still under editing
Original writing was published in Sotilasaikakauslehti 11/2011 http://www.upseeriliitto.fi/the_finnish_officers_union_in_english
Confrontations, Conflicts and their Management in Postmodern era
Sun
Tzu - Attack by stratagem:
“...
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme
excellence;
supreme
excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting.
Thus
the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans;
the
next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces;
the
next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field;
and
the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.”
1. From wars between industrial states to confrontations of post-modern societies
The
industrialization did change the society, national states emerged and
in Napoleonic wars the first symptoms of mass warfare occurred. In
France Napoleon established an conscription law and drafted a mass
army of infantry and cavalry. The strategy of Napoleon was to use the
strengths of his conscript grand army (conscription, patriotism,
operational manoeuvreability of army corps and logistical solution)
to destroy the opponents main force i.e. ability to wage war and thus
dictate the terms of peace agreement. Napoleon concentrated
political, strategical and operational leadership to himself thus
compromising his operational agility with “patent solution” and
ending losing wars among others to Russia.1
In
the Civil war of USA general Sherman destroyed the economy and
people´s willingness to continue fighting by attacking through the
state of Georgia and destroying about 100 km widely and 500 km deeply
cities, farms, railroads, shops, material, industry and weapons.
This
was first time that force was massed against opponents economical and
industrial assets. The railroads provided operational
manoeuvreability and telegraph provided fast communications first
time. The Southern troops were better led at tactical level but
Jefferson and Grant combined political and strategical level to
better the opponent.2
In
the First World War industrial power was used to provide weapons for
army, navy and air force with a magnitude of mass production.
Firepower and lethality of military force was multiplied compared to
Boer war or Civil war. Railways were used to gain operational
manoeuvreability but after dismounting armies tactical movement was
limited to walking speed. To keep the integrity of the troops and
hoist their spirits a variety of information means were used. Later
this was called propaganda.3
In
China 1934 the long march of Communist Party was a military loss and
brought Chinese communist movement to a brink of end. Later Mao
created tales of communist heroism out from miseries of march and
spread them as propaganda amongst people thus gaining the support of
ordinary people and finally a military victory over Chiang Kai-shek.4
In
the Second World War industrial productivity increased firepower and
tactical speed. The battlespace extended to air (The Battle of
Britain), to electromagnetic space (signal surveillance), to will of
the home front (V-weapons and resistance movements), to information
domain (propaganda in press, party ceremonies, radio and movies), to
industrial assets (large scale air bombardments of cities) and to
diplomatic level (Stalin had Germany and UK competing about the terms
of non-aggression pact on August 19395).
As conflict proceeded Stalin increased his capability to control the
vast spectrum of struggle - military, economical, social, technical,
diplomatic, ideological and national aspects of confrontation –
better than his colleges at the time6.
Both Hitler and Stalin had trouble trusting their military leadership
thus spreading their activity at operational and sometimes even
tactical level besides their efforts at political and strategical
level.7
Both leaders made same mistake of pulling decision making too high,
operating hierarchical control over malfunctioning communications and
stiffening their operational and tactical level with inadequate
delegation.
After
the WW II confrontation between two ideologies escalated to conflict
we know as “Cold War”. On the military line of operations two
sides ended up with Mutual Assured Destruction with nuclear weapons
and arms race to keep up with deterrence. The other line of military
operations were local conflicts with conventional arms backed by both
sides of ideology. Both ideological sides were operating along the
line of economical operations to enhance political and economical
development in the nations within their domain of influence and
opposing the economical development in the nations of the opponents
domain. In the line of social operations USSR conducted class
struggle with means of international media, exchange of culture,
education and sports. International Communist Party provided
effective avenue of influence as well.8
Both political, economical and social lines of operation was
supported by projection of military power either for stability or for
instability. The Communist Party in USSR did combine these lines of
operation at strategical level with powerful effect.
In
Vietnam War NVA and NLF launched an Tet -operation in 1968. It was
unsuccessful on the line of military operation, but on the
socio-political line of operation, probably unintended, it ended as a
strategic victory by entering to living rooms in USA via television
channels and breaking the will of the home front to continue military
campaign. With opposing from home front, political leadership did not
sustain and military withdrawing concluded by 1975.9
The
western pact won the confrontation of “Cold War” mainly with
successful operations along the lines of economy and politics. The
home front of USSR broke because of mothers opposing casualties
caused by lengthening war in Afghanistan and Party was failing in
homeland economy. The political leadership gained valuable lessons at
political-strategical level and combining different lines of
operation to successful course of action, they got rid of old
constraints in operational thinking. The military leaders in the
other hand restricted their thinking against all the lessons of Sun
Tzu and stovepiped themselves as weapon system managers at tactical
level.
