War in the Carolinas Heats Up!

As war in the Carolinas intensified, the British kicked up a “hornet’s nest” near present day Charlotte, NC. On General Cornwallis’s left flank was a Scotsman named Patrick Ferguson. Since age 15, Ferguson had served in the British military for two decades. He was called the “bulldog” by his fellow soldiers. In September 1780, he sent an ultimatum to the American militiamen. Ferguson warned them:

If they did not desist from their opposition to the British arms, he would march over the mountains, hang their leaders, and lay their country to waste with fire and sword.

News of Ferguson’s threat reached Colonel Isaac Shelby. Shelby wasted no time telling his fellow Patriots about the loud barking Scotsman. An army of American militia mobilized west of the Blue Ridge mountain range in the heart of present-day northeast Tennessee. This army is known historically as the Over Mountain Men. On September 26, 1780, a Presbyterian preacher, Samuel Doak, delivered a fiery sermon to the men. At the height of Doak’s sermon, he shouted, “The Sword of the Lord and Gideon.” The militia shouted the words back to him and then crossed the line of departure in the direction of Kings Mountain, SC.

American Guerillas (Part Two): The Sword of the Lord and Gideon

In part two of the American Guerillas series, we cover the battle of Kings Mountain in detail. Kings Mountain helped turn the tide of American misfortune in South Carolina. The battle was a complete American victory. It remains one of the most remarkable mobilizations of forces in American military history. Over the last two years (2022-2023), the American military specifically the Army has had recruiting shortfalls. Colonel Shelby did not have that problem. As we discuss in the podcast, the Over Mountain Men were joined by over 1,000 militiamen from the Piedmont. By the time the combined force reached Cowpens, SC, they numbered 2,000. For the assault on Kings Mountain, the combined force attacked with 900 hand-picked militiamen.

Kings Mountain stands out because of the totality of the victory. A force of 1,1000 British Loyalists and Provincials were killed or captured. We say British Loyalists and Provincials only to distinguish the fact that they fought for the British. However, the Loyalists and Provincials were from the American colonies. The Provincials were the equivalent of regulars and many came from New York, New Jersey, and South Carolina. The Loyalist militia were part-time soldiers. They were the modern day equivalent of reservists. Many of them were from South Carolina.

The Over Mountain Men

Who were these legendary men that defeated Major Patrick Ferguson? To begin, they are called Over Mountain Men because they had migrated west of the Blue Ridge Mountain range. They were on the frontier of westward American expansion. As a result, it is misleading to say they were from the “backcountry.” How can someone be on both the frontier and in the backcountry at the same time? The term backcountry merely categorizes the region they inhabited as being wild and lawless. It was a rugged, tough place with the threat of violence prevalent in all aspects of life. This was a savage world, and the settlers survived through hard work, family, faith, and skill with a rifle.

Most of these settlers were Scots-Irish. In the podcast, we begin with a discussion about the Scots-Irish. Why are they called Scots-Irish? Where did they come from? The short answer is that they had emigrated from the lowlands of Scotland to the Ulster region of northern Ireland. From 1717-1775, nearly one quarter of a million Scots-Irish settled in colonial America. They came through Philadelphia and pushed west. Many of them continued to travel down the Shenandoah Valley along the Old Wagon Road. This brought them into Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia.

The Scots-Irish were mostly Presbyterians. They were very much reformed in their theology, and had no interest in the Church of England. The Church of England was still the established church in colonies like Virginia. Presbyterians were some of the most vehement supporters of American independence. Twelve of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence were Presbyterians including the President of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University), John Witherspoon.

War in the Carolinas: Early American Wins

Prior to the American victory at Kings Mountain, there were a few battles that the American militia won. First, the Battle of Musgrove’s Mill was a battle in which an outnumbered Patriot militia was able to defeat a British Loyalist and Provincial force that was twice their size. The Battle of Musgrove’s Mill offered an early glimpse of how American forces were able to use “guerilla” style tactics in the Carolinas. Guerilla tactics are used by smaller units to overcome larger conventional units. The style of fighting relies on tactical creativity, knowledge of the enemy, and understanding of the terrain. Furthermore, it relies on setting traps and ambushes against the enemy.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War delivers timeless maxims on how this style of fighting works. In many ways, the term “guerilla tactics” is misleading. The tactics are simply good tactics. Conventional units can use them too. Any good military commander should be familiar with them. We say that they are guerilla tactics only when smaller, unconventional forces use them in cases of rebellion and insurgencies.

