Applied Smart Power by a SEAL

[davidbfpo]

A new thread will appear.

[jmm99]

But why should "the opinion attacks begin" ?

[J. Robert DuBois]

(Moderator added comment: Introductory remarks were on the Hail & Farewell thread: http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=8667).

My long-winded introduction is really just to set the stage for my own personal crusade, which is to help communicate the fundamentals of Smart Power at the interpersonal level. Having spent most of my professional life immersed in cultures other than my own (thanks to an incredibly strong and patient wife!), I've experienced countless incidents in which conflict was avoidable or avoided by improved understanding between parties. The members of this council, above most other groups, must be aware of the tragic consequences when innocent lives are tangled up in violent hatreds.

At the same time, we all have to respect the periodic requirement for "necessary violence" (i.e., in response to a suicide bomber's approach to an entry control point).

I write two blogs and a hardcopy column on this important topic. (Those are ConflictInContext.org and PowerfulPeace.net - I'll try to link the column to my profile. Note that the latter is published as "Jack Oatmon".) I'm also writing a book, similarly titled "Powerful Peace", in hopes of reaching readers across the spectrum to "subvert" excess reliance on force. It will be a sort of global hearts-and-minds campaign, intended to leverage the proactive engagement of citizens in the US and beyond.

Okay. With that out of the way...let the opinion attacks begin.

[J. Robert DuBois]

But why should "the opinion attacks begin" ?

Believe me, I'd be plenty happy not to face heavy fire with my very first posting, but I've encountered resistance to Smart Power as being too "touchy-feely". Folks sometimes assume it's an expression of weak passivity, rather than a disciplined focus on balancing hard and soft influence.

Interestingly, most detractors tend to come from outside the SOF world, while my SEAL colleagues and their Army counterparts generally "get it". Similarly, this Small Wars assembly may also be more receptive to the concepts.

[jmm99]

I didn't get into your blogs for content. Since the post contained nothing exceptionable, I didn't see the controversy. So, in a few bullet points, what is "Smart Power" ?

[J. Robert DuBois]

I didn't get into your blogs for content. Since the post contained nothing exceptionable, I didn't see the controversy. So, in a few bullet points, what is "Smart Power" ?

"Smart power" is a term used in a 2004 Foreign Affairs article by Suzanne Nossel.

She was defining in one phrase a necessary blending of two concepts originally contrasted by Prof. Joseph Nye in the early 1990's. Hillary Clinton (and please note that I'm deliberately apolitical with these references) used the words "smart power" ten times during her confirmation as Sec State. Here is her definition:

"We must use what has been called smart power – the full range of tools at our disposal - diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural - picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of foreign policy."

Nye first coined the term "soft power" in order to describe a tool he believed the US government had traditionally under-utilized: capitalizing on our natural resource of attraction for other cultures, e.g., Japanese fascination with Elvis, bobby socks and baseball.

He explained that we as an institution tend to lean too habitually on "hard power", or the power of coercion. This doesn't mean only a threat of military force, but also other methods of influencing by force such as economic rewarding/withholding or direct manipulation of foreign domestic affairs (look at the long-term results of our early efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan).

So - smart power was defined in the early 2000's as an effective blending of hard power with the soft power defined in the early 1990's.

Among international experts, as you know, there are huge differences of opinion as to how much the super-powered US government should accommodate the desires or demands of less powerful nations.

Where my work modifies this existing controversy even further is in the assertion that it is possible to reach individuals and groups of individuals at a much lower level and leverage large enough portions of influenced populations to upwardly or outwardly influence local systems like government or terrorism.

To sum up, I emphasize that because conflict is often based in large part on misunderstanding and ignorance, and that because innocents are harmed in such flare-ups of "unnecessary violence", there is a direct burden of peacemaking on those of us who can recognize both the vicious cycle and effective injection points at a much lower and more practical level than traditional statecraft.

It comes down to people first, and genuine humility on our part to ever accomplish real progress. The Brigadier who served as Iraqi liaison officer to MNC-I told me, "We need to be trusted. My men cannot trust the Americans when they can't feel any trust in the first place."

[William F. Owen]

"
He explained that we as an institution tend to lean too habitually on "hard power", or the power of coercion. This doesn't mean only a threat of military force, but also other methods of influencing by force such as economic rewarding/withholding or direct manipulation of foreign domestic affairs (look at the long-term results of our early efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan).

