| Small Wars Journal

THIS JULY 5^th, France and Algeria marked the fiftieth anniversary of the latter’s independence. An inglorious seven-year war against a nationalist insurgency was brought to a close by President Charles de Gaulle, and with it, the last significant chapter of Western colonialism in the Arab world.

French efforts to “pacify” Algeria were politically doomed despite growing military successes on the ground. Four long years before the 1962 Evian Accords were signed with the Front de Libération Nationale (FLN), the incumbent de Gaulle had concluded that the costs of maintaining the colony had come to outweigh the benefits to Metropolitan France. The war had been socially divisive (leading to a coup against the Fourth Republic), geopolitically counterproductive (isolating France from her NATO allies while creating enmity in the Arab world), and economically disastrous.

De Gaulle wished for a “responsible” pull-out. Subject to a popular referendum, Algeria would be granted its independence in exchange for the promise that France would continue to have access to the naval installations, nuclear sites and gas fields she had invested in there, and that the former colony would not turn into a Soviet proxy-state.

Fifty years later, the United States, which had once been very critical of French objectives in Algeria, would yearn for an analogous conclusion to her own protracted war in Afghanistan.

The general impression of the Algerian War today is that the French lost their colony because the indigenous population kicked them out. The plain truth, however, is that the French were not ousted from Algeria, anymore than the Americans were ousted from Iraq, or will soon be “ousted” from Afghanistan.

Setting the conditions for a “responsible” exit from Algeria in 1962 had required the French to bleed soldiers and treasury for years after the political decision had been made to withdraw. We are seeing the same eerie phenomenon repeat itself in Afghanistan. There, the irony of fighting against insurgencies abroad is emerging in full force; the counterinsurgent’s exit hinges on negotiating with the insurgent he continues to fight.

De Gaulle had negotiated with the FLN from a position of relative weakness; for despite France’s military successes on the ground, her political desire to withdraw was well known to all. The United States is confronted with a similar weakness in Afghanistan. Insurgent groups – the Taliban especially – have capitalized on NATO’s urgency to leave. The Taliban have come to realize that intransigence (to the point of killing negotiators – a recurring theme in Afghan history) will offer the better long-term yield. The more the Taliban wait, the more U.S.–NATO position will become desperate.

One hopes that the difference between Algeria and Afghanistan will lie in the degree to which the insurgent accedes to power in the aftermath of the foreign power’s withdrawal. In Algeria, despite promises of constitutional elections, the FLN had been allowed to achieve quasi-dictatorial control over the entire country following the French pull-out. The repercussions of a similar scenario being repeated in Afghanistan could be worse still. The Taliban’s record of governance offers bleak prospects for Afghanistan's sectarian stability, and more broadly, for the stability of Pakistan and the entire region. The tragedy of such an endgame would lie in the amount of blood and tears spilt by all sides only to yield results that could have been obtained – it will seem in hindsight – without paying such a tribute.

In Afghanistan, it remains to be seen whether the population will muster the strength to reject Taliban rule in the South on the morrow of an American withdrawal, or whether it will cave to the terror and fanaticism imposed by a few, thereby remaining cut-off from the rest of the world.

When national security imperatives or humanitarian concerns justify the toppling of a regime in the future, it is hoped that all efforts towards achieving a revolution from within will first be exhausted prior to contemplating an invasion. Otherwise, the insurgents, regardless of the merits of their banner-cause, will encounter no shortage of recruits to fight against the foreign occupiers of their lands and the perceived domestic lackeys they support.

Lowy Institute: The 'Pivot' in Australia-Indonesia Strategic Relations

The Asia-Pacific ‘US Pivot’, of course, has ramifications (second-third order effects) well beyond US defense strategies, budgets, and service-related in-fighting. This piece, The ‘Pivot’ in Australia-Indonesia Strategic Relations by Greta Nabbs-Keller, at the highly regarded Lowy Institute’s ‘The Interpreter’, discuses Australia's relationship with Indonesia as a “triangular relationship” with the US comprising the third angle.