At Musgrove’s Mill, the Patriot forces baited the British into an attack using a small party on horseback. The British chased after them and charged up a hill into a planned American engagement area. The British advanced into a clearing and crossed into the effective range of American rifle and musket fire. At that point the Patriot militia fired a coordinated volley which had devastating effects on the British forces. The British attempted a counterattack, but their commander was shot dead. American militia counterattacked and the British began to withdraw from the battlefield after taking heavy casualties.

The Swamp Fox

Francis Marion was a South Carolina native. He was a man of French Huguenot descent. He was a farmer and worked on his families plantation in Berkley County, South Carolina. During the Revolutionary War, he served as an officer in the Continental Army. He served at Fort Sullivan and then remained in Charleston through a period of relative quiet in South Carolina. He was absent when Charleston fell due to the fact that he had injured his foot while escaping from a dinner party with heavy drinking.

After the British took Charleston and pushed into South Carolina, Marion commanded a militia unit in the low country where he began using guerilla style tactics against British Loyalists. He had early success after the Battle of Camden when his militia unit set 150 Continental prisoners free at Nelson’s Ferry. Marion followed up his success with a victory at Blue Savannah, Black Mingo Creek and Tearcoat Swamp. At Blue Savannah, Marion used similar tactics to what the Patriot militia used at Musgrove’s Mill. He baited the enemy into an ambush. During the other two battles, Marion attacked at night and struck the enemy in three columns.

After these victories, General Cornwallis had had enough and sent Banastre Tarleton after him. Tarleton nearly sprung a trap on Marion. However, a timely piece of intelligence came to Marion through Mary Richardson and her son. Thus, Marion withdrew to avoid the trap and Tarleton pursued him for nearly 30 miles. When Tarleton realized he was not going to catch Marion, he said, “Come my Boys! Let us go back, and we will find the Gamecock.” And then he concluded, “But as for this damned old fox, the Devil himself could not catch him.”[1]

Battle of Blackstock’s Plantation

In part two of the American Guerillas series, we cover the Battle of Blackstock’s Plantation. We talk about Thomas Sumter, who was known as the Gamecock. The University of South Carolina’s mascot comes from Sumter’s nickname. Sumter was a hard charging militia commander. He was very skilled at recruiting new men to take the field. He also never gave up even when he was defeated.

The Battle of Blackstock’s Plantation was one of the first battlefield victories where a Patriot militia defeated British regulars. Although the British claimed victory, their numbers told a much different story. Sumter’s militiamen bloodied Tarleton, who suffered heavy losses that he could not easily paper over. More importantly, the Battle of Blackstock’s Plantation showed how American militia might be used against the British to maximum effect. As the militia withdrew, the British pursued them straight into the teeth of an American engagement area. When the British entered the engagement area, sharpshooters used cover and concealed positions to fire at them. British losses piled up, and many of their officers were killed and wounded. Eventually Tarleton withdrew his unit two miles from Blackstock’s. When they returned in the morning to attack, the Americans had slipped away in the night and were gone from the plantation.

Sumter was wounded in the battle. He was out of action for the next few months. During this time, several key leaders made their way south. Among them were Daniel Morgan and Nathanael Greene. Both were seasoned officers and great leaders. As the year 1780 came to a close, events were shaping up for 1781 to be a bloodbath. The following year was a test of wills and the stage was set for several of the most important battles of the war.

