Jun.02.2008
3:14 pm
by dni
On War #261: Not Checking Six
By William S. Lind
As the U.S. remains fixated on two Fourth Generation wars half a world a way, in Iraq and Afghanistan, 4GW is knocking at our back door. The death spiral of the Mexican state appears to be accelerating. To quote just one illustrative bit of evidence, the Cleveland Plain Dealer recently reported that
Seven Mexican federal agents looking for an arms cache died early Tuesday in a shootout with gunmen in the northern state of Sinaloa, officials said. The agents came under fire when they went to search a home in Culiacan, the state capital. Four other agents were wounded. At least one gunman was reported killed during the confrontation, which came as a wave of drug-related violence has washed over Mexico.
The fact that seven government agents were killed and four wounded while only one 4GW fighter died suggests the raid was tipped off. The Mexican security forces have been so thoroughly penetrated by criminal gangs of every sort that the government’s hands have been cut off. It may want to reassert the state’s authority, but it has no uncompromised means of doing so.
Here we see a model of 4GW that is likely to be much more common than what we are now fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the state has disappeared, despite our frenetic efforts to make its corpse gibber and dance (the al-Maliki and Karzai “governments”). Most 4GW entities, unlike al Qaeda, have no need to overthrow the state. They just need to render it impotent to interfere with their activities (as Hezbollah has done in Lebanon).
This will generally best be accomplished quietly, by taking relevant aspects of the state from within. Those aspects may include the security forces, which usually are not difficult to penetrate; leading politicians, who can be bought, bullied or both; and at least elements of the media. Mexican drug gangs have been effective in killing local political leaders and media figures who have opposed them. Others can be counted on to get the message.
The result is not the disappearance of the state but its hollowing out. To the outside world it remains a state, with all the sovereign rights of a state. Internally, it becomes a Potemkin village, a stage-setting on which dramas like “elections” can be played out while 4GW entities go about real business. Often, that business will include much of the country’s economy, which the state dares not throttle even if it could.
As I have noted previously, operating within a hollowed-out state may benefit many 4GW entities more than replacing the state. A Potemkin state protects 4GW organizations from foreign attack; the U.S. cannot go after drug gangs within Mexico except in a surreptitious manner, because doing so would violate Mexican sovereignty. The penetrated Mexican government will ensure that any “cooperation” with U.S. anti-drug efforts will not go beyond a “check the box” level. Everyone benefits from maintaining the fiction of a state: the 4GW gangs, the Mexican economy, the bank accounts of Mexican politicians and the U.S. government, which can tell the rubes back home we are “fighting the drug war” in what amounts to shadow boxing.
Our continued fixation on just one 4GW threat, that from Islam, in a geographically remote part of the world has left our back door wide open. Like an aviator who doesn’t check six, we have set ourselves up to get hosed. In effect, to borrow from General Patton’s famous metaphor, we have grabbed our own nose and presented our tail to our opponent for a good kicking. Anyone with the misfortune to live on or near our southern border, or have responsibility for security in that area, will attest that it hurts.
All this and much more is the price we are paying for our twin Syracuse Expeditions, the quixotic crusades to force “democracy” (really Brave New World) on Iraq and Afghanistan. America desperately needs leadership that will at least attempt to reconnect with reality, including the fact that the U.S.-Mexican border does not presently exist. Those who insist on keeping their head in the clouds will find their ass on the ground, shot down in flames.
William S. Lind, expressing his own personal opinion, is Director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism for the Free Congress Foundation.
To interview Mr. Lind, please contact:
Mr. William S. Lind
Free Congress Foundation
1423 Powhatan Street, # 2
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
Direct line: 703 837-0483
Filed in 4GW - Articles, 4GW - Theory, Global and Strategic Issues, Military in Society, Strategy and Force Employment, Trust, William S. Lind |
20 Responses to “On War #261: Not Checking Six”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Excellent, timely and IMPORTANT post. Mexico is a real mess and “check six” is a most appropriate characterization.
With no intent to downplay events and operational development in Iraq or Afghanistan, I remain concerned that the frustration with the Bush administration’s handling of GWOT and “Long War” (including the naming, characterization and explanation to the country) masks the long term “whole world” problem set reasonably defined by the term “fourth generation warfare.”
I have read with interest the growing give and take on 4GW (writers such as Fabius Maximus, T.X. Hammes, Dr. Tony Echevarria and Frank Hoffman) and while I am not qualified to comment on 4GW’s “validity” as formal “military theory,” from my first introduction followed by seeing several briefs by G.I Wilson, I remain convinced “4GW” is a most significant viewport on events of this century. Since military researchers, historians, and the military itself have other more sophisticated or appropriate terms, a great value of use of “4GW” may be in assisting other organizations and citizens in understanding the “long problem set” of the 21st Century.
