America’s Not Ready for Today’s Gray Wars by Eric Olsen, Defense One
As Washington struggles to respond to brutal acts of violence from Syria to San Bernardino, much of the conversation is about the size and scope of our response to defeat our enemies.
Although Americans by now understand that we are not in a traditional war against an armed state, we still fail to comprehend the true complexities and profound challenges of conducting a broad range of military and law enforcement actions in smaller, less straightforward operations against terrorists and their organizations.
We are trying to oversimplify the pandemonium of war. Violence, frequent and savage, is brought upon us by non-state entities and their ideological subscribers who do not hold to the traditional justifications or methods of armed conflict. Barbaric behavior has become the norm. Our enemies’ use of technology will continue as cyber attacks become commonplace, digital media are used to frighten and incite, and remote detonation of bombs is exported from the roadside improvised explosive devices of Iraq and Afghanistan to the streets of Middle America…
Comments
OK can we all relax here?
Warfighting has changed as much as law enforcement.
Bobbies don't go exclaiming: "stop that man", and running with a whistle, anymore than diminutive detectives inquire about a "ghastly murder" for an inheritance.
Similarly, armies don't meet up in a field to fight it out.
The US knew for a long time that Russia had its eye on the Donbass and Crimea, and had given those Ukrainians Russian passports.
But they didn't formulate a response, and when it was obvious that the polite green men were Russian soldiers, the Ukrainians stood down.
Such tactics were never designed with NATO in mind, and NATO forces could easily reinforce any Baltic policing operation that got out of control.
Let's not refight Ukraine 2014 when the next one hits?
Quality over quantity and new definitions of winning I agree with, but I tire of of the over stated success of the through, by, and with approach as though this old as history approach is a strategy in itself. If we do it ourselves or via surrogates is relevant, but the underlying strategy is more important. Through, by, and with is not unique to SOF, nor is it an ideal solution in many cases. We also must recognize we can't always outsource our security. No doubt ADM Olsen would agree, but many in the SOF community think the use of surrogates should be our default position. It may be best if we purge the phrase through, by, and with from our lexicon. We have always done it without a cute phrase many confuse with strategy. We need to do what is necessary, and in most cases it will be a blender approach.