Works Cited

• American Battlefield Trust
• Buchanan, John. The Road to Guilford Courthouse: The American Revolution in the Carolinas. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1997. The Road to Guilford Courthouse
• Brown, Robert W. Jr. Kings Mountain and Cowpens: Our Victory Was Complete. Charleston, SC, The History Press, 2009. Kings Mountain and Cowpens
• Maass, John R. The Battle of Guilford Courthouse: A Most Desperate Engagement. Charleston, SC, The History Press, 2020. The Battle of Guilford Courthouse
• Babits, Lawrence E. A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens. Chapel Hill & London, The University of North Carolina Press, 1998. A Devil of a Whipping
• Gordon, John W. South Carolina and the American Revolution: A Battlefield History. Columbia, SC, The University of South Carolina Press, 2003. South Carolina and the American Revolution
• Tzu, Sun. The Art of War. New York, NY, Barnes and Noble Classics, 2003. The Art of War
• Presbyterian Historical Society

[1] Buchanan, John. The Road to Guilford Courthouse (p. 242). Turner Publishing Company. Kindle Edition.

If you haven’t heard part one of the series. Be sure to listen to it.

New Enterprise

My company, Alexandria History Tours, provides history tours in Old Town Alexandria, VA. We have a George Washington tour, a Revolutionary War tour, plus Civil War stops on our tours! Check out the website and learn more.

Support the Show

If you like the show and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth. Also, check out the show on Twitter and Facebook

With any feedback or to connect, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Revolutionary War Series: “American Guerillas”

Revolutionary War history is dominated by studies of what happened in the north. It makes sense because George Washington spent most of his time in the middle and northern departments. Famous battles such as the Battles of Trenton, Princeton, and Lexington and Concord took place in the middle and northern departments. Also, there has been a strong focus on Valley Forge (and for good reason). In fact, the PME Podcast recently did an entire episode on Valley Forge.

However, the campaign in the south is worth studying. First, a lot happened in the south specifically in South Carolina. It is estimated that 1/3 of all Revolutionary War battles and skirmishes happened in the South Carolina. Second, the battles that took place were some of the most remarkable battlefield victories in American military history. Finally, the campaign in the south shows military leadership at its finest.

I am proud to launch a series called “American Guerillas” that focuses on what happened in the Carolinas from 1780-1781. The name of the series will make sense as we study the tactics and styles of fighting. This series will also focus on many of the leaders on both the American and British side.

British Strategy Shifts South

In part one of the series, we discuss the events that led to Britain invading Charleston, SC in March 1780. The British had previously tried and failed to take Charleston in 1776. After this failure, the northern campaign became the British focus of effort. Much of the south including Charleston went into an uneasy period of calm. But, all of that changed as the British shifted their strategy.

After the Battle of Monmouth Courthouse in June 1778, British strategists took steps to implement a new campaign. The southern strategy was predicated on a belief that there were more Loyalists in the south than the north. After all, New England and specifically Massachusetts had been the epicenter of the American insurgency. The south seemed to be more supportive to the Crown. At least that was the theory.

In attempting to take Charleston again, British military commanders such as General Henry Clinton learned their lesson from the first attempt. They landed infantry units south of the city and had them work northward. Ultimately, they used classic siege tactics to slowly degrade and destroy the forces within it. On May 12, 1780, American forces under General Benjamin Lincoln surrendered Charleston and were taken prisoner.

After Charleston’s Fall

The British had the momentum and went on the offensive. They fanned out through South Carolina and set up a system of posts from the Ninety-Six district to Camden, Cheraw Hill, and Georgetown. General Charles Cornwallis commanded troops in the field. Under him were Lieutenant Colonel Banastre Tarleton. Tarleton was an aggressive cavalry officer, who had gained a reputation in the northern theater for his capture of American General Charles Lee. Tarleton also led a series of attacks around Charleston that cut off American supply lines, and led to the city being captured.

In South Carolina, Tarleton earned an even more notorious reputation after a bloody massacre at the Waxhaws. The story is that the Patriot forces under Abraham Buford had been denied quarter as they tried to surrender. Thus, the phrase “Tarleton’s Quarter” or “Buford’s Play” became synonyms for enacting revenge on the British.

Not long after the Waxhaws massacre, General Horatio Gates took command of the Continental Army in the southern department. Despite the advice of his subordinate commanders, General Gates decided to go on the offensive. This decision led to the Battle of Camden on August 16, 1780. The Battle of Camden was another major setback for the American military in the south. Gates’s right flank was mostly comprised of poorly trained and inexperienced militia. These militiamen fled the field when they were confronted by highly trained British regulars.