While American voters await with great anticipation a new president and departure from Iraq, my sense is on the last great day when the last soldier steps out of the sand, it will just be one more day in that long- problem-set somewhere in the world (possibly Mexico???).
Newt Gingrich has two new books on the street “what if’ing” Pearl Harbor, by simply replacing Admiral Nagumo with Yamamoto - one a cautious and traditional battleship man, the other the intellectual architect of Japenese Naval strategy and leading advocate of airpower. what would have been different had a third strike been executed?
What would now be different if Al Gore or John Kerry had been president on Sept 12, 2001? In March 2003? On Dec 8, 1941 with Yamamoto in command, things might have been much different. Replacing one Washington elite with another in this century might just be “Oh well.”
Seems to me we better find a good viewport on the world of this century and based on some learning, look to create an adaptative resilient community, starting at the local level. Seventh Cavalry might not be in range. Ref Katrina:Brotherhood vs. Bureaucracy (http://www.chetrichards.com/c2w/2008/05/28/a-case-study-in-self-organization/#more-113)
Check Six
AHOY
My apologizes, feel I’m wearing out my welcome, I promise after this I well “quit barking to here my head roar” as grandma use to say. I was raised in Texas, so had to commit.
BRAVO TO MR LIND. BRAVO!
IMO after 9-11 the President said (paraphrase) unlike the mafia Al queda kills indiscriminately etc. he was winking (for those in charge) at the true evil doers.
Child porn, human trade and the drugs we always here about IMO are all run by the same people. Like subsidiaries of large corporations.
We must face up to being the human race. I’m afraid we can only dream of a world of dignity, maturity, education, honestly and most of all NO CAREER POLITICIANS. I’ve often said the last thing any governments won’t are truly educated societies.
My point, Sodom and Gomorrah maybe the price of nurturing a sheep herd. Ultimately IMO it’s more about the haves vs. the have not than nation vs. nation.
On a tactical note; From what little I know about them Hydrogen cells produce no carbon monoxide making possible true “poor man submarines” not just the semi submersibles used now and living under ground is much easier and less detectable.
Mexico is probably a first class Petri dish for a neighboring failed state. As you suggest, for most intents and purposes our southern border no longer exists. This has provided Mexican elites with a safety valve against social change for decades. The USG has been complicit in that for both foreign policy reasons and as an inexaustible source of cheap labor. Consequences, of course, were for another day.
The Emperor, as it turns out, not only had no clothes, but was completely lacking in principles as well.
The old Chinese curse is upon us.
Government control of the economy is the biggest reason for the rise of 4th GW entities in Mexico, Eastern Europe and Africa. This may also be the case in Islamic countries, or at least I suspect it is, but I have no proof of that. This is rarely mentioned. It’s simply impossible to eat, let alone rise up in life, under the legalized looting of many governments. So young men turn to other “companies” who are less corrupt, loyal to their employees, and far more honorable then the government that supposedly controls Mexico.
In Juarez we have the spectacle of the old guard being kicked out of their homes and jobs, while new neighborhoods grow under the protection of the “4th GW” criminals. The Mexican police are not exactly known for being incorruptible and their habits of living off the community they work in has made them much less attractive to the local people then the so-called “criminals. Mexico since the time of the Revolution has largely been a Marxist country. Unlike the Soviet Union there was nothing to loot upon taking control, meaning the government had trouble stealing much since it never existed. But it has still managed to ensure “equality” amongst those that don’t already have money. The only way out for the average Mexican is to go north of the border or cross the legal border within Mexico.
I recently heard an “expert” on immigration say that for every immigrant (legal or illegal) coming into the US there were usually 4 people being directly supported in the country they came from. In Mexico this would work out to somewhere around 20 percent of the population. Things would get desperate indeed if not for the US supporting Mexico and I’m sure every Mexican without a government job understands this. The essence is that the Mexican government has forced the people to make changes necessary for their own survival.
[...] On War #261: Not Checking Six [...]
“It’s simply impossible to eat, let alone rise up in life, under the legalized looting of many governments. So young men turn to other “companies” who are less corrupt, loyal to their employees, and far more honorable then the government that supposedly controls Mexico.”
It’s an interesting point that may come very close to the heart of the matter in many cases.
The disparity between the wealthiest ruling elites and the general population is an issue that practically every country ignores at it’s longer term peril.
To paraphrase a PT Barum cliche,
the trick is to keep enough of your population,
happy enough, most, or enough of the time.
Gamefull employment plays a major role.
If a sizable minority or a majority end up out of work, unhappy and with time on thier hands, woe betide those who try to maintain the staus quo.