In
so called International War on Terror, and specially, when US lead
coalition conducted the Freedom Iraq operation in 2003, US lead
military leaders learnt that opponent is able to adjust their
operations and organisations. The opponent was good at analysing the
strengths and weaknesses of the coalition and acted upon the findings
as follows:
- guerilla operations were combined with conventional tactics,
- industrial and military products were integrated with COTS information technology to create more effect on physical and information level,
- propaganda was used to weaken both the will of fighting forces and the home front of coalition.
Iraq
resistance changed their way of fighting both at strategical,
operational and tactical level so that coalition force would suffer
their weakness such as disability to sustain their operation or wage
effective information operation in very different culture from their
own.10
In
all armed conflicts occurred after 1991, the most lethal weapons have
been machete, AK-47 and suicidal bomb (In Rwanda almost a million
people was killed within three months in 1994). Before 2005 the
number of armed conflicts had declined 40% and the number of major
conflicts (over 1 000 casualties) had dropped 80%. Only 5 % on all
conflicts are wars between states.11
2. Possible challenges in the confrontations of post-modern world
At
political level a leader is moved by opinion of voters, opinion of
other party members, opinion of major coalition partners and opinion
of global society. The effectivity of those opinions has multiplied
with modern, public, commercial media, who is competing for receivers
attention emphasizing extraordinary, radical or negative news. The
themes that go over the threshold of one´s attention are still heat,
dread and grudge12.
The
liberation of global economics has increased after the fall of
communist block in 2000 century. Economically speaking the earth is
flat13,
because knowledge work is not spatially restricted. Even the heavy
fabrication industry is finding optimum between labour, taxation,
energy, raw materials and logistics with fewer concerns of
geographical or state borders.
A
post-modern state is more interdependent of other states and their
assets like energy, rare materials, capital, competence and labour.
Capitalism separates good products from bad even faster than before
with assistance of technology and information14.
This enhanced separation process divides production structure either
to small specialized companies or huge global organizations who are
leaders of supply chains or near monopolist builders of business
ecosystems. Products and their production structures do change faster
compared to last century. So does requirements for competence and
jobs. Companies are located more and more in cities, that grow to be
metropolises, centroids of economy. These centroids are growing to be
economically larger than states and thus more influential and more
profitable targets for attacks.15
In
western world social activity happens merely in metropolis where
people are single, women are more educated than men, amount of
working people is less than those of cared by society and more people
are becoming marginalized from society.16
Changes in the essence of childhood are lessening our ability to
create normal relationships with people. Need to be accepted is being
satisfied in virtual world, where social and moral rules are more
simple and may differ greatly from those of real world.17
Empty
home, ritualistic religion and indistinct nationality are not able to
bring people together like in the times of French Revolution, to
possibly give their lives for greater needs of their society. The
structure of social capital is changing significantly18,
which increases the vulnerability of post-modern western individual,
leaves him exposed to influence and in crises times more prone to
seek security from authority. As this is happening in this world,
there is another world, where 97% of people does not watch CNN and
only one of five owns a television. That is a reality, where people
are ready to even die for their religion, tribe, village, kin or
their nucleus family.19
The
armies of post-modern states are more professional, smaller and more
technical. They are more interdependent of public and private
companies that support them even in a space of operation. Long supply
lines may cross borders and international dependence is a fact even
with national army. With professional army soldiers and citizens
seldomly interact. This may lead to separation between armed forces
and the society it is supposed to secure, because fewer people do
participate in defending their community. This alienation has
happened for example during the last centuries of Roman Empire.20
As
weapon systems become more expensive, international co-operation
between providers and military forces intensifies and that leads to
similar tactics and battle technics of forces. Complexity requires
more professional soldiers and increases interdependence between
military and industry.21
Compared
to Napoleonic Army Corps22
or WW II division which were hierarchically led independent forces, a
post-modern force is a coalition of specialized military,
non-governmental and civilian organizations, which creates a value
driven chain. It is a process driven provider-subscriber network,
that creates besides vertical also horizontal value. The management
of this value adding network is based on information flow, trust and
common understanding.23
In
the other world using violence is a business as usual for some
people. With vast stocks of conventional weapons delivered from
depots of cold war era, some people do continue tyrannize, blackmail
and harass their fellow human beings.24
In
post-modern societies people may either lower their acceptance of
military operation because it does not happen in their reality but
news. In the other hand violence is not an everyday thing in their
lives, so even a slight casualty may change the general opinion.