Conclusion

As the summer of 1780 came to a close, the British had the upper hand. As we will cover in part two, there were a few victories that took place on the American side. But, these victories occurred between Patriot and Loyalist militias. The British regular army handily defeated their American counterparts under Horatio Gates. As a result, Cornwallis set his sights on moving further north and planned to launch an invasion into North Carolina.

Check out the podcast series to learn more about the key leaders in the south on both the American and British side.

Resources and Works Used

• • • American Battlefield Trust
    • Buchanan, John. The Road to Guilford Courthouse: The American Revolution in the Carolinas. New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1997. The Road to Guilford Courthouse
    • Brown, Robert W. Jr. Kings Mountain and Cowpens: Our Victory Was Complete. Charleston, SC, The History Press, 2009. Kings Mountain and Cowpens
    • Maass, John R. The Battle of Guilford Courthouse: A Most Desperate Engagement. Charleston, SC, The History Press, 2020. The Battle of Guilford Courthouse
    • Babits, Lawrence E. A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens. Chapel Hill & London, The University of North Carolina Press, 1998. A Devil of a Whipping
    • Gordon, John W. South Carolina and the American Revolution: A Battlefield History. Columbia, SC, The University of South Carolina Press, 2003. South Carolina and the American Revolution
    • Tzu, Sun. The Art of War. New York, NY, Barnes and Noble Classics, 2003. The Art of War

New Enterprise

My company, Alexandria History Tours, provides history tours in Old Town Alexandria, VA. We have a George Washington tour, a Revolutionary War tour, plus Civil War stops on our tours! Check out the website and learn more.

Support the Show

If you like the show and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth.

Check out the show page on Twitter and Facebook

With any feedback or to connect, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

On December 19, 1777, Washington led his army to a high plateau 20 miles northwest of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It was not the coldest winter during the Revolutionary War. However, soldiers lacked shoes and clothes. The army was ravaged by diseases like yellow fever, typhus, scabies, and smallpox. Desertion was high. Men were not getting paid. Soldiers shouted, “No meat! No soldier!” The army was on the brink of dissolution.

Over the next six months, General Washington did everything in his power to hold the army together. George Washington’s leadership held the army together. It was a testament to his strength as a commanding officer and a leader. The challenges piled up from day one in camp.

At Valley Forge, the army established an area defense. The primary orientation was southeast toward Philadelphia. The terrain was high with good visibility, which made it easily defensible. The drawbacks of the terrain included no natural shelter. The army had to build 2,000 huts to house up to 12,000 soldiers.

Valley Forge was a good position where the army could monitor the British in Philadelphia and also protect Congress located in York, PA. The Continental Congress fled Philadelphia after the British threatened the city. British forces invaded and occupied Philadelphia on September 26, 1777.

 

Five Paragraph Order

In this podcast, I decided to think about what order Washington would have issued to his commanders. What would the planning process have looked like using O-SMEAC? How would Washington think through key strengths and weaknesses?

The orders process is known as O-SMEAC. This stands for “orientation, situation, mission, execution, administration and logistics, and command and signal.” Here is a simple overview of each paragraph.

Orientation: The orientation provides a high level snapshot of the area of operations (AO). It is a detailed overview of the key terrain features and orients everyone to the important points in the AO.

Situation: The situation provides an overview of the enemy and friendly situation. This will analyze the enemies key strengths and weaknesses. It will also analyze the enemies most likely course of action (EMLCOA).

Mission: Contains the mission statement. Within the mission statement is a tactical task as well as the “why” behind the mission. It typically includes the 5 W’s of “who, what, when, where, and why.” For example, a mission statement for Valley Forge might have read as follows, “On December 19, 1777, the Continental Army will defend at Valley Forge in order to prevent the British from attacking Congress.”

Execution: Includes the Commander’s Intent, Concept of Operations, Tasks, and Coordinating Instructions. There are a lot more details in execution and this is just an overview of the major items.

