks the willpower, the moral and physical capacity for resistance of an opponent through the cognitive dimension, the knowledge and understanding of who he is and how and why he fights." is the principle method of war utilized by physically weaker forces. The guerilla can cause damage far beyond the size and strength of his forces applied by relying on 'emotional contagion' and 'terrain amplification or multiplication.'

Emotional Contagion- a human response to facial expression, body language & tone of other humans that causes a person to have an involuntary empathic reaction. For example a smile can cause other humans to be happy as a sneer can cause anger.

Terrain Amplification & Multiplication--Using terrain to mask and or amplify your force size and strength, generally causing it to seem larger and more effective than it actually is. The goal of any good ambush or guerilla force action. Taken in conjunction with emotional contagion the shock of an ambush or perceived ambush can cause a negative (ambushee) or positive (ambusher) emotional response either increasing or decreasing fear.

*This is the goal of all IED and other surprise type attacks.

Western militaries tend to focus on the physical differences and similarities between ourselves and our enemy. COG, CV's, priority and high payoff targets most often reflect the physical hard targets: tanks, training camps, command and control nodes, weapons caches etc. It is harder for us to grasp or to target the will and level of fear/respect of local influencers. This is what insurgents do best.

-T