Could the pen really be as mighty as the sword?
One could easily reach this conclusion in looking back at the recent 2008 Joint Warfighting Conference, titled, "DoD Capabilities for the 21st Century: Dominant—Relevant—Ready?" which took place 17-19 June at the Virginia Beach Convention Center. After three days of speeches and sponsor-packed convention halls, it was one senior officer's push to publish that drew the strongest response from several thousand attendees at the conference, cosponsored by the U.S. Naval Institute and the Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association International.
Navy Admiral James G. Stavridis, commander of the U.S. Southern Command, gave an address in which he insisted that joint operations necessitate new ideas. And nowhere better for service members to test those ideas than in professional journals such as Proceedings.
Stavridis's speech stood out—amid speeches and panels on military jointness and the new challenges of warfare—for its powerful message. He quoted John Adams, who wrote, "Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write." Stavridis said, "We need to get into the business of launching ideas. We all—active-duty, contractors, civilians—should be thinking, reading, publishing."
Learning from the 'Artists'
Other conference speakers addressed the new factors raised by contemporary warfare while advising caution lest we drift too far from knowledge derived from past conflicts. As U.S. forces increasingly find themselves battling an enemy that won't fight conventionally because it knows it will be outmanned and outgunned, those forces shouldn't forget about their most important asset: the people doing the fighting.
Lieutenant General John "Bob" R. Wood, deputy commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command, said in his welcoming address that the impact of modern warfare on those who fight—the "artists" of allied joint warfare—must never be forgotten. They are young service members, many whose ideas and solutions benefit those several ranks above them, he said.
Human concerns have forced innovations on the battlefield. One way the Army is combating the enemy in an irregular fight is with what Lieutenant General David P. Valcourt, deputy commanding general and chief of staff for the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, called "human terrain systems," leveraging academics in cultural anthropology to help American forces better understand and communicate with the people who live on the battlefield. "The dominant terrain in the 21st century is human," Valcourt said. Twenty-five such teams will be deployed by this September in support of operations in Iraq.
Recruiting ?Millennials'
Valcourt also is a foot soldier on another front in the battle to preserve a human emphasis in the armed forces: recruiting. As the Army's "architect," TRADOC recruits and develops the country's Soldiers, a task that has grown increasingly difficult in an era of fighting two wars with an all-volunteer Army, he said. To make matters more challenging, only 3 of 10 American citizens ages 17 to 24 qualify for the armed services without a waiver for medical, physical, or moral reasons.
"It's a national crisis," Valcourt said. "Where would you rather they be? Under the watch of one of our sergeants? I would thank the services that take people who may have a slight stain on their shirts and find a way for them to serve their country. We have a command for a volunteer force. The pickings are pretty lean. The answer is not the draft. Many of us in this room have served. [The draft is] not a fun thing."
Recruiting the current generation, the so-called "millennials," poses new challenges, said Dan Gardner, director of the Pentagon's office of readiness, training, and policy programs. But today's incoming Soldiers also bring unique skills to the table and are the most "tolerant, get-along generation on record," said Gardner. "This generation has grown up on the Internet with YouTube and MySpace and is able to multi-task without thinking about it," he said. Consequently, the service must consider these areas when making decisions about how to recruit, he added.
Unconventional Weapons, Adaptive Adversaries
This year's Joint Warfighting Conference occurred at an opportune time, Lieutenant General Wood said. When the next U.S. President takes office in January, he will bring with him a new perspective on the questions of dominance, relevance, and readiness—the same issues that have been raised for years. In many ways, they are the same as those raised in 1980 after Operation Eagle Claw, which saw eight U.S. servicemen killed in the Iranian desert in a joint attempt to rescue American hostages in Tehran. Some of those questions were answered by the Gulf War in 1991—a proven concept of what American forces expected from joint operations, Wood said. The enemy saw it, too, and reacted accordingly. "We have chased our enemy from the conventional side of the spectrum to the unconventional side," he said. "Where else would an enemy go?"
In Iraq and Afghanistan, irregular warfare from the enemy's perspective has meant the rise of improvised explosive devices (IEDs), the weapon of choice to shake the collective will of the American people and the armed forces. In another compelling speech, Army Lieutenant General Thomas F. Metz, director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, stressed the importance of informing the public about IED attacks and said the key to success in both theaters is the defeat of these weapons.
"He's no fool," Metz said, referring to the insurgents. "He's no dumb Third-World guy. He's a determined, ruthless enemy using IEDs as his weapon." Explosions of IEDs spiked during 2006-07; they have decreased since June 2007, thanks to the IED office. "The worst thing that could happen is that they bring [them] to the homeland," said Metz, who speculated that the chemical components for IEDs exist in the homes of many Americans.
Technology keeps Soldiers informed, Valcourt said. He touted the Army's Web resources—the Army Warfighter's Forum—as an innovative way to trade information between experienced service members and those newer to force. "The Soldiers in the operating force—they're either in the [sand]box, getting ready to go into the box, or have been in the box," he said.
Along with developing adaptive leaders and designing the Army's modular force, TRADOC counts institutional learning among its goals. Part of that learning is done through immersive simulations that teach "ethical decision-making" skills for use on the battlefield, he said—providing Soldiers with a stable foundation in a battle where, increasingly, enemies thrive on instability at all levels.
Field a Balanced Force
Several speakers cautioned against putting too much stock in unconventional warfare, fearing it will compromise areas in which we are now dominant, relevant, and ready. Although currently fighting an asymmetric enemy, American forces must retain their ability to wage a conventional war, said Marine Corps General James N. Mattis, commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command and NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation. In his address, Mattis said the U.S. and its allies must continue to field a balanced force. The key to determining the future course of the military, Mattis said, is deciding the role of technology, which is, he cautions, not a "panacea."
"We don't want to lose our sense of balance here. . . . [War] will remain a human endeavor. I want highest capability in the field. The idea that technology will change the fundamental nature of war is wrongheaded. It's not the answer, but it does enable the human interface—not replace it."
Echoing Metz's words, Mattis said a key to winning the war will be defeating IEDs. "Fixing" and "finishing" the enemy are not concerns so much as "finding" him and his IEDs, he said. Coalition forces will triumph by taking that technology and turning it against the enemy, just as U.S. forces in World War II found a way to preempt the deadly efforts of kamikaze pilots.