Administration & Logistics: Includes the casualty evacuation (CASEVAC) plan and enemy prisoners of war (EPW) plan. It also discusses plans for resupply of food, water, and ammunition.

Command & Signal: Discusses a signal plan for communication. The command lists a succession of command plus location of key leaders such as the commanding officer.

Housing at Valley Forge

Washington’s army worked hard to build housing for 12,000 soldiers. Washington’s orders on December 18, 1777 provided detailed instructions on how the huts were supposed to be built. The orders also incentivized soldiers to build their huts quickly. The fastest party in each regiment was awarded $12 for the quickest and most “workmanlike” hut construction.

Valley Forge Defenses

The defenses included a system of trenches and redoubts. Redoubts integrated indirect fires from artillery cannons. Furthermore, they were located along key terrain features with good visibility.

Below are pictures showing engineering tools. Also, there is a view from Redoubt 5 and looking up at Redoubt 5. Looking southeast toward Philadelphia, Redoubt 5 was on the left most flank of the defense. Today it looks out on Valley Forge Casino and a Top Golf driving range.

 

 

The Grand Parade and Von Steuben

An unlikely resource entered camp to help Washington’s army to serve as Inspector General. An unemployed Prussian Captain, Friedrich Wilhelm Baron Von Steuben, whipped the soldiers into shape on a drill field known as the Grand Parade. He might not have been a Baron. His background was less impressive in fact. But, the man clearly knew what he was doing.

Von Steuben authored one of the first army training manuals called the “blue book.” His influence was important to standardize soldiers movements in and out of formations. Additionally, Von Steuben brought discipline to the army in terms of hygiene and camp conditions. Soldiers could no longer pee wherever they felt like it. As Inspector General, Von Steuben’s job was to assess the conditions in camp and the state of the army.

George Washington’s Leadership Challenges at Valley Forge

Conway Cabal

Washington faced a challenge to his command from within the army and from parts of Congress. There was an effort to undermine him and replace him with Horatio Gates. However, Washington kept his cool and moved deliberately to let the conspirators follies and loose lips work against them.

Preventing Mutiny

As he rode through camp, Washington was greeted with cries of “No meat! No soldier!” He had to deal with soldiers stealing from the local population. Up to three quarters of the army attempted desertion. The orders of the day included the details of court-martials. Soldiers were put on trial for crimes ranging from assault, desertion, theft, and cowardice. Punishments included lashes on the “naked back” ranging from 30 to 100.

Political Wrangling

Washington petitioned Congress for more troops and supplies. He also took his appeal directly to the states. Furthermore, a Congressional Committee arrived in January. Washington was ready to receive them with a 13,000 word report written by Alexander Hamilton. Francis Dana from Massachusetts led the committee. This was an opportunity for congressional representatives to see first-hand the hardships that the army endured at Valley Forge.

As the committee inspected camp. They witnessed the dysfunction that Washington had been writing about. They also recognized the need to recommend several of the changes that Washington was advocating in terms of pay and promotions.

Furthermore, the Committee recommended that the quartermaster position be immediately filled. This position had been vacated by Thomas Mifflin in October 1777. Congress allowed Washington to fill the position. Washington appointed one of his best field commanders, General Nathanael Greene. Greene wasted little time implementing necessary changes.

Medicine

The state of medicine was rough. Like many aspects of the army, there was little standardization in terms of care. Most doctors did not have formal training and education. Hygienic practices were not common. The hospital conditions were unsanitary.

There were three echelons of care. There were flying hospitals, regimental hospitals, and general hospitals. During the winter at Valley Forge, Washington’s medical department continued to build a network of 30 general hospitals from Lititz to Bethlehem, PA. The main hospital for Valley Forge was at Yellow Springs.

Smallpox continued to be a problem. A year prior Washington had authorized a plan to inoculate all soldiers that had not been exposed to smallpox. The inoculation process carried a lot of risk too.

 

Breaking Camp

The Continental Army broke camp on June 19, 1778. Washington held a council of war to determine whether the army should attack the rearguard of General Clinton’s forces marching overland to New York City from Philadelphia.

