"The Folly of 'Asymmetric War' " is the title

[Ken White]

of this Article (LINK) in the Washington Quarterly.

It strikes me as more political and ideological polemic than an exposition of 'strategic thought' and it seems to succumb to the myth that by ignoring minor annoyances and concentrating on MCO, all will be well. Admittedly, the author provides plenty of caveats to give himself some wiggle room but if this is an example of strategic thought at the NWC, I think I'm worried...

[Mark O'Neill]

Ken,

I am in 100% agreement with you. Here is how I treated Mazarr's piece at the Lowy Institute's blog, The Interpreter, a few weeks ago:

http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/....aspx#continue

The rigour of thought displayed, understanding of the subject matter and the quality of the 'logic' was sadly lacking.

What is of equal concern to me is the fact that the article would have been peer reviewed. Material like this leaves those of use in the Military/ Strat / Academic community with little ground to stand on when we want be to be critcial of of dodgy reporting and analysis by journalists. If the 'professionals' are so inane, what hope others?

Cheers

Mark

[Ken White]

Strange fish in the sea...

[Bill Moore]

Mark, great review, but as you state the article still has merit. I strongly encourage members to read the article Ken posted and your review. Bill

[Hacksaw]

is sadly a growing industry. It always chafes my cheeks when someone who knows better uses asymetry in this manner.

Mark - perhaps the title of your review should have been "The Folly of False Dilemmas.

Live well and row

[MikeF]

Dr. Gordon McCormick argues that in the beginning, a small war is symmetric in nature. The state has an overwhelming advanatage in force structure (i.e military/police capability). Conversely, the counter-state(partisan or insurgent force) has the overwhelming information advantage (i.e. the counter-state can see the government, but the government cannot see him).
Initially, these comparative advantages are equal.

The conflict does not become assymetric until one side gains a significant advantage over the other- either the state gains significant intelligence over the insurgent or the insurgent degrades the military/police capability of the state.

Just another way to look at it.

v/r

Mike