This is but the tip of an iceberg of complicated issues associate with the pivot that will play out in Asia’s East, South, Southeast, Central, and Oceania as well as ‘The America’s’ Pacific countries. Europe and NATO aren’t exactly non-players either. Solid and unanswered questions abound concerning what the pivot holds for US engagement in the Middle East. Old and new alliances, both formal and informal are or will be on the table. Anyone up for a game of Dominos? (No Vietnam War pun intended).

Read more about Lowy Institute: The 'Pivot' in Australia-Indonesia Strategic Relations

American Strategy in Afghanistan Flunks Sun Tzu

American Strategy in Afghanistan Flunks Sun Tzu by Gian Gentile, Jerusalem Post opinion piece. "Proof of counterinsurgency’s failures is the current state of affairs in Iraq and Afghanistan."

…leads to the last causative factor in American history that has helped shape the current impulse to “change an entire society” in Afghanistan. After World War II, throughout the Cold War and persisting through the 9/11 era is the rock solid assumption that whatever America does in the world is, by rule, morally righteous. This hardened assumption of moral righteousness has combined with another rock solid assumption: that American war of whatever kind works in foreign lands, that if the United States just gets the tactics of war correct and puts the right general in charge then anything can be accomplished with military force.

Independence Day SWJ News & Opinion Roundup

Small Wars Journal Daily Roundup

US Naval Institute Daily - USNI

Real Clear World – RCP

Afghanistan

Afghanistan Not Ready to Govern Itself, Say Afghan Legislators - SB

Clinton: Pakistan to Reopen NATO Supply Lines to Afghanistan - VOA

Pakistan Reopens Supply Routes after Clinton Says 'Sorry' - S&S

Clinton’s ‘Sorry’ to Pakistan Ends Barrier to NATO - NYT

Pakistan to Open Supply Routes after US Apology - WP

Pakistan Allows NATO Convoys to Resume - BBC

Pakistan Reopens NATO Supply Routes to Afghanistan - CNN

Pakistan Ends Blockade of NATO Supply Routes - TT

US, Pakistan Reach Deal to Reopen Afghan Supply Routes - Reuters

Panetta Welcomes Opening of Pakistan Supply Lines to Afghanistan - AFPS

Man in Afghan Army Uniform Wounds 5 NATO Soldiers - BBC

US Military Deaths in Afghanistan at 1,896 - AP

Problems Hobble Afghan Air Force - WP

ISAF Operations Summary - AFPS

Clinton Says We’re Sorry - NYT opinion

Syria

Syrian Opposition Draws Up Goals for Transition - NYT

Rifts Split Syria's Opposition at Cairo Meeting - AP

Fights Break Out at Syrian Opposition Meeting - Reuters

HRW: Syria Has 'Archipelago' of Torture Centers - VOA

HRW: Syria 'Regime Torture Widespread' - BBC

Syria's 'Network of Torture Chambers' - CNN

Russia Accuses West of Distorting Syria Agreement - TT

Assad Reportedly Regrets Syria Downing of Turkish Jet - VOA

Assad 'Regrets' Downing of Turkish Plane - BBC

Expelled Priest Turns Diplomat for Syrian Opposition - Reuters

Militant Group Claims Syrian TV Channel Attack - Reuters

Iran

Iran’s President Says New Sanctions Are Toughest Yet - NYT

US Adds Forces in Persian Gulf, a Signal to Iran - NYT

Iran Says Ballistic Missile Tests 'Response to Threats' - VOA

Iran Says It Test-Fires Missiles in War of Nerves - Reuters

Iran Nuclear Talks Could Resume - WP

Iranians 'Were Targeting British High Commission in Kenya' - TT

Russia to Renew Iran S-300 Sales if Syria Fails - Bloomberg

Iranians Yearn for Freedom, Too - WT opinion

Middle East / North Africa

