Interesting article over at MWI on the role of the ‘human domain’ in strategy.
The US military flounders in the human domain of conflict, with respect to foes, friends, and bystanders alike. Failure to engage with the building blocks of humanity—culture, society, politics, economics, and religion—leaves our strategies and plans untethered to reality. The result has been on display to the world for decades. The Afghan collapse provided a final exclamation point.
GETTING COMPETITION WRONG: THE US MILITARY’S LOOMING FAILURE
There is a lot I agree with in this article – like the importance of understanding human dynamics in warfare. The authors don’t really talk about language – but I’m coming around to believing that you can’t call yourself a “regional expert” if you don’t have some language ability in the region in which you claim expertise.
However, I’m skeptical about the idea of building strategy on all of the granular human stuff.
It seems like the powers that be should set the goals, set the objectives, set the end states. And then it is the role of the rest of us to use what we can to achieve those.
I’m not sure it works any other way.
Enjoy the posts? Subscribe to the monthly newsletter.
Carrying the Gun 