It
might be easier to manipulate the thinking of public and politics of
post-modern society because of their real world distance from
violence.25
In the other world it is more probable to face violence. Deaths of
children and young people is considered natural. Those societies, on
the other hand, are passively facing violence and then struggling
with life.26
A
democratic leader of the post-modern society wants to share risks,
gain gravity of positive public opinion and political will by
creating multinational coalitions. Coalition also minimizes effects
of complexity and expenses of war and gain positive ethos in front of
public.
It
is easier to political leader to send either employed or paramilitary
people than draftees to operations with aims or methods difficult to
justify to ordinary citizens. With information spreading globally
without delay and media trying to produce most selling news of the
day, the opinion of shareholders, neutrals and global media is
effecting more in the space of operations. The public pressure is
having impact specially on political decision making.27
In
the other world power is in the hands of different parties with
divergent interests. There are warlords and chieftains, whose living
is depending on armed violence. There are charismatic leaders, whose
power is depending on continuation of confrontation and conflict.28
The
British military has adopted the following aspects on changes in
conflicts as society evolves from industrial to post-modern as29:
- The means and aims in conflict are changing. Industrial societies were trying to destroy each others military forces. Post-modern societies try to utilize force to change the behaviour of opponent and other stake-holders.
- At tactical level force is utilized amongst people. The space of operation includes houses of people, streets of cities and fields of farmers. The space of operations is extended into living rooms globally delivered by mass media.
- Conflicts are often timeless and never ending. There seldom is a military line of operation leading to end state. With military means there is a possibility to gain and maintain conditions, that allow to proceed in other lines of operation to comprehensive solution.
- Post-modern states are handling their confrontations sparing living force and securing their economical networks. They operate in a pressure of general opinion shaped by global media. They seldomly invest all their focus and resources to solve a confrontation.
- Post-modern armies do use their existing weaponry, suffer from their restrictions but find new applications as they are utilized in modern space of operation.
- In most cases the parties of conflict are not states, because either the argument over interests rises between smaller societies or internationally states want to create coalitions to minimize risks and gain positive ethos in the eyes of general opinion.
3. How to change the behaviour of opposing sides i.e. how to resolve conflicts of post-modern time
There
is a need for both pre-emptive and reactive measures to change the
behaviour of parties involved in post-modern confrontations and
conflicts. It takes comprehensive30
effort along all four lines of operations (political, economical,
social and military) to change the opposing interactive structure of
political leadership, population and force as defined by Clausewitz.
The combined operations do create an effect on physical or on
information level from where it is projected to cognitive level
amongst all shareholders and stakeholders of conflict. Information,
knowledge and experience together creates understanding or feeling on
the cognitive level. Only understanding or emotions make individual
or society to change their behaviour.31
The
physical level is familiar to all generations of warfare. On the
physical level a force of material, people and movement is being
utilized. On this level one also meets a friction caused by
environment, weather or malfunctioning systems. On the physical level
casualties are suffered concretely. The military dimensions of
physical level are ground, sea, air, space, electromagnetic waves,
cyberspace and time.32
Those
events or features on physical level, that are sensed by human or
other sensors, create information. Information can be delivered to
other entities by means of communication. A piece of information in
an information or communications system is called data. Information
is being processed, delivered and saved either in cyber domain, human
brains or other media.
Communication
between entities occur on information level and often it has a nature
of interaction. Information answers to questions like: what, where,
when or who. Information is a raw material, which is being refined to
knowledge for humans and artificial intelligence to understand.
A
information created by real world event is being interpreted along a
long line of communication and information processing on the
information level to a meaning. That line is not always linear, so
the meaning may be true, untrue or delusion. Information is being
packed to mediums (audio, picture, text, video, etc.) and packing
process loses or distorts information. Mediums are being forwarded
through channels (massmedia, Internet, conversation, clipboards,
information systems and other means) that are not linear. When
information is delivered via interaction of human beings, there is
always ethos and pathos, which effect on how information is
understood.33
Between machines there is often an interface to adapt information
between different ontologies, data models or message models. That
interface may loose information, change its meaning or add noise.
On
the cognitive34
level human thinking is processing information and knowledge to
understanding, which is one of the basis for insight and foresight.35
Cognitive level includes also believes, feelings, values and will.
The questions being answered are why and what comes out of this.
Decisions are being made on this level with a mixture of logical and
emotional deduction or realization. Tacit -knowledge is also
cumulating on the cognitive level36.
In
all action, communication and thinking is happening over the
physical, information and cognitive levels as interaction between
entities and environment. Societies (family, groups, organizations,
states, nations) interact between each other socially and
economically. There has been political and military interaction
between industrial states, but those means have expanded even between
entities like interest groups and insurgents during post-modern era.