Bombings Across Iraq Killed at Least 40, Wounded 100 - VOA

Dozens Killed in Rising Iraqi Violence - NYT

'Many Dead' in Iraq Bomb Attacks - BBC

Bombs Kill 44 Before Shiite Ritual in Iraq - Reuters

Iraq Bombs Kill 40; Officials Eye Security Bribes - AP

Yemen Air Strikes Kill Four Al Qaeda Suspects - Reuters

Yemen Official: Drone Kills 2 al-Qaida Militants - AP

Palestinians Protest Against PA - BBC

Lebanon Finds Israel 'Spy Devices' - BBC

Lebanon Artists Confront Censorship - NYT

UN Ends Saudi Dissident Sanctions - BBC

Judge Helped Egypt’s Military to Cement Power - NYT

Islamists Put to the Test in Libya Vote - WP

Libya: Gaddafi’s Son Lives the Good Life, Can it Last? - WP

France, Algeria: Two Lenses on the Past - VOA

What Does Morsi Mean for Israel? - NYT opinion

United Nations

UN Chief Pleads for Arms Pact, Palestinians Demand Seat - Reuters

NATO

NATO Chief Discusses Alliance Role in Syria, Afghanistan - AFPS

US Department of Defense

Army Looks for Global Partnerships - WT

Vietnam War at 50: A Lesson for Afghanistan? - USAT

C-130 Crews Resume Firefighting Operations - AFPS

NC Air Guard Identifies Airmen Killed in C-130 Crash - AFPS

Facebook Posts Shed Light on Fort Bragg Shooter's Mind-set - S&S

Appeals Court to Hear Case of Marine Jailed in Iraqi Civilian Killing - LAT

Army Dismisses Officer Who Killed Soldier in Friendly-fire Incident - WP

United States

America Readies for Independence Day Celebrations - VOA

Fears of Fires Take Fireworks Out of July 4th Celebrations - Reuters

Difficulties of Moving From Military to Diplomatic Circles - NYT

Demonstrations Show Domestic Drones Could be Hacked - VOA

IMF: Europe's Problems Slow US Economic Recovery - VOA

Plenty of Job Openings for US Vets, in Canada - S&S

The American Debate - NYT editorial

Happy Dependence Day - WT editorial

The Fourth of July - WP editorial

Thanks to King George - WT opinion

The Downside of Liberty - NYT opinion

The Price and Responsibilities of Liberty - WT opinion

A More Perfect Union, Built on Shared Debt - Bloomberg opinion

A Land of Liberty or Equality? - WP opinion

Making July 4 Unpatriotic - WT opinion

The Balkanized States of America - WT opinion

Happy Independence DNA - WT opinion

Why We Need Mayberry - CNN opinion

Immigration Ruling Nixes State Sovereignty - WT opinion

Civil War: Schools for Soldiers - NYT opinion

Africa

AFRICOM Builds Logistics Capability in African Partners - AFPS

Boko Haram Battles Crush Northern Nigerian City - VOA

Nigeria Mulls Gas Flare Crackdown - VOA

Mali: Timbuktu Rejects Islamists' Reason for Destroying Shrines - VOA

'Mines Planted' Around Mali Town - BBC

Zimbabwe Foreign Bank Handover Deadline Row - BBC

CPJ Rips Ethiopian Crackdown on Journalists - VOA

Liberian President’s Party Members Demand Jobs - VOA

South Africa Mine Union Revolt Shows Cracks in ANC Rule - Reuters

The International Criminal Court is Hurting Africa - TT opinion

Americas

Narrow Victory for Mexico’s New Leader Signals Challenges Ahead - NYT

Mexico's New President Will Need Outgoing Party for Reforms - Reuters

Mexico's President-Elect May Double Security Spending - Reuters

Mexico Student Movement Protests Results of Presidential Election - WP

Accusations Grow of Vote-Buying in Mexico Election - AP

Mexico Presidential Candidate Demands Recount - BBC

Mexican Leftist Asks for Presidential Recount - Reuters

Brother of Mexico’s Zetas Cartel Leaders Held in Texas Jail - AP

Colombia General Turns Himself In, Flown to US - BBC

