Boyd 2008 - Challenging the Shadow of our Institutions - The Military by Chet Richards

This is Saruman - the Shadow of Gandalf. He is the wizard whose ego takes over. He is the fallen angel - he is the Dark Side of power.

Most of our great institutions were created to be the ego-less servants of society. Education, Health care, the media. More important and more costly than any of these great servants of society was surely the military. Most people still join today seeking only to serve their country. The US spends nearly a trillion dollars a year to provide for security.

But then many - especially those who can "see" - realize that what these great institutions now serve is something else. Many can now see that this vast investment of the nation's treasure in life and money may be misdirected. They see that what once served us now mainly serve themselves.

Chet's talk illustrated this widening gap between what institutions seek to do with what they actually do by taking a sharp look at the US defense situation today. He made a compelling case - further deepened by a new book called America's Defense Meltdown - that the vast current spending and even the mission of the existing organization was at the best misguided.

In this commentary I will do my best to give you the Coles Notes of his briefing.

But first a quote from the end of his talk and a clip from a recent interview concerning piracy and the US Navy

A great nation is like a great man: When he makes a mistake, he realizes it.  Having realized it, he admits it.  Having admitted it, he corrects it … He thinks of his enemy as the shadow that he himself casts.

Tao Te Ching (Mitchell trans., 61

I think that facing the "shadow" is an important part of understanding our reality. Who does your organization truly serve. If America is to be really great - it has to look at the reality of its investment and in the reality its mission for its Armed Forces.

In this tough economic times, America has to get value for its investment. Chet will make a powerful case that it does not.

To illustrate this point, lets look at the capability of the US Navy to protect the world's Oil supply that is Chet's Blog DNI

"My good friend Pierre Sprey forwarded this amazing quote by Vice Admiral Bill Gortney. Pierre’s comments are in BLUE and Vice Adm Gortney’s comments are in italics.

An utterly convincing testimonial, from an expert witness with flawless credentials, regarding the benefits of quality over quantity for the fleet:

“The U.S. commander in charge of the waters off Somalia, Vice Adm. Bill Gortney, told CNN on Monday that he thought it would take a force of 61 warships to safeguard the sea lanes just in the Gulf of Aden, compared with the 14 international ships now patrolling off the Horn of Africa. If the U.S. Navy alone had to provide a force that size, it would take every destroyer and cruiser in the fleet, plus three frigates. ( Navy Times, 12/09/08 )”

Pierre continues: In other words, the USN’s pursuit of ever more “capable” ships has provided America with a fleet that is incapable of handling the Somali pirates."

Here is the paradox in a nutshell - never has America spent more and got less for its defense dollar.

This is how Chet sees the end game - he is not alone in this assessment.

How does this make you feel?
This slide shows the relative spend on defense since 1948. Note that we spend much more now since the end of the cold war and the threat of massive conventional war. This itself raises a question
For all those worried about us not spending enough to meet the threat of say Russia, China or North Korea - have a look here. The US spends more than all of them combined and some. But we cannpt stop pirates in motor boats in the Gulf!

Before Chet spoke I asked the group to consider other areas of life as well. Just so we have some perspective about the Dark Side here is what is happening to education in the US.

This slide shows literacy levels - the black horizontal line - flat in spite of billions more being spent.


Here we see that the US far outspends all other nations per capita with relatively poor results. About equal to Cuba!

Something is truly broken and the answer - as with the Auto bailout - is not necessarily more money!

What this complex chart says is that the US military is organized around the wrong threat. Our true foes - the real risk to our security are not the armies of other states.

He makes the case that having a nuclear deterrent makes it all but impossible to have a conventional war.  The threat that we face comes not from States but from groups - many of whom have their roots in crime. The Taliban is financed by Heroin. Mexico is under siege by the mafia. Mumbai was not attacked by Pakistan and with bot India and Pakistan having nukes - it is unlikely that either side will revert to conventional war.

But we are largely organized to fight conventional war and we have at the heart of our mindset that role. America's Defense Meltdown says that the US Navy is prepared to fight the Imperial Japanese Navy again!
So what next?
The big thing today is Counterinsurgency - but it is worth recalling that no outside state has won one of these since 1948. With how the US military is encultured and organized and equipped - it is even less likely. Chet thinks that privatization may be inevitable.
The real mission is police work.

The current leadership seem obsessed with a possible state conflict that is unlikely and their response is to make the error of Germany in WWII. To get confused between quality and quantity.

Huge parts of the budget are allocated for "super weapons" that are designed to fight a conventional foe that cannot cope with the old inventory. The weapons that are even now needed in the field - ground attack etc - are in short supply.

Chet also makes the powerful point that the Mindset of the US military does not allow for good intel to be possible. There is too much cultural bias and hence distance to understand a people's war far away. Big Army is the problem - slow and sclerotic. I - Rob here - found Kaplan's Imperial Grunts an indictment

My response to this key point of poor intel by Chet was to recall Glubb Pasha. Please take the time to have a look here - the piece will offer a concise reality check - our security forces have to be this culturally attuned or they must be blind to what is going on.
 
The Brits had a custom of embedding Brits in a lifetime of cultural embedding in key areas. Glubb ran a semi private force of bedouin for first the Brits and then the King of Jordan.

This is where Chet raised a storm in the room. If he makes the case the threat is non state and if the threat is more like a gang, then the ideal response would be more like a police force and more likely a private one. Blackwater may do in reality a better job against pirates in the gulf that the US Navy.
Again the Brits a complete Indian force in India. Even today, the British army have as their shock troops the Gurhkas officered by Brits who themseves continue the tradition of T E Lawrence and Glubb.

An important feature that I see - Rob's opinion here - is that not only do forces have to be small and nimble but most importantly they have to be culturally adept. Back to mindset again. Traditional forces do not have the OO in the OODA loop to cope.

So like Education, like Healthcare, like the Auto industry - tinkering is not going to work.

But we all know how hard it is to effect a true revolution.


So how are the weak forces of the reformers going to take on the power of the establishment?

Well dear reader - that is why I asked the translators of the Art of War to end the conference. They are up next.
Download Richards -- US Milit#DAB47B