Despite most of the officers being against the plan, Washington decided to attack. The battle occurred on June 28 near Monmouth Courthouse in New Jersey. A series of human factors made the battle exceptionally difficult. The temperatures swelled above 100 degrees. Both British and American soldiers passed out and even died from overheating.

Washington ordered General Charles Lee to lead the attack. Lee had been recently released from British captivity. He was not a supporter of the attack. During the attack, he ordered his division to retreat. Washington fired him on the spot.

Ultimately, the Battle of Monmouth ended in a draw. It was not the overwhelming victory that Washington hoped for. But, it was a strategic victory due to the fact that it boosted morale and proved the army was capable of fighting the British as equals.

Washington’s HQs

Washington stayed at the home of Isaac Potts. His HQs was located near the intersection of Valley Creek and the Schuylkill River. While he was in camp, Washington’s wife, Martha, came to stay with him in February 1778. Many wives of officers stayed in camp. When the army first marched into Valley Forge, there were at least 400 women and children with them. Valley Forge became the fourth largest city in Colonial America.

Here is a picture of the HQs and the Schuylkill River behind it.

Visiting Valley Forge

Valley Forge is operated by the National Park Service. It is on the outskirts of Philadelphia, PA near King of Prussia. Despite the malls and trappings of modernity in the area, the experience inside the park is great. There are several miles of trails to hike, bike, and run. The visitor center at the park is well done and helps provide an excellent introduction to what happened at Valley Forge. Additionally, the park is set up for a self-guided driving tour. At each stop on the tour, you can listen to what happened at the different locations.

Sources and Additional Resources:

• • • • • Library of Congress
        • MountVernon.org
        • American Battlefield Trust
        • Founders Online
        • Von Steuben, F.W. (1985). Baron von Steuben’s Revolutionary War Drill Manual: A Facsimile Reprint of the 1794 Edition. Dover Publications. Garden City, NY. Get the Book
        • Greenwalt, Phillip S. (2021). The Winter that Won the War. Savas Beatie LLC. El Dorado Hills, CA. Get the book Book
        • Stewart, David O. (2021). George Washington: The Political Rise of America’s Founding Father. Dutton. Get the Book
        • Chernow, R. (2010). Washington: A life. Allen Lane. Get the Book
        • Martin, J.P. (1962). Private Yankee Doodle. George F. Scheer. Get the Book
        • Langguth, A.J. (1988). Patriots: The Men Who Started the American Revolution. Simon & Schuster. New York, NY. Get the Book
        • Chadwick, Bruce. (2004). George Washington’s War. Sourcebooks, Inc. Naperville, Illinois. Get the Book
        • Ellis, Joseph J. (2004). His Excellency: George Washington. Vintage Books. New York. Get the Book
        • My latest essay called “How Would George Washington Approach the Russia-Ukraine War”

An honest look at U.S. military strength

Is the United States Military strong or weak? The Heritage Foundation has fired a shot across the bow with its “2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength.” The Index concludes that the U.S. military in its current posture is “weak.” The Pentagon might not like the report. But, my guest, Dakota Wood, is calling things as they are rather than the way people would like them to be.

“Nobody likes their baby being called ugly. But the facts are what they are.” -Dakota Wood

The 2023 Index starts with an assessment of the operating environment from Europe to the Indo-Pacific. Dakota explains that the Index is looking at American military power within a two major-regional conflict (MRC) framework. The Index analyses enemy threats through the lens of “intent and capability.” The focus is on Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and terrorist groups like ISIS. The Index then shifts to a detailed overview of each U.S. military branch in terms of capacity, capability, and readiness. After grading each branch individually, the Index comes up with an aggregate grade of “weak.” This is not an indictment on any individual service member or unit. Mr. Wood explains that this is a combination of years of underfunding, misuse of resources, and a “profound lack of seriousness.”

The Framework of the 2023 Index

The Index analyzes U.S. military strength within the framework of two major-regional conflicts (MRCs). The question is can the U.S. military successfully fight two major wars in two separate theaters at the same time?