Ex-Police General Surrenders in Colombia - AP

Questions Raised on Venezuela Joining Mercosur - AP

Chavez: Venezuela to Buy Tanks From China - AP

Venezuelan Doctor Held Over Leaks - BBC

Argentine Workers Keep Oil Blockade in Place - AP

Peru May Suspend Freedom of Assembly Over Protest - Reuters

Emergency in Peru After 3 Killed in Mining Clash - AP

Three Dead in Peru Mine Protest - BBC

Asia Pacific / Central

RIMPAC Exercise Praised as Key Tool for Global Prosperity - HAS

Philippine President Wants US to Monitor Disputed Waters - PDI

Reactor Restarts, but Japan's Energy Policy in Flux - Reuters

US Sending Ospreys to Japan Despite Local Protests - AP

Cancellation of S. Korea Pact with Japan Reflects Rise of Park Geun-hye - ANN

Russia's Medvedev Visits Disputed Pacific Islands - AP

Russia Angers Japan with Visit to Disputed Island - CNN

UN Report: N. Korea Ships Arms, Violating Sanctions - AP

Hunting for N. Korea Invasion Tunnels to Prove a Threat - NYT

China Vows Crackdown on Environmental Protesters - VOA

After Year of Peace, Trickier Times Ahead for Thai PM - Reuters

Burma Poised for Cabinet Shake-Up, MPs Say - Reuters

Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim Speaks Out - WP interview

Europe

Terror Threat to London Olympics? - CNN

German Spy Agency Faces Shake-Up in Neo-Nazi Case - AP

Suspected al-Qaida Financier Arrested in France - AP

France to Tackle 'Crushing Debt' - BBC

France: Police Raid Sarkozy's Home in Funding Probe - Reuters

Lawmakers in Ukraine Approve Bill on Language - NYT

Ukrainian Parliament Speaker Quits After Language Vote - Reuters

Ukraine Police Battle Protesters, Teargas Used - Reuters

Ukraine Interior Minister Arrest 'Violated Rights' - BBC

Europe: Is the UK In or Out? - TT opinion

South Asia

South Asia Rivals India, Pakistan to Hold Peace Talks - BBC

India-Pakistan Security Talks Come Amid New Tensions - VOA

India-Pakistan: Peacocks at Sunset - NYT opinion

Read more about Independence Day SWJ News & Opinion Roundup

"Little America" - Doug Ollivant's View

SWJ friend Doug Ollivant takes a contrarian view of Rajiv Chanrasekaran’s new book, Little America; a view we here at SWJ don’t necessarily share. That said; he, in the same quarter as COL Gian Gentile, is a wise and experienced practitioner, researcher and deep thinker. The definitive history is yet to be written, if ever. As SWJ presents all views with anticipation that our community of interest and practice will aid in contributing to the historical works of the future we present Doug’s op-ed at Time’s Battleland blog as yet another piece of the Small Wars jigsaw puzzle. Please feel free to comment away (put up or shut up).

Long Time SWJ & Personal Friend: Good Man Down

Carl Prine is hurting, a reporter, blogger, a former Marine and Soldier - and the best of the best at cutting to the quick and backing words with real analysis. His words of wisdom will be missed. That said, it ain't over until the fat lady sings and I encourage words of encouragement and prayers for a speedy recovery. Carl, don't give up, not only do we want you back, we need you back. Semper Fi, Dave

Independence Day 2012

We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

-- U.S. Declaration of Independence

I am well aware of the toil and blood and treasure it will cost us to maintain this declaration, and support and defend these states. Yet through all the gloom I see the rays of ravishing light and glory. I can see that the end is worth all the means. This is our day of deliverance.

