I tend to strongly disagree with the broad east v west gernalizations about different ways of war. They are easy to discuss, however, they tend to overlook most of history. What is generally said to be the western way of war is actually more descriptive of the majority of US military thought in the last fifty years. It ignores hundreds of years of insurgancies, terrorism, small wars, and other variations in US and European history. Likewise, the so called eastern way of war overlooks much of military history in the ME, China, India, and Japan. It is based on a couple books and a handful of case studies.
That being said, there are clear distinctions between the way we think and the way that our enemies think. We need to understand these differences and their origins. I would argue that most are organizational and can be traced back through various social learning models.
There are also broader cultural differences that make it harder for us to communicate on social and political levels with natives of the ME. Our political culture with its Cartesian and Lockeian assumptions is vastly different that the worldview of the Arab and Muslim worlds. These differences not only influence our miscommunications in politics, but also influence the differences in warfare.
Bookmarks