M
What Lind says of Mexico,
“The result is not the disappearance of the state but its hollowing out. To the outside world it remains a state, with all the sovereign rights of a state. Internally, it becomes a Potemkin village, a stage-setting on which dramas like “elections” can be played out while 4GW entities go about real business. ”
I can see the USA heading in the same direction. Moreover,
I think that without too much imagination, one could argue that the Neo-conservative revolution since 9/11 is a unique variation of 4GW waged on the US populace, not to mention most of the entire world.
Ahh, yes just what the USA needs right now, yet another “forgien
enemy” to divert attention from it’s own decline.
It works even better than games at the colleseium.
It might be nice, if Americans would pay just a little more attention
to thier own rotting version of so-called democracy, instead of worrying so much about Mexico, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, China, Russia, Myranmar, Phillipines, Venusella, Cuba, N. Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Kosevo, Nicuarga, Panama, etc.
That’s one problem, too much emphasis, pre-occupation and obsession abroad, but not enough at home.
The complacency, hubris, and arrogance is astonishing, if one can
manage to step back, think independently, and detach oneself emotionaly from the inbred patriotic transe.
Mind you as an experience, It’s utterly fasinating to observe, the decline and implosion of this empire.
We have front row seats.
M
Ed writes,
I have read with interest the growing give and take on 4GW
SNIP
I remain convinced “4GW” is a most significant viewport on events of this century.
Ok, snowmobile time.
It might be useful to review some basics.
Starting a list.
Low intensity conflict as waged by non-state entities.
Groups, gangs, minorities, majorities, the aggrieved,
those with select economic, and political interests.
Full spectrum warfare, including the use of propaganda,
and the unprecedented influence and spread of electronic
media, and mass communications.
There’s a departure point, now add your own, I hope that many people here take an interest and add more points to the list.
M
[CR: Max has an excellent idea: Without any filtering or analysis for now, just describe the types of conflict we may be facing in the coming years. I'll throw in Clausewitzian cabinet wars.]
As an aside,
“I’ll throw in Clausewitzian cabinet wars.]”
My guess would be that the Korean war fit that characterisation.
As did Vietnam in large measure, at least as was concieved, fabricated, packaged and sold, at the onset.
In usurping the legtimacy of the state, we can be looking at geographic circumstances, economics (US War Of Independence) , ethnic-tribal, racial, lingustic, class or scocial factors, and the real biggie, RELIGION, wich can also be an excuse masking, and including most of the afore mentioned.
Did I miss any ?
M
Forgive the non-sequitor.
However this is significant for being the first time in a long while
that ANYBODY’s been FIRED from the USAF top brass, for ANYTHING.
MC
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/air_force_shake_up
Gates ousts Air Force leaders in historic shake-up
By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer 2 hours, 58 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates ousted the Air Force’s top military and civilian leaders Thursday, holding them to account in a historic Pentagon shake-up after embarrassing nuclear mix-ups.
Gates announced at a news conference that he had accepted the resignations of Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne — a highly unusual double firing.
SNIP
Wynne has been an “insider” with OSD connections for years. The wonder was: what he had to offer the AF.
Possibly respect for OSD, taht did not happen. As if OSD were any more useful/respectable than the USAF cabal!
Moseley was implicated in sending $40M contract to insider PR firm.
However, the USAF is rotten to the core and neither were aware of how bad or what to fix.
Hope it portend the reversal of the Airbus tanker debacle.
But I am usually to be disappointed.
Better overestimate AF tendency for fraud wate and abuse.
And a design flaw caused the Feb B-2 mishap!!
*William Lind “the changing face of war”
Marine Corps Gazette 10/89.
* ” In broad terms, 4th generational warfare seems likely to be
widely disperced, and largely undefined.”
That is to say that “the DISTINCTION” (my emphasis) “between”
the state of “war, and peace, will be blurred to the vanishing point.
As we see in Isreal, where a perpetual state of war, and siege mentality prevails, and becomes defato thier “way of life.”
An attitude now being embraced by America as well.
It will be non-linear possibly to the point of having no definable
battlefields or fronts.”
As saw in Vietnam, and experience in Afgainstan and Iraq, the socalled enemy is everywhere, but frequently nowhere to be found.
“The distinction between civilian and military may disappear.”
Absolutely, in the obvious sense, IE ; Vietnam, but also from the perspective of full spectrum warfare. (see also below)
“Actions will occour concurrently throughout all participants depth,”
Everywhere, all the time by every stakeholder.
“including their scociety as a cultrural (incl. Public opinion)
not just a physical entity.
We see that in Palistinian / Isreali struggle, I LIVED that reality in Quebec.
M
[CR: "The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation" is available here.]
“the DISTINCTION” (my emphasis) “between”
the state of “war, and peace, will be blurred to the vanishing point.”
What does Lind mean by that ?
A couple of ideas.
In the sense that for instance the state of Isreal could be considered
as defacto in a perpetual state of war, or low intensity conflict.