-- John Adams

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

-- Benjamin Franklin

Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Read more about Independence Day 2012

Professional Military Education: Separate Military Requirements and Academic Degrees

At an April 2012 panel on Professional Military Education (PME) in Washington, D.C., defense analyst Tom Ricks expressed apprehension that uncertainties about the rigor and value of PME would make it an easy target for those wielding the budget ax. Specifically, he stated: “I suspect that in the coming decade, any institution, department, or individual that cannot demonstrate a clear, positive contribution is going to get axed. My concern is that the baby will be thrown out with the bathwater. There is a lot of good in military education, but if you let the bad persist, it will drag down the rest.”

How to avoid having the baby tossed out the door is an important question that must be addressed. I believe the first step is to separate the military requirements of Joint Professional Military Education, and the academic degrees which ostensibly testify to rigor, now concurrently conferred by the War Colleges.

The problem is in defining what constitutes rigor and value -- demonstrating a clear, positive contribution -- and to whom. Understandably, the military defines “value” as having the best-trained officers available to be operationally deployed as much as possible. By that definition, costly career time spent in schoolhouses should be compressed, and/or focused on training for operations. On behalf of the Nation, however, Congress has in its Goldwater-Nichols legislation defined “value” in terms of senior military leaders who are “intellectually agile,” with adequate time provided in schoolhouses to transition from being operationally proficient to having the knowledge and education to be strategic, critical thinkers.

Trying to kludge together these very different goals of getting officers quickly-training and back into operations, and having them be well-educated strategic thinkers, has resulted in War College academic programs where, even with no academic standards for student admission, there is virtually a 100 percent success rate. No one fails. Programmatic goals become set by the need to get officers back in the field, with both a Master’s degree and certified as Joint Professional Military Education II “qualified,” which is necessary for promotion to higher ranks.

Any program with a 100% success rate, however, will inherently have its rigor and value questioned.

What it takes to be operationally successful can be very different from what it takes to be a strategic, critical thinker. Admiral James Stavridis gave his take on the difference in his 2011 commencement address at National War College.

I knew what I was good at and what I knew well: driving a destroyer or a cruiser; navigating through tight waters; leading a boarding party up a swinging ladder; planning an air defense campaign; leading Sailors on the deck plates of a rolling ship. But I also sensed what I did not know or understand well: global politics and grand strategy; the importance of the ‘logistics nation'; how the interagency community worked; what the levers of power and practice were in the world—in essence, how everything fits together in producing security for the United States and our partners.

But since all senior officers are required to attend War College, there is no sifting of the different types of individuals – those not just proficient at operational skills, but also with the potential to be strategic thinkers. Nor, necessarily, should there be. American military officers face the most complex global environment ever, and are often the face of America in far off places; they are de facto diplomats as well as warfighters. Therefore, all officers should have the opportunity to have a well-rounded education and to better understand that environment. But there is no way around it: some will do better than others in graduate level education programs.

Curiously, one suggestion for injecting more rigor into War College programs has been to do away with grades. The rationale, apparently, is that military officers “are different” and therefore some will not succeed in an academic program and so shouldn’t be bothered with trivialities like grades. That rationale, however, is too often used to avoid comparisons and standards. Note that no one is suggested doing away with the degrees, of course -- just the grades. Doing away with grades and still passing every officer does nothing for rigor, and would only exacerbate current problems.

Further, accreditation for the Master’s degree would be put at risk, if not outright revoked. If that happened, the students would undoubtedly revert to past ways, when they attended War Colleges knowing they would all pass, consequently pay minimal attention to the curriculum, and instead enroll in and focus on a local graduate night school program to get a Master’s degree they all know will be more valuable post retirement than some box-check certificate.

Also, many of the War College students I have worked with in my career have been more concerned about single point differentiations between grades than students in civilian institutions. Whereas most civilian institutions give letter grades – an 86-89 are all a B+ -- numerical grades are more often awarded in PME because that’s what the students want.

It has also been suggested that the War Colleges simply be closed, and officers sent to civilian schools. General David Petraeus went to Princeton, and that seems to have worked for him.

But this has always been a non-starter of an argument. There simply aren’t enough spots in top civilian academic programs for the literally thousands of officers required to attend. Consequently, officers would end up attending second, third and fourth tier schools taking courses not relevant to their careers as security professionals, and missing the opportunity to interact with their peers from the other military services that occurs in War College seminars.

Worse yet, they might all simply be told to get a degree online in their spare time – of which they have little as it stands already. This would be a clear signal that quality was irrelevant. Civilian academic institutions are not above creating watered down programs to get military students through quickly and easily, whether online or in classrooms, which would be a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Setting different standards for passing the JPME requirements of War College and attaining the Master’s degree at War College would serve multiple purposes. For one, doing so would allow for injecting and enforcing far more rigor into PME programs. Right now, War Colleges design their curricula, both for a graduate degree and for the far less demanding JPME requirements, so they can be taught by anyone (and especially by former military officers). PME is steeped in military retirees not only as faculty – where some serve well, while the skill sets of others have a fast half-life -- but as administrators overseeing areas on which they have no background. That has resulted in some nasty situations where unqualified individuals teach courses based on opinion rather than knowledge -- witness the course previously taught at the Joint Forces Staff College (JFSC) advocating the use of nuclear weapons to fight Islam.

Additionally, if JPME and the awarding of the Master’s Degree were separated, those aspects of the program key for strategic thinking and important at the higher ranks could be taught with real rigor, rather than as a hand wave. Skills such as writing – a requirement abhorred by many military officers because they have little experience with writing beyond bullet points, and so are usually not good at it – and critical analysis could be taught and tested beyond the basics, which is where they barely are offered now.

The Master’s degree would be reserved for those who actually demonstrated accomplishment in those areas of advanced studies being taught. Students could work harder while still staying focused on the War College curriculum rather than somebody else’s night school program.

JPME, by contrast, would be pass/fail -- as it effectively is today -- with everyone passing so that no officer’s career would be hurt by not being as academically adept as others. While it can be argued that all mid/upper level officers should be able to pass a (at least mildly) rigorous Master’s course they are paid to attend full time, the service powers-that-be are currently unwilling to risk that. Perhaps the problem is over-inflation of rank requirements for billets, but that’s another issue. The question here is how to best accommodate reality and still be able to have a credible, academically rigorous PME program.

The War Colleges must be maintained. For most officers, they provide the only opportunity and pathway for operational leaders to receive the broadened educational background they will need as senior strategic leaders and hence able to maintain their own in strategic planning with the best and the brightest civilians they will likely encounter in future career paths. Congress specifically and intentionally reinvigorated the War Colleges with provisions of the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act because military voices were being excluded from strategic discussions. The intent was to move military education away from what Samuel Huntington in The Soldier and the State had earlier called the “technicism” – concentration on a technical specialty – prominent in military culture. Technicism, however, is what the services were and are largely comfortable with and want, and understandably so given the increasing military reliance on increasingly sophisticated and complex technology. As technical experts in operations, however, with few exceptions they had little to contribute to strategic planning. But their voices are necessary.

Military officers who sit at the conference tables where strategic decisions are made (and those who sit along the back wall and assist their bosses at the table) and those working in distant countries with often very different cultures than their own must have the education required to put operational objectives and obstacles into the context of the larger strategic environment. That does not come through tactical excellence, pilot training or time at sea. And admittedly, education alone will not suffice if culture and ideology impairs judgment – as demonstrated at JFSC -- but education will lessen those instances.

But if the War Colleges want Congress to recognize their value and therefor protect their budgets, the War Colleges must respect and fulfill the Professional Military Education goals set in Goldwater-Nichols. That means a demonstration of rigor beyond a program where everybody goes and everyone graduates.