In
a confrontation between post-modern societies all means of social,
economical, political and military are being used on the physical and
information levels in order to create a meaning on cognitive level
thus change the behavior of opposing individuals, groups or
societies. While effecting to opposing entity, the understanding and
behavior of other stakeholders and bystanders within the space of
operation are also targeted. To create an effect one has to have
interaction on one or several lines of operation: social, economical,
political or military.
On
the social line of operation there is possible to execute following
tasks:
1.
Found a plinth that enables higher level interaction by
providing basic nutrition; founding schools to advance literacy;
founding religious buildings, shops, markets and wells; training
police forces, search and rescue forces and health care personnel.
2. Ameliorate structures for higher social interaction and necessities by supporting open gatherings and independent media, building the integrity of society with religious events or sports and educating teachers, officials and journalists.
3. Contain and restrict inter- and intra-action societies within the operations space by denying usage of media, gatherings, movement outside or by censoring the content in interaction situations or restricting the usage of communications and Internet.
2. Ameliorate structures for higher social interaction and necessities by supporting open gatherings and independent media, building the integrity of society with religious events or sports and educating teachers, officials and journalists.
3. Contain and restrict inter- and intra-action societies within the operations space by denying usage of media, gatherings, movement outside or by censoring the content in interaction situations or restricting the usage of communications and Internet.
On
the economical line of operation there is possible to execute
following tasks:
1.
Ameliorate economy by providing loans or investing, giving
bilateral priorities for commerce, forgiving loans or their
interests, donating production lines or other facilities, importing
advertise, importing shops of friendly chains.
2.
Contain economy of the society subject by manipulating its
currency, lowering its credit rating, freezing foreign assets of the
society or its key personnel, building up export duties, banning
commerce of key products, restricting importation of energy or raw
material.
3.
Prevent or Force economy by creating commerce or
economical blockades, freezing international assets or investments,
occupying key companies, cutting energy supplies or foodstuff, hold
up society to execute their basic professions by tampering with
irritation, energy, commerce, fertilizers, etc. Removing population
away from the opponents eminent area of operations and support.
On
the political line of operation there is possible to execute
following tasks:
1.
Ameliorate the societies in the space of operations by
supporting democratic elections, opening media channels to every
interest group, supporting creating associates or congregating,
educating party and administrations officials, exchanging of cultural
events and values, exchanging of entertainment or sports.
2.
Contain or pressure the societies in the space of operations
by giving disapproval statements, publishing diplomatic missives,
creating political alliance for diplomatic pressure, seeking
condemning resolutions from international bodies, starting to bargain
about requirements and their fulfilment, Creating untrust between
society and its key personnel by publishing embarrassing information,
supporting opponents opponents in their quest.
3.
Deter or Coerce the societies in the space of operations by
seeking condemning resolutions from international bodies, summoning
to international justice, terminating contracts, severing diplomatic
relations.
On
the military line of operation there is possible to execute following
tasks:37
1.
Ameliorate societies in the area of operations with military
force by building infrastructure, ensuring police, border and SAR
-services, educating, training and mentoring local societies,
supervising the stabilized situation. Examples like UNIFIL, UNFICYP,
UNMOGIP.
2.
Contain with military force by supporting other lines of
operation with surveillance (no fly zones, ban of arms), enhancing
local police and frontier guard to prevent illegal passage, using
military intelligence to support other lines of operation. Examples
like adhering no-fly zones over Iraq, tasks in the beginning of Libya
operation 2011.
3.
Deter or Coerce with military force the opposing society to
create a threshold that would keep opponent at bay or change its
behavior in other lines of operation. Examples like deterrence of
Cold War, Operation Desert Shield in 1990, Estonian bronze warrior
episode with massive DDOS -attack in 2007.
4.
Destroy the opponents assets or centers of gravity like C2
structure, production of basic goods, infrastructure or military
power in order to achieve end of state together with other lines of
operation. Examples like Falkland war 1982, Desert Strom operation
1990 – 1991.