Not just in the sense of violence, but also in the scocial, economic, political, media, and world opinion battle, in a constant state of conflict, in winning hearts and mind or sympathy to their cause.
Where the Palistinians are popularly portrayed as under dogs,
and highly agreived parties.
Isreal plays up it’s portrayal as being highly civilised, cultured, educated, dynamic, creative, and with everything that is admired in western civilisation.
So indeed, even when ther’s no violence, the state of wr is never far from the surface, and actually continues, in the media, at the populist level, politicaly, or in other words, “warfare by other means.”
As to become virtually indistigiushable.
M
There seems to be some very considerable difficulty
among some with the concept of the declining
legitimacy of the state, and the relationship with non-state entities that seek to usurp autonomy
and authority, in favour of thier own interests.
IMO, Practically every state on earth is under this assault and threat to various degrees these days,
a type of friction.
What analogy could be used to grasp the concept,
in the most basic and simpliest illustration ?
In the simplest terms perhaps a marage under stress, where the interests of the parties involved
seriously diverge.
M
Not forgeting Mexico.
This could get very interesting.
If the US becomes the center peice of a wider conflict.
Would the US fight Iran and Pakistan simultianously ?
While still trying to control Iraq and Afganistan ?
Recalling that Turkey is also engaged.
M
Max,
No problem, so long as we can avoid occupying territory for much longer than it takes to pass through it. Neither Pakistan nor Iran have what one would call a “first rate” military, although the Pakis could be expected to put up a strong defense against any sort of frontal attacks.
I hope you’re not contemplating invading Turkey?
Hmmmm - Title of my 1992 Air War College paper (one of two required then - I think they have dropped requirement)…. was “False Prophets and Pharmakeion - America’s Soft Underbelly.” I passed, paper disappeared, threat didn’t. Thanks for applying 4GW terminology to it. Aztlan already exists -
[CR: They dropped the requirement to write two papers? What in the world is going on at Maxwell?]
“the ‘Pakistani’s’ could be expected to put up a strong defense against any sort of frontal attacks.”
No worries Chet. Since Nam, The US never attacks countries that might provide a credible or significant defence.
I think New Zealand should be the next, yeah, “we” can take them, err,
Luxenburg for sure, well, maybe ?
M
I’ve made the big mistake here myself of reffering to
the Taliban as being somehow primative. One certianly
get’s that impression throughout the media, and also
in Iraq, and from the top US military brass, that somehow,
we’re so much smarter and “they” are inferior.
Certianly more technicaly and tacticaly sofisticated.
The bottom line is,
These pepole have fought the self proclaimed mightest,
most advanced military in the world, to a stand still,
for over 5 years.
Meanwhile, The US spends as much money
on it’s military resourches, security, and policing
than all other countries and
4GW entities combined.
Yet Americans
remain afraid while the military cannot
deliver meaningfull, lasting and decisive victories.
M
__________________
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/quinn2.html
http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=15419
Chet notes,
“Neither Pakistan nor Iran have what one would call a “first rate” military,”
Taking this to the next level.
2 links, you do the math,
build your own snowmobiles.
The question is if we can see this coming ?
Why can’t others ?
M
___________
http://tinyurl.com/6oewfh
http://tinyurl.com/6mgkpj
As Chet well knows,
“But increasingly military analysts are warning of severe consequences if the US begins a shooting war with Iran. While Iranian forces are no match for American technology on a conventional battlefield, Iran has shown that it can bite back in unconventional ways.”
“Iranian networks in Iraq and Afghanistan could imperil US interests there; American forces throughout the Gulf region could be targeted by asymmetric methods and lethal rocket barrages; and Iranian partners across the region – such as Hezbollah in Lebanon – could be mobilized to engage in an anti-US fight.”
(If this becomes widely ‘percieved,’ throughout the middle east, along with further military incursions into Pakistan, as a next round in the ‘US lead war against ISLAM !’ You’ll get something you never barganed for, and only a lunatic wants.) MC
“Iran’s response could also be global, analysts say, but the scale would depend on the scale of the US attack. “One very important issue from a US intelligence perspective, [the Iranian reaction] is probably more unpredictable than the Al Qaeda threat,” says Magnus Ranstorp at the Center for Asymmetric Threat Studies at the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm.”
(Ask yourself can the US ecomony sustain another 9-11 anytime soon ?) M
“I doubt very much our ability to manage some of the consequences,” says Mr. Ranstorp, noting that Iranian revenge attacks in the past have been marked by “plausible deniability” and have had global reach. ”
(Very telling summation, as the US has empheicaly demonstrated time, after time, after
time, it’s severe ineptitude at 4GW)M
“If you attack Iran you are unleashing a firestorm of reaction internally that will only strengthen revolutionary forces, and externally in the region,” says Ranstorp. “It’s a nightmare scenario for any contingency planner, and I think you really enter the twilight zone if you strike Iran.”