This two MRC construct has its roots in the Second World War. The U.S. fought in both the European and Pacific Theater simultaneously. As a result, the Index uses the American experience in World War II as a model. It also integrates historical data in the post-World War II era. As a result, the Index looks at U.S. military relative to where it has been historically since World War II.

Overall, the Index is a report card. It is a snapshot of current U.S. military strength. The report is principally for lawmakers and their staff. It is also for the American taxpayer. Finally, the report pulls from open source documents. There is nothing that The Heritage Foundation includes that a strategic competitor cannot also find.

The Global Operating Environment

The Index claims that the global operating environment is “favorable” to the U.S. Mr. Wood explains that this is due to our freedom of movement. America also has many strong allies in Europe and the Pacific. Since we can move to most parts of the world without being contested, the operating environment is given a favorable rating.

Enemy Threats

The report looks at four nation-state threats and also several terrorist groups. The nation-states include Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. The Index breaks down both the intent and capability of each nation state. For example, with a country like Russia, the Index sees their ability to use nuclear weapons combined with their aggression as posing a major threat to America. While they have not performed well on the battlefield in Ukraine, Mr. Wood explains that they still have large material resources and a strong weapons inventory. Thus, they cannot be discounted despite recent operational and tactical failures.

The Index focuses on the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Over the past 20 years, China has shifted their inward focus outward. They are in the process of tripling their ballistic missile capabilities. The Chinese Navy has gone from 210 to 360 ships with plans to get to 400. Their aircraft is being upgraded from fourth to fifth generation. For the U.S. military to oppose the PRC, we have to move thousands of miles from our shores. Overall, the PRC has demonstrated aggression, willingness to prepare for war, and the “most profound threat to [American] military power.”

U.S. Military Branches:

U.S. Army

The Army is aging faster than it is modernizing. In order to be prepared for two MRCs, the Index asserts that the Army needs 50 brigade combat teams (BCTs). It currently has 30. Additionally, about 25 BCTs demonstrate sufficient readiness. In terms of BCTs, the Army is 50% of where it needs to be. This means that it could engage in one MRC, but not two. Mr. Wood also points out that a lot of Army training is focused on the company level. He questions whether the focus of training should be at a higher level to be prepared for a conventional fight against a near-peer competitor. The Index rates the Army “marginal.”

U.S. Navy

At the end of the Cold War, the U.S. Navy had around 580 ships. Today, that number is just under 300. It is expected to move lower and shrink to 280. Furthermore, the Navy continues to maintain its heavy operational tempo. The ships and manpower have declined, but everything else has remained the same. This is a problem for the Navy. Training standards have dropped. Recruiting standards are dropping. The infrastructure to build new ships is not there. The infrastructure to repair old ships is equally bad. The Index rates the Navy as “weak.”

Air Force

How did the Air Force earn a “very weak” grade? In a nutshell: Old planes and less training. The average air force fighter jet is 32 years old. Their average tanker plane is 60 years old. The average pilot is lucky to receive 120 flight hours of training per year. This is down significantly from 200 hours that pilots would receive during the Cold War. Additionally, F35 pilots are lucky to get 75 flight hours of training. Inspection and readiness standards have declined. Pilots are passing flight school at nearly 100% rates. Why is that? The Air Force is short 650 pilots.

Marine Corps

The Marine Corps is rated “strong.” However, I would throw a caveat in there. The Marine Corps has decided to be a one war force. By design, the Marines are focused on one MRC and not two. If they were trying to be engaged on two fronts, then they would be like the Army. Nevertheless, the Marine Corps does not want to be the Army. They are actively trying to get back to their naval roots. The Marine Corps seeks to be an expeditionary force with the capability to project power from the sea. Mr. Wood says that the Marine Corps has done a good job phasing out old equipment and modernizing the equipment that they currently need. Furthermore, Marine Corps training has helped keep the force ready. As a result, it possesses a good balance of capabilities, readiness, and capacity.

Conclusion

The Index is not meant to be a feel good report. It is meant to raise awareness about the state of our military as it is. There is obviously a lot of significant improvements to be made. There are causes for concern for the Navy and Air Force especially. The numbers do not look good. Comparing the Navy and Air Force