The
operation is planned to achieve the end of state by using means from
all lines of operation. After analysis and war gaming a course of
action will be defined and operation starts. Operation is a series of
parallel and consecutive tasks that are effecting either on physical
or on information level. The aim is to have definite effect on
cognitive level and change behavior of opposing society and their
leaders. Confrontation, conflicts and operations are managed at four
levels: political, strategical, operational and tactical. These
levels intertwine through space of operation and occasion at one
level may have major affect on others.38
Reference:
1General
Carl von Clausewitz: On War. Translated by Col J.J. Graham 1909
2General
Rupert Smith: The Utility of Force. Vintage 2008 ISBN
978-0-307-27811-1
3General
Rupert Smith: The Utility of Force. Vintage 2008 ISBN
978-0-307-27811-1
4Matti
Nojonen: Jymäyttämisen taito. Strategiaoppeja muinaisesta
Kiinasta. Gaudeamus 2009 s.28
5Geoffrey
Roberts: Stalin´s Wars. Yale University Press 2006 s. 33
6Geoffrey
Roberts: Stalin´s Wars. Yale University Press 2006 s.12
7Geoffrey
Roberts: Stalin´s Wars. Yale University Press 2006 s.10
8Jukka
Seppinen: Neuvostotiedustelu Suomessa 1917 – 1991 Strategia ja
toiminta. Gummerus 2006 s.269
9General
Rupert Smith: The Utility of Force. Vintage 2008 ISBN
978-0-307-27811-1
10ARMY
TRADOC Pam 525-3-0: The Army Capstone Concept (ACC) 2009
11General
David Richards, Greg Mills Ed.: Victory among People, Lessons from
Countering Insurgency and
Stabilising Fragile States
12Pauli
Aalto-Setälä: Merkitystalous. Helsinki 2005 ISBN 951-607-261-5
13Thomas
L. Friedman: The World is Flat. Globalized World in The Twenty-First
Century. Penguin 2006
14Kjell
A. Nordström: Speaking at Elisa seminar in Helsinki 2010
15Peter
Gordon et al: Economic impact analysis using a model of consistent
interregional economic and highway network equilibria. University of
Southern California.
16Kjell
A. Nordström: Speaking in Elisa seminar Helsinki 2010
17Liisa
Keltikangas-Järvinen: Tunne itsesi, suomalainen. 9.painos WSOY 2010
18Putnam
R.D: Bowling alone. The Collapse and Revival of American Community.
Simon&Schuster 2000
19Pauli
Aalto-Setälä: Merkitystalous. Helsinki 2005 ISBN 951-607-261-5
20Adrian
Goldsworthy: In the name of Rome. The men who won the Empire.
Lennart Sane Agency 2003
21Janne
Mälkki, Risto Marjomaa, Jyri Raitasalo, Tero Karasjärvi, Joonas
Sipilä: Sodan historia. Otava 2008 ISBN 978-951-1-21885-2
22Dunn-Pattison
R.P: Napoleon´s Marshals. Methuen&Co, London 1909
23Seppo
Niemelä: Menestyvä yritysverkosto. Edita 2002 ISBN 951-37-3648-2
24John
Keegan: A History of Warfare. Vintage Books 1994
25Janne
Mälkki, Risto Marjomaa, Jyri Raitasalo, Tero Karasjärvi, Joonas
Sipilä: Sodan historia. Otava 2008 ISBN 978-951-1-21885-2
26John
Keegan: A History of Warfare. Vintage Books 1994
27Janne
Mälkki, Risto Marjomaa, Jyri Raitasalo, Tero Karasjärvi, Joonas
Sipilä: Sodan historia. Otava 2008 ISBN 978-951-1-21885-2
28Col
Kenneth Allard: Somalia Operations: Lessons Learned. CCRP
29General
Rupert Smith: The Utility of Force. Vintage 2008 ISBN
978-0-307-27811-1
30NATO
agreed 2010 that ”Comprehensive Approach” -concept will create a
foundation of their strategy. Comprehensive Approach means that
Diplomatic, Informational, Military, Economic elements (DIME) are
being used jointly and combined at strategical and operational level
to achieve the end state in a conflict.
31DoD:
Network Centric Warfare. Department of Defense Report to Congress 27
July 2001. (www.dodccrp.org)
32Colin
S. Gray: Another Bloody Century – Future Warfare. Phoenix 2005
ISBN 0-3043-6734-6
33Pauli
Aalto-Setälä: Merkitystalous. Helsinki 2005 ISBN 951-607-261-5
34Cognition:
the act or process of knowing including both awareness and
judgement. Webster´s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 1983
35UK
Joint doctrine publication 04: Understanding. Development, concepts
and doctrine Centre, December 2010
36Tacit
-knowledge: born from experiences, effecting in all human behavior,
sometimes even subconsciously.
37General
Rupert Smith: The Utility of Force. Vintage 2008 ISBN
978-0-307-27811-1
38A
single unwise tactical move by a soldier on patrol can instantly
change the character of an entire operation and, when broadcast by
the ever-present media pool, can also affect strategic
considerations. Col, PhD Kenneth Allard: The Somalia Operation:
Lessons Learned. CCRP
