
![]() | |
November 2009
October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by!
April 26, 200720% military, 80% politicalBy GreyhawkIf that version of the 80/20 rule (there are others: 20% of the people do 80% of the work, 20% of the people cause 80% of the problems) it looks like the odds for getting things done favor the politicians. It's certainly become one of Senator Harry Reid's favorite sound bites: BASH: The phrase "the war is lost" really touched a nerve.That's different than saying it's lost (unless Senator Reid knows full well that the "80% political" component is going to devote it's efforts to destroying the "20% military"). But while I was already familiar with the Generals comment that you can't kill all the bad guys - some must be "reconciled"...: GEN. PETRAEUS: With respect, again, to the -- you know, the idea of the reconcilables and the irreconcilables, this is something in which the Iraqi government obviously has the lead. It is something that they have sought to -- in some cases, to reach out. And I think, again, that any student of history recognizes that there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq. Military action is necessary to help improve security, for all the reasons that I stated in my remarks, but it is not sufficient....I wasn't certain on the origin of the specific 80-20 remark. Senator Reid seems to have used it more times in one interview than the General has in the past several months. In fact, here's an obscure Fall, 2006 interview (Source here - hat tip: A Jacksonian) that might be the first. In discussing the (then) forthcoming Field Manual on Counterinsurgency, (Petraeus oversaw it's creation) the Interviewer prompts a discussion: I: I wanted to get to the idea that counterinsurgency is 20-percent military, 80-percent political and sort of how that plays out.And the General responded: R: Well that’s a--a common feature of counter-insurgency literature and--and Doctrine and has--has been for years. But it--well it’s--it’s from David Galula’s classic book, which in fact is read by all of the students at the Command and General Staff College, where I might add we had gone from having about five-percent of the curriculum of the average Command and General Staff College student covering counter-insurgency to over 40-percent and even higher depending on the electives. But Galula’s book--a number of others all certainly and you can certainly debate whether the percentage is 20/80 or 30/70 or who knows what but--but clearly there has to be a primacy of the political aspects. At the end of the day that’s what this is about--it is about helping another nation in this case forge a sense of political community, of unity, of moving forward together and then improving in the economic realm, improving in the realm of basic services, improving in terms of--of security, of justice, and all of the other aspects that any society aspires to enjoy.So now we have the General on record - and an earlier source. Since then the manual has been published and publicly released. Therein (page 1-22) we discover an even earlier source: 1-123. General Chang Ting-chen of Mao Zedong’s central committee once stated that revolutionary war was 80 percent political action and only 20 percent military. Such an assertion is arguable and certainly depends on the insurgency’s stage of development; it does, however, capture the fact that political factors have primacy in COIN. At the beginning of a COIN operation, military actions may appear predominant as security forces conduct operations to secure the populace and kill or capture insurgents; however, political objectives must guide the military’s approach. Commanders must, for example, consider how operations contribute to strengthening the HN government’s legitimacy and achieving U.S. political goals. This means that political and diplomatic leaders must actively participate throughout the conduct (planning, preparation, execution, and assessment) of COIN operations. The political and military aspects of insurgencies are so bound together as to be inseparable. Most insurgent approaches recognize that fact. Military actions executed without properly assessing their political effects at best result in reduced effectiveness and at worst are counterproductive. Resolving most insurgencies requires a political solution; it is thus imperative that counterinsurgent actions do not hinder achieving that political solution.And in the notes: para 1-123. …revolutionary war was 80 percent political action and only 20 percent military: cited in David Galula, Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice (1964; reprint New York: Praeger, 2005), 89 (hereafter cited as Galula); …he was involved with establishing special schools…: Walter Sullivan, “China’s Communists Train Political Corps to Aid Army,” The New York Times, 4 Jul 1949.Anyhow, while that source in Communist Chinese revolutionary doctrine renders the concept no less valid (and there's nothing wrong with adopting conceptual elements of foundations of strategy that may be applicable regardless of source), it might explain both General Petraeus' reluctance to emphasize that specific point in public (I can find no other citations - perhaps others can), and Senator Reid's seizure of the concept and endless repetition thereof. And while Reid isn't citing the original author either, clearly he - or someone on his staff - is an expert to at least that level of detail on either Counterinsurgency or Revolution, or both. But on which are they focused? Given that Reid appears to be using his part of the 80% against the General's 20, I'm afraid I know the answer. Related: If you're interested in what President Bush, General Petraeus, and Senator Reid actually have to say on military/political ops, start here. Posted by Greyhawk / April 26, 2007 1:20 PM | Permalink 3 Comments |
November 18, 2009Dawn Patrol 11/18/2009 [Mrs Greyhawk]
Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics - from the MilBlogs and various sources around the world. If you're a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link to any of these stories, add a link to the Dawn Patrol too and your trackback will be added to the list. Hat Tips to the Dawn Patrol are greatly appreciated.Refresh for updates.
AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTANBoondoggle -- [3rd Time, New Country - in Afghanistan] Clinton in Kabul for Karzai's inauguration -- [Foreign Policy - AfPak] The war of leaks -- [Foreign Policy - AfPak] Ridding Afghanistan of Corruption Will Be No Easy Task -- [Los Angeles Times] Afghan Minister Accused of Taking Bribe -- [Washington Post] Vision for Victory, Part I -- [Washington Times] U.S. Turns to Local Guns-for-Hire to Guard Afghan Outpost -- [Danger Room - Noah Shachtman] NATO Chief Confident Afghanistan Will Have More Troops -- [Voice of America] Germany to extend Afghanistan mission another year -- [AP] Pakistani Successes May Sway US Troop Decision -- [New York Times] Where are Taliban and al Qaeda commanders, US media asks Pak -- [Daily News & Analysis] Pakistani Army Shows Off Captured Taliban Posts -- [Washington Post] IRAQIraqi Kurds Warn of Election Boycott in Dispute Over Seats - [Washington Post] US has time to reconsider Iraq drawdown plan-Odierno -- [Reuters] A few words from medics for the 41st Brigade -- [The Oregonian] Goodbye to Iraq, and thanks -- [The Oregonian] U.S. AND OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLDUS, China in Strained Diplomatic Embrace -- [Wall Street Journal] Obama: 'We've restored America's standing' -- [CNN] Somali Pirates : Maersk Alabama Attacked, Fights Back -- [Eagle Speak] Iranian COS Warns Russia: Your Security Is Tied To Ours -- [Memri Blog]
WAR ON TERROR /TERRORISMSuspected Fort Hood Shooter Believed to Be Self-Radicalized -- [Wall Street Journal] Guantánamo Won't Close by January, Obama Says -- [NY Times] SUPPORTING THE TROOPS...OR NOTNo Man Left Behind -- [Knottie's Niche] LTC Tim Karcher Update -- [Soldiers' Angels Germany] Support SA while Christmas shopping this year! -- [Soldiers' Angels Germany] Trees for Troops: Helping Military Families -- [AdAge.com] FOX 5 Special: I-Team VA Loans -- [FOX News] A FOX 5 I-Team investigation uncovered allegations of a nationwide scheme by banks and mortgage companies to defraud U.S. military veterans. The scheme, spelled out in court documents, claims banks are overcharging veterans on home refinancing loans. The question raised in a racketeering and class action law suit is how many of those loans involved banks defrauding U.S. military veterans. MILITARYMuslim discrimination in the U.S. military. Not. -- [Castra Praetoria] Time to revisit firearms policies on military posts -- [Atlanta Journal Constitution] Army's Record Suicide Rate 'Horrible,' General Says -- [Washington Post]
WELCOME HOMEVeterans' descendants welcome troops home to Fort Campbell -- [Clarksville Leaf Chronicle] 'Greywolf' Among First CAV Troops to Return Home -- [DVIDS] THE MEDIAWhere are Taliban and al Qaeda commanders, US media asks Pak -- [Daily News & Analysis] Army officials said that they have killed as many as 550 Taliban militants a month after the military began its campaign into the lawless territory, yet they acknowledge that hundreds, perhaps thousands more have melted away.
POLITICSRepublicans Criticize Obama's Call to Delay Hill Inquiries on Fort Hood -- [Washington Post] HUMOR / SATIRE
Iraq, Afghanistan, War, Terrorism, Military, Politics, Media, MilBlogs, dawn patrol Mudville
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]()
![]() I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2009 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() |
reid's ill-conceived and IMHO traitorious jargon hinders our side and encourages the insurgents, and therefore is counter-productive to a political solution.
I just think that Harry Reid is an intellectual idiot; he cannot possibly understand a brillant mind such as General Petraeus. I can picture Reid's face sort of like a drooling idiot's.
Reid is kicking and throwing sand in the air--this 20/80 business is completely beside the point. In any event, the numbers themselves were pulled out of someone's rear end, as Petreus himself suggests rather more nicely ("you can certainly debate..."), and in all likelihood, that dark well of mysteries hid beneath Chinese silk.
Putting aside the quality of the numbers, consider their likely origin in Mao Zedong's central committee, and hence their original intention--to suggest the task confronting a revolutionary.
That task is quite different from counter-insurgency, and I doubt if the relative importance of political and military action are equivalent for both. After all, the revolutionary has to change the political consciousness of the people in order to win them over to his cause, inverting the mass (human) component of the power equation (if that makes any sense; I'm kind of riffing here). That's why his task is so heavily political.
I guess I should read Grim's piece before I blather on like this, but anyway, it seems pretty obvious to me that counter-insurgent has a very different task that has to be considered on its own.