America is preparing to go to war again. As photos of victims are displayed
and funerals are played live
on our TV screens, few people can help but react in an emotional and
anger. But now, more than ever,
is the time to think - coldly and unemotionally - and decide what must
be done.
If we are serious about taking the war to the enemy, it is time
to look to history for some indication of
how this war should be fought. History is littered with the cases of
how to conduct, and more importantly
how not to conduct this type of fight.
Terrorism is simply the first stage in the evolution of guerilla war.
Mao Tse Tung, arguably the most successful
of modern practitioners of “irregular warfare”, describes in his writings
the stages of a successful guerrilla war.
Guerilla war has its genesis in discontent. A body of people see themselves
as being repressed, disrespected,
and trod upon. The natural reaction is to strike back. However, those
who are seen to repress others are
typically too powerful to take on directly.
This discontent spawns small groups of people who take action against
their enemy. In essence this is what
we call terrorism today. These fanatics (their friends call them freedom
fighters) come together to create havoc
and inflict pain on those who allegedly repress or insult their people.
This leads to reprisals and the discontent
from those reactions create the fertile fields where masses of recruits
can be harvested.
The other stages are not important for this discussion but basically
follow the evolution from terrorism to
“hit and run” military type raids to, at it’s conclusion, open warfare
against the enemy.
But first, there is terrorism. Mao explains in “On Guerrilla War” that
there are two basic requirements for
the birth of a guerrilla (or terrorist) movement. He says,
“… guerrilla warfare basically derives from the masses and is supported
by them, it can neither exist nor
flourish if it separates itself from their sympathies and co-operation.”
And the second requirement is that
“All guerrilla units must have political and military leadership.”
So, if we truly desire to “win” a guerrilla war, at least before it
moves out of the terrorist phase, we must
address these two basic prerequisites for a successful enemy campaign.
We must deny the terrorists
popular support and deny them their leadership.
So how is this accomplished. We actually have an recent historical example
that provides some insight.
Not only does the example show how such a war can be won, but show
also how that war can be utterly lost.
That example is, of course, Vietnam.
“Hearts and Minds”
The first objective is to win over the population of the target nation.
First an foremost, this means we must
respect the people and treat them with the same respect we give to
our own people. They are not the enemy.
The vast majority are those who simply want to live their lives, raise
their children and grow old with some
sense of peace and security. It is therefore incumbent on us to insure
and reassure, through our actions,
that these honest, hardworking people can get on with their lives in
peace and brotherhood.
In the very earliest stages of the Vietnam War, we sent small groups
of elite soldiers into villages to assist the local
authorities in setting up local defense, building schools and providing
medical services. The goodwill generated by
these efforts turned the population (Mao’s masses) away from the guerillas,
and nearly won the war before it started.
So what went wrong? In short, we did. We got impatient. Rather than
this indirect action, we decided to place
a barrier between the population and the guerrillas. We herded the
population into base camps (slums really),
erected barbed wire fences around them, and burned their homes. All
of this in an attempt to keep them from
the Viet Cong. It didn’t work. The people resented being treated like
animals and rebelled.
Support for the VC became entrenched. We became the hated enemy and
not without reason.
“Decapitation”
The second objective is to eliminate the enemies ability to fight. In
conventional war this means destroying their
armies, cutting off supplies and destroying their production facilities.
In this type of war, the infrastructure needs
of the guerrilla band are practically non-existent. As such, there
is only one area of vulnerability - the actual
leadership and bands themselves. The bands and leaders must be hunted
and destroyed.
Once again, Vietnam offers answers to those willing to look. During
the height of the war, the CIA and military
cooperated in an operation called the “Phoenix Project”. The basic
effort was to assassinate the leadership of the
VC at the local level, such that local officials could once again operate
in some sense of normality. Initially, the “Project”
was extremely successful, nearly reversing the ratios of “turned” and
“friendly” local officials in a few short years.
Regrettably, the oversight on Phoenix was missing and they started assassinating
targets they should not.
Also, security on the operation deteriorated to the point where public
became aware of these activities.
In the end, the political leadership of our country and to a lesser
extent, the people, found the practice to
be so repugnant that the operation was terminated. These feelings are
still with us today, most recently
evidenced by the crucifixion of Senator Robert Kerry and the revulsion
by many regarding his SEAL
mission in Vietnam where he was accused of killing civilians. This
was a Phoenix Project operation.
“Fighting to Win”
So what needs to be done?
The first step, and it may already be too late for us this time, is
to make a declaration of this nation’s intent
in clear and specific terms. Before America became involved in WWII,
Roosevelt help craft the Atlantic
Charter, which among other things guaranteed the right of self determination
and called for the end of
“fear and want”. This would be a good start. Add to that a declaration
that all support for any terrorist
organization or those with terrorist elements would end and you’d really
have something for other
nations to get behind.
However, we, the United States of America, would have to be good to
our word. All of the taverns in Boston
that have mayo jars for IRA donations sitting on their bars have to
go. All private support for the PLO must go.
Support for Israel must end. Our own homegrown terrorists must be hunted
down and eliminated. Our house
must be clean or we can not expect others to follow us. We must show
that we have zero tolerance for hate.
If we did this, others would follow.
Second, we need to establish strong economic ties with those who sign
onto this “new Atlantic Charter”.
Economic stability is the first key to insuring a population that is
content. This could start with dept forgiveness
or expand to a “Marshal Plan” for the world. This single act of generosity
will pay huge dividends in the long run.
Third, if we must take direct action in another person’s nation, we
must respect the people who live in the
combat zone. Their personal safety and the safety of their families
must be guaranteed. These people must know
that their rights will be respected - especially their religious beliefs.
Our soldiers must respect their customs,
respect their women, respect them as humans. They must be assured that
there is nothing to fear from our military.
They must be assured that we operate with the consent of their legal
government and we are not there to take over
and prop up some puppet government we control. We must show that justice
and truth are more than words.
From this all else flows naturally.
Finally, we need to unleash our assassins. There is no nice way to say
it. If terrorist organizers and bands can not
be brought before the bar of justice, they must be killed. This can
only be done with oversight by our political
leadership, with guidance from the judiciary, but if we are serious
about combating terrorists, it must be done.
Bombs and cruise missiles are simply too crude a weapon for this type
of warfare. This is dirty war, it is messy war,
but, when a nation will not participate in the community of the world,
it becomes a necessary war.
“Conclusion”
So when someone you know, or overhear starts talking about “nukin’ those
bastards”, ask them if they want to win?
The surest way to loose this war is to treat a body of people who are
not the enemy as if they are the enemy.
This simply fuels the hate that feeds the terrorist. The enemy must
be eliminated and the best way to do that is
to deny them followers and, ultimately, deny them life.