When did normal everyday diplomacy become "smart power"? The instruments of state craft are Diplomacy and Strategy, are they not?

I think we need a bit more 15th-16th Century Venice and Milan, and lot less new words and terms to describe things we have done for 1,000's of years.

[Stan]

"Smart power" ...

Rob, Welcome Aboard !

I intentionally will refrain from using Smart and State in the same paragraph

I however really enjoyed the Finnish Institute's use of the term Soft Power regarding Russia's resurgence:

money, media, alliance with the Orthodox church, and even energy

Wonder what SecState thinks of that order of precedence ?

Regards, Stan

[MikeF]

This is what happens when you take a SEAL outta water. They start getting all Dr. Phil and touchy-feely on us. Y'all need to be out hunting pirates.

Welcome aboard Rob. I've never met a SEAL that I didn't like or that I wouldn't give a hard time as the opportunity presented itself .

I'll check out your website and provide some thoughts on "Smart Power." Off the top of my head, I like it. Right now, I'm on a "More FID and Greg Mortensen, Less occupation and GPF" kick. We'll see where that leads.

And, most importantly, good luck down-range.

v/r

Mike

[jmm99]

from DB
You can be sure, though, that I'll be extremely wary about flavoring my Applied Smart Power for conflict reduction with references to a published Marxist! As Paul and John sang, "If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, ain't nobody gonna listen to you anyhow."

and I thought it was because others were deaf - too much St. Paul and not enough of Paul et al. Still you have to admit that Lenin, Mao and Giap were winners in their major armed conflicts.

and MikeF: I will await your incorporation of "Smart Power" into the General Theory of Few Kinetics. Truly that will be a synthesis of thesis and antithesis (in Marxist terms, of course). Seriously, you've been doing that in your writings long before this. Keep writing.

Regards

Mike

[MikeF]

and MikeF: I will await your incorporation of "Smart Power" into the General Theory of Few Kinetics. Truly that will be a synthesis of thesis and antithesis (in Marxist terms, of course). Seriously, you've been doing that in your writings long before this. Keep writing.

Regards

Mike

Mike, glad you picked up on that. I'm actually working things backwards- most write the dissertation then the book. I'm doing the prose first using my experience to challenge Nash Arbitration as I haven't finished the mathematics yet.

It's just like in a divorce. Nash shows the lawyers and judges (arbitrators), how to divide utility (property). Still, the ex-couple is left to deal with the emotions (hate, anger, jealousy, etc...) as the union dissolves. Same rules apply on the state to state level and small wars. Arbitrating conflict resolution or the General Theory of Few's Kinetics. I'll get there.

Mike

[J. Robert DuBois]

This is what happens when you take a SEAL outta water. They start getting all Dr. Phil and touchy-feely on us. Y'all need to be out hunting pirates.

Mike,

Thanks for the welcome. You're right about the water thing. I feel a mounting sense of anxiety as I deploy farther and farther...and farther...from the beautiful, blue sea!

[William F. Owen]

Smart Power?

Not trying to start a fight here, but I'd be a lot happier with a prescise definition equating to general description of activities to judge what is actually being talked about.

...because I am still a bit confused. I do applaud the attempt to recognise that doing stupid things is .... well stupid. These would be being offensive to people undeserving of it, or just behaving badly or even killing people that do not need killing.

Do you really need to explicitly recognise this? Training? Education? Maybe we do, but it has to be prefaced with "You have been stupid because...."

I emphasize that because conflict is often based in large part on misunderstanding and ignorance, and that because innocents are harmed in such flare-ups of "unnecessary violence", there is a direct burden of peacemaking on those of us who can recognize both the vicious cycle and effective injection points at a much lower and more practical level than traditional statecraft.

I dispute that as a useful assertion. It's one possible view, and it is highly context specific. Conflict in not often based in large part on misunderstanding and ignorance. Sometimes it is.
Smart power or even soft power cannot function unless "hard power" is the predominant element in play.

Being fair (not kind. Kind = weak) to the population, rewarding and/or inciting good behaviour, and even offering limited social benefits is mind-numbing common sense - and that is good. All for it, but how does this qualify as "Smart Power?" Why not call "Military Local Government," or even "Local Government."

