opinionWar

Why We Dont Need a New War Against ISIS

The question continues to circle from Pennsylvania Avenue to Main Street whether or not America should go to war against ISIS in the Middle East. The responsibility for that answer lies squarely on the shoulders of the President and our Congress.  Their answer must consider the potential outcomes of both action and inaction and will require a carefully developed and coordinated strategy.

As any B student from one of the US Military War Colleges can tell you, there are several important principles that have proven critical over the centuries to the success of a nations decision to utilize war as a means of pursuing its national policy.  Students at the War Colleges study Clausewitz and Sun Tzu, discussing their ideas and those of many others full-time for one year of graduate study.  These ideas are studied in the hope that someday said soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines may both put these ideas to good use and influence the civilian authority of this nation to make wise and informed decisions.

These are some of the most important principles I recall, now 18 years after my own studies:

Until the different peoples of these Middle Eastern states decide a democratic, united, and civil society is worth standing up for, even dying for, this struggle cannot be won.

1. The desired End State of a potential conflict must be clearly delineated, prior to initiating contact with an enemy.  This delineation must include a thorough assessment of the economic, moral, and human costs to our nation to achieve that End State. An intimate knowledge and understanding of the societies with which we are to be engaged is just as important.  If that End State is not clearly fixed and articulated then as the complexity of the struggle being pursued increases, the chances for success decreases.

2. The use of this nations military forces is but one arrow in the quiver of our national policy.  Military force cannot be used alone but must be aligned with a coordinated strategy. At the international level, this should be carefully harmonized with our allies; at the national level the integration of at least the following agencies should occur: State, Defense, Justice, Commerce, Homeland Security, and the National Security Council.  Lead responsibilities will shift as the tempo of the struggle proceeds but all must be orchestrated in unity.

3. When a decision is made to use this nations military forces, sufficient personnel, money, and supplies must be allocated to ensure an overwhelming force quickly wins the war, with as little loss of life to combatants and civilians as possible.  Once the initial conflict is over, those same sufficient forces must then be allowed to completely and fully control the areas in question until authentic civil authority can effectively control the situation and win the peace.

4. We must know our enemy/enemies as well as those we support.  We must understand their motivations, their cultures, their belief systems, their sense of urgency and willingness to sacrifice.  We must understand that what we want for those we support may not be understood by them and may not even be what they desire.

5. Modern 4th Generation Warfare (a concept defined by Lind and refined by Hammes in which one of war’s participants is not a state but rather a violent ideological network) cannot be fought from the sea, air, or by using stand-off weapons.  It demands street to street, block by block, hand-to-hand combat which is violent, bloody and devastatingly costly in casualties and deaths, both military and civilian.  This type of warfare does not seek to overwhelm an enemys center of gravity (economic, political, geographic) since most terrorist groups are not nation states; it must win the hearts and minds of the dispossessed, skillfully use strategic propaganda, risk communication, economic developme