Heads or Tails? The COIN Keeps Flipping

In his keynote address at an irregular warfare conference this week, ADM Eric Olson, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, silenced the audience with his comments that counterinsurgency doctrine was “an oxymoron” and that “counterinsurgency should involve countering the insurgents” rather than “protecting populations.” This is some tough talk coming on the heels of Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s decision that the entire military should adopt the counterinsurgency training and proficiency standards implemented by GEN Stanley McChrystal in his “AfPak Hands” program in Afghanistan. And in an interview, Ben Rhodes, the primary author of the new National Security Strategy (NSS) released yesterday, responded affirmatively to the interviewer’s observation of some similarities between the NSS and Army Field Manual 3–24 (FM 3–24), Counterinsurgency, “from the focus of legitimacy of action . . . and in its recognition that too much hard power can be counterproductive.”

Regular readers of JFQ or any milblog are familiar with (and probably participating in) the ongoing battle over all things counterinsurgency. JFQ is doing its part to stoke the fires in the July 2010 issue by including not one but two sets of point/counterpoint articles on FM 3–24 by Gian Gentile and John Nagl, who see counterinsurgency differently, to put it mildly.

Click here to get a preview and to whet your appetite for more.

Students Compete in Annual Essay Competitions

The 4th Annual Secretary of Defense and 29th Annual Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Essay Competitions took place this week. Students at the joint professional military education colleges, schools, and other educational programs competed for a chance to catch the ear of the Secretary of Defense or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Dr. James A. Mowbray of the Air War College stresses the importance of the competitions, stating that “writing is an important part of officer training. It is important to encourage officers to write well so that they can express themselves well.”

Dr. Mowbray, who has been a judge in the essay competition for over 23 years, says the competition is fun and extremely educational. He “likes seeing what the other colleges do” and explains that “it is a great honor to have someone from your own college win the competition.” Mowbray laughs as he remembers one Air War College student, a Naval officer, who had originally been enrolled in the college’s writing program because his writing was so poor. But the student had the last laugh: his end product was a phenomenal research paper that won the competition in the early 1990s. Mowbray believes that the competition has always been startlingly objective: “The judges have a genuine heartfelt desire to send forward only the best.”

This passion for excellence in strategic studies is echoed by fellow judge Professor Charles C. Chadbourn III of the Naval War College. Professor Chadbourn is the longest standing judge in the competition; he has been participating since its inception in 1982. Chadbourn, a Professor of Strategy, says the essay competition gives him a unique opportunity to reconnect with the judges, many of whom come back year after year. He loves reading the papers and seeing the ideas that are generated. One of the best papers he ever read was an essay by Charles L. Dunlap, Jr., called The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012, about a fictional overthrow of the government. The essay suggested that the blurring of the military role of the armed forces into civilian missions might be dangerous to democracy and civilian government.

Chadbourn chuckles as he remembers how a movie studio tried to buy the rights to the Dunlap essay. Dr. Frederick T. Kiley, then Director of NDU Press, told the studio that the essay was not for sale. After Kiley refused a very enticing offer, the studio explained that money was not an issue; the studio could afford to pay whatever he wished. Dr. Kiley then explained why he could not take their money: because the essay was written by a military officer for a government-sponsored contest, it was public property and the rights were free to the public. Chadbourn isn’t sure if a movie was ever made after the request.

The seasoned essay judge explains how the papers submitted for the essay competition really run the gamut, covering almost any issue the military has ever faced. When students ask him what they should write about, he counters with, “If you had five minutes to speak with the Chairman, what would you say? That’s what you should write about.” Chadbourn fondly remembers meeting Chairman Colin Powell when a student from the Naval War College won the essay competition. Part of the prize was a meeting with the Chairman. Chadbourn accompanied the student to the meeting and remembers being struck by Powell’s penetrating comments. Powell had done his homework and obviously read the paper, which both surprised and delighted the Professor.

The Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Essay Competitions wrapped up yesterday afternoon and the votes were tallied. Final results will be posted by NDU Press after the winners are notified by their schools.

Click here to see photos from the event.

Bio-inspired Innovation and National Security

New from NDU Press for the Center for Technology and National Security Policy: Bio-inspired Innovation and National Security, edited by Robert E. Armstrong, Mark D. Drapeau, Cheryl A. Loeb, and James J. Valdes.

