America's Most Dangerous Enemy

[Fabius Maximus]

Threat identification and prioritization is critical for many reasons, such as
1. to properly deploy limited military and intelligence resources.
2. to develop doctrines suited for the next conflict
3. so diplomatic and economic policies work to build allies and isolate probably enemies.
4. to mobilize popular support for the Government’s actions.

Who do you consider as America’s Most Dangerous Enemy?

I, Fabius Maximus, say a few words (3,000) on this in Chapter Four of my series on Grand Strategy. As usual, my answer is not what you expect. What do you think of this analysis?

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/fabius_enemies.htm

Links to the previous Chapters appear at the end.

[Jedburgh]

Threat Definition? Hmmm…

China
Billions of people, a rapidly growing economy that will inevitably replace America in both economic and geo-political importance. One of our largest creditors, its technological theft and unfair trade practices are destroying America’s industry. A military confrontation over Taiwan is inevitable in the near future.

Unduly alarmist. Nothing is “inevitable. China’s technological theft and unfair trade practices are certainly serious issues and do cause a degree of economic harm, but can hardly be construed as “destroying American industry”. Regarding Taiwan, a military confrontation between the US and China is a definite possibility in the future, but unlikely in the near term – yet again, to use the term “inevitable” is unacceptable in a real analytic product.

Islamofascism
This mutant version of Islam combines traditional Islam, nostalgia for a long-gone age of Muslim supremacy, and Fascism. Motivated by hatred of western culture, if not stopped it will control not only the vital Middle East oil producers, but also important States such as Pakistan and Indonesia. Large minority populations of Moslems will destabilize other States (e.g., India and the EU). Even small Moslem enclaves, such as those in the US, can act as fifth columns.

Personally, I dislike the term “Islamofascism” because it smacks more of politicized sound-bites than reasoned analysis and true threat identification. This statement is vague and broad-brushed to the point of being absolutely useless in defining the threat.

However, as the article moves along, it seems like these two alarmist paragraphs were purposefully written in this manner to lend justification for what is really an op-ed – not analysis – on US paranoia, hubris, etc…

The last bit regarding Islam is grossly oversimplified and virtually meaningless. The close is similarly so. It is just so much pseudo-intellectual blather leading to a marketing of the next article.

What is needed in “threat identification” is a true threat assessment, one based on real analysis, not completely false ideas of the threat that happen to be populist fancy, poorly informed and emotional public opinion, or the catering of high-level politicians to various interest groups.

Take a look at the paper that SWJED posted in another thread over a month ago. The author in that case took a good look at what occurs when a threat is “identified” in the absence of any truly professional and disciplined threat assessment.

But more than simple threat identification, the article linked at the top of this thread seems to be a critique of the national-level decision/policy-making process. Although this damn sure has a significant impact upon threat identification, it is a separate issue entirely. A detailed study of interaction between national-level policy-makers and the threat analytic process since 9/11 (similar to the WWI/WWII studies in that outstanding volume Knowing One’s Enemies) would make for a fascinating read.

[Fabius Maximus]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this!

As you correctly noted, the first section was a bit of humor -- obviously grossly overdrawn -- to set up the actual thrust of the article.

After reading your comment, I remain unclear in what respect is this analysis incorrect? Paranoia and hubris are in fact great dangers to the development of a grand strategy. Specific examples were given, and placed in a historical context.

By the way, as noted in the article, this did not discuss actual threats -- that comes in the next article. This discussed the importance of clear "observation and orientation" (to use John Boyd's terms).

So I am a bit puzzled at your comment "completely false ideas of the threat that happen to be populist fancy, poorly informed and emotional public opinion, or the catering of high-level politicians to various interest groups"

Perhaps you were still locked into focus on the parodies at the beginning?

I appreciate that you’ve taken the time to read this article, and look forward to your comments.

[Jones_RE]

If we're picking mental states (properly held by individuals and not nations), then why not ignorance? Hubris comes from a misplaced understanding of American military strength - paranoia from a misplaced understanding of the intentions and capabilities of other nations. The litany of American military action abroad (and sadly, also at home) in the 21st century seems to be based entirely around swift triumphs and confused retreats - security forces too ignorant to see the buildup of al Qaeda to 9/11, an intelligence apparatus unable to pin down the location of senior AQ leaders, and again unable to pin down the exact status of Ba'ath run Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs, a military machine sublimely unaware of the building insurgency against them and even less aware of how to conduct itself against an enemy that refuses to commit to fire and maneuver warfare, etc.

[GorTex6]

Wait ... We supported "islamofascists" in the past. Was the blowback anticipated; could they be our cats paw? Do they give us exoteric reason to dominate the geopolitical region in Afgahnistan(pipeline) and Iraq(IE undercut China's oil interests)? Could some of it have been done to counter China's economic ascention at the time of peak oil?

and

Are we benefiting from a Macedonian pipeline(caspian oil) after the Bosnia/Kosovo war?

[Stu-6]

Well as Buffalo Springfield said “Paranoia strikes deep Into your life it will creep”.

Man’s quest for self-preservation often leads to self-destruction. Paranoia is the biggest threat since it makes use enemies of ourselves.