[Steve the Planner]

I'm down with the genuine sentiments on the population, but I do have a problem with the slogans.

All these conflict zones have a history of sloganeering from their dictators: Arbeit Macht Frei, etc... but nobody quite knows what the slogans mean.

In my profession (civilian planning), I wrote a feature article for Planning Magazine in 2003 that led with: "Smart Growth is so last year...". Got a lot of editorial questioning ahead of then, but, the mixed messages and bewilderment of Smart Growth had solved within a year. We've already done the Smart XXX thing to no ultimate value.

In December 2007, I brought a copy of "Implementation," by Wildavsky and Pressman, a basic text in planning/public administration that tells the sad story of the Great Society effort to reconstruct Watts after the riots. All the money, all the political will, but no results. The implementation phase failed giving rise to a great teachable moment of what can and can't be done, and how to channel and structure good intentions into viable public solutions.

There were only a handful of Senior Planner/City Managers, and two out of three of us brought the same book. One even taught from the book in courses on public administration.

So we listen to a lot of diplomatic/political slogans on soft power, demo/gov capabilities, etc..., and know that it is about the nuts and bolts of economic, societal, political, and essential services expansions. Slogans and concepts are not implementable.

Last week, we had a Planning Conference in DC, during which the UN Under Secretary of the UN's Habitat Group introduced their new book and initiatives on informal settlements (old phrase: slums) from Africa through Asia. Looked like the map of Africom/Centcom. 50% Urban; 50% of those in informal settlements; 50% under 30 years of age. Serious poverty, lack of services, social instability.

The problem is: How do we systematize implementable solutions to these high-needs areas either before or after they fall to conflict. The root is always poverty, lack of education/services/resources/participation. Less slogans, more implementable solutions, please.

Welcome aboard.

Steve

[Ken White]

Looked like the map of Africom/Centcom. 50% Urban; 50% of those in informal settlements; 50% under 30 years of age. Serious poverty, lack of services, social instability.

The problem is: How do we systematize implementable solutions to these high-needs areas either before or after they fall to conflict. The root is always poverty, lack of education/services/resources/participation. Less slogans, more implementable solutions, please.

All that would be helpful here...

[bourbon]

Right now, I'm on a "More FID and Greg Mortensen, Less occupation and GPF" kick. We'll see where that leads.

Mortenson has new book coming out at the end of next month: Stones into Schools: Promoting Peace with Books, Not Bombs, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We should see if we can get an advance review copy for SWJ blog from the publisher.

[davidbfpo]

Mortenson has new book coming out at the end of next month: Stones into Schools: Promoting Peace with Books, Not Bombs, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We should see if we can get an advance review copy for SWJ blog from the publisher.

Bourbon,

Best person to review this would be Melissa Payson, who has worked on the ground in both places, maybe not in schools and has the perspective needed.

davidbfpo

[M Payson]

I've yet to read Three Cups of Tea, been too busy working in Afghanistan and Pakistan to get to it. I will, I will...

I seem to remember hearing that Greg was held captive in North Waziristan. Sounds about right... Canadian Beverly Giesbrecht is still held there, kidnapped last November, though interpreter and driver were released. David Rohde has just started publishing a five-part series in the New York Times on his ordeal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/wo...pagewanted=all

[bourbon]

Bourbon,

Best person to review this would be Melissa Payson, who has worked on the ground in both places, maybe not in schools and has the perspective needed.

davidbfpo

Sounds good, maybe when the book comes out SWJ blog could have a symposium on it on and get several different perspectives in there. Mike has been preaching the Mortenson evangel for some time now, Mortenson’s first book Three Cups of Tea became a best seller largely from word of mouth praise – much of it from guys just like Mike.

[Intel Geek]

Sorry to join the discussion so late.

Does anyone know about the Amerika Haus institutions in Germany? I was wondering if they can be used as a model for the Middle East. Setting up an institution to learn about American democracy may seem a little forced to the intended audience, so I was thinking about setting up institutions where locals can learn about things such as American advancements in science and technology*. I'd like to you some of your thoughts.

*In Soft Power by Joseph Nye, he point out that 70% of Muslims polled say they admire U.S. advancement in science and technology.