Despite the vital importance of the emerging area of biotechnology and its role in defense planning and policymaking, no definitive book has been written on the topic for the defense policymaker, the military student, and the private-sector bioscientist interested in the “emerging opportunities market” of national security. This edited volume is intended to help close this gap and provide the necessary backdrop for thinking strategically about biology in defense planning and policymaking.

This volume is about applications of the biological sciences, here called “biologically inspired innovations,” to the military. Rather than treating biology as a series of threats to be dealt with, such innovations generally approach the biological sciences as a set of opportunities for the military to gain strategic advantage over adversaries. These opportunities range from looking at everything from genes to brains, from enhancing human performance to creating renewable energy, from sensing the environment around us to harnessing its power.

I’ll Take “Jointness” for $500, Alex

Professors from all joint professional military education institutions will converge on Fort McNair tomorrow to begin the final round of judging in the 4th Annual Secretary of Defense and 29th Annual Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Essay Competitions. This year’s contests drew a record number of submissions—76—from both U.S. and foreign military and civilian students, all with their eyes on the prize of having their work published in Joint Force Quarterly, potentially meeting the Secretary of Defense or Chairman in person, and appearing on one of America’s favorite game shows.

Uh, wait a minute—that last thing isn’t part of the prize. But that didn’t stop 2004 CJCS Essay Competition winner Col David Belote, USAF, from making it happen. Then LtCol Belote tied for first place with his paper, “The Political Role of Regional Combatant Commanders,” which he wrote while attending the National War College. Sharing the first-place prize may not have been a lifelong dream for Col Belote, but appearing on the game show Jeopardy! was. After numerous attempts to get on the show, Col Belote, now 99th Air Base Wing Commander at Nellis Air Force Base, appeared on the program in December 2009 and racked up a six-show winning streak.

Whether Col Belote’s triumph in the CJCS Essay Competition led to his success on Jeopardy! has yet to be proven, but we like to think there is a connection—especially if it encourages even more participation in next year’s competitions.

Another Skelton Panel Moment for Officer Education?

In its first comprehensive report on the professional military education (PME) system since the panel chaired by Congressmen Ike Skelton released its review of the topic 20 years ago, the House Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation suggests that the system has both systemic and institutional issues that need to be addressed—in particular, the mixed results of the effort to cultivate strategists. The report notes that joint and Service efforts in this regard are “relatively disassociated from one another” and that PME, while an important factor in shaping strategists, is not the primary means of doing so.

Some of the contributors to the forthcoming Joint Force Quarterly (Issue 58, July 2010) undoubtedly will read the HASC Subcommittee report with great interest. The authors of the four articles in the issue’s Commentary section hold forth on some of the aspects of military education, training, and professionalism referenced in the report. In particular, Scott A. Bethel, Aaron Prupas, Tomislav Z. Ruby, and M.V. Smith take a Service-specific perspective regarding the education of strategists in their article “Developing Air Force Strategists: Change Culture, and Reverse Careerism.” Barry Watts, Bernie Schriever, black swans, and Baron de Jomini all figure into their argument, which you can read here in advance of its publication; then click here to sound off to the authors.

The Role of Leadership in Building Resilience in Troops

The Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program launched by the Army last fall is intended to help Soldiers deal with stress by building their resilience to adversity. The Army has designated Master Resilience Trainers to help Soldiers cope with the stresses of deployment.

Dr. Paul T. Bartone, Senior Research Fellow in the Center for Technology and National Security Policy at NDU, and several of his colleagues both inside and outside of the university have devoted much of their research to military psychology, stress, adaptation and resilience, and leadership. In Defense Horizons 69, “To Build Resilience: Leader Influence on Mental Hardiness,” Dr. Bartone, Charles L. Barry, and Robert E. Armstrong enumerated the main stressors of military operations and highlight how unit leader actions and policies can positively affect the mental hardiness of their troops.

In their forthcoming book, The 71F Advantage: Applying Research Psychology to Improve Military Health, Performance, and Policy, Dr. Bartone, Ross H. Pastel, and Mark A. Vaitkus capitalize on the expertise of numerous Army research psychologists to delve more deeply into the psychology of leadership, Soldier psychological health, challenges faced by military families, and other dimensions. Click here to read Dr. Bartone’s chapter, “New Wine in Old Bottles: Leadership and Personality in the Military Organization,” from The 71F Advantage, which will be available from NDU Press in early summer.