Thoughts rule the world. —Ralph Waldo Emerson
National power is the sum total of any country's present and projected capabilities derived from political, economic, military, social, scientific, technological, and informational resources plus geographic circumstances. Innovative thinking should be an intrinsic part of that package, but the U.S. national security community taps only a tiny fraction of potentially available talent. The Secretary of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Saff, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, combatant commands, and their main subsidiaries therefore lack institutional ways to generate and sustain chain reactions of creative thought that they could use to solve strategic, operational, tactical, logistical, budgetary, and countless other pressing problems. Autocratic restrictions, built-in biases, compartmentalization, enforced compromise, and security classifications aggravate reliance on resident thinkers and selected think tanks. A string of intellectual clearinghouses could eliminate or greatly alleviate those shortcomings.
Clearinghouse Concepts. Unclassified email messages solicit diversified opinions on a global scale. Small, handpicked staffs initiate and nourish a diversified flow of opinions; screen and synthesize responses; then provide top-level decision-makers the most promising observations for possible implementation. Horizontal as well as vertical connections within and between clearinghouses would enable all concerned parties to share useful ideas routinely. Here's how:
- Diversify membership—The entire process is an audience participation show that depends on the broadest possible spectrum of opinion. Clearinghouse operators before activation day accordingly should assemble a cosmopolitan list of participants and refine it as the process matures. A JCS forum, for example, might enlist active and reserve component officers, NCOs, civilian employees, retirees, selected academicians, journalists, think tank occupants, industrialists, and members of Congress who exercise national security responsibilities. Each clearinghouse staff could, at little or no cost, use the Internet and professional publications to reach target audiences: The Association of the United States Army, U.S. Naval Institute, Air Force Association, Marine Corps Association, and the Retired Officers Association, all of which maintain immense subscriber lists, could attract countless contributors. Credentials accompanying applications would enable clearinghouse operators to identify potentially fruitful candidates.
- Solicit innovative opinions—Directors could request out-of-the-box solutions to exasperating problems or float trial balloons to open and maintain operations. Party of the First Part opens arguments, brutally frank Party of the Second Part might say, "That won't work and here's why," prompting Party of the Third Part to assert, "You're both wrong. Here's the only sensible way to proceed." Dialogues would continue until wells run dry. The quantity and quality of ideas received would reflect guidance that contributors receive. Clearinghouse managers consequently should: encourage controversy, allow sources to remain anonymous if they are reluctant to express provocative views in Macy's window, and advise active duty participants to bypass the chain of command so provocative thoughts arrive undiluted. Unclassified procedures from start to finish would enable intellectual groundbreakers to generate original ideas faster than enemies could counter them.
- Screen responses—No holds barred brainstorming characteristically produces a lot of junk along with enough jewels to make it worthwhile. Each clearinghouse staff therefore should sift input carefully, give open-minded consideration to "far out" flights of fancy, identify potentially useful ideas, and discard the rest.
- Submit options for approval—Each clearinghouse staff finally collates and synthesizes opinions, then submits the most promising options (not answers) to "the boss." Pro-con appraisals should accompany each packet so decision-makers see warts and all.
Possible Prototype. An open-source email net called the Warlord Loop, which has thrived for five years, might serve as a prototype. Membership grew from a handful in 2000 to 150, the maximum number manageable for administrative reasons. The object is to ventilate crucial national security issues from every quadrant of the compass. Carefully selected applicants include Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps officers from silver bars through four stars, plus a flock of sharp civilians. Liberals, conservatives, Republicans, Democrats, and nonpartisans touch every point on the public opinion spectrum from far left to far right. Invitational correspondence advises addressees to read all messages with open minds, because no contributor is always right, and none is always wrong. Al-Qaeda's capabilities and intentions, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, homeland security, cross-cultural requirements, Iraqi exit strategies, the intelligence community, recruitment, the Quadrennial Defense Review, leadership, and military ethics represent typical topics that morph in amazing ways. Freewheeling exchanges ensue in strict accord with bylaws that represent "rules of engagement." Few members have ever voluntarily left the Warlord Loop for any reason. Those who remain praise priceless insights not obtainable elsewhere.
Postscript. Edward George Bulwer Lytton in 1839 declared that "The pen is mightier than the sword," but words and weapons in fact are complementary. Warriors armed with obsolete plans needlessly waste irreplaceable lives and squander national treasure, whereas intellectual trailblazers lay sound foundations for exemplary performance on land, at sea, aloft, and in space. Intellectual clearinghouses that encourage freedom of expression and prize offbeat opinions could augment attractive options immeasurably, if given half a chance.
Colonel Collins, a longtime contributor, conceived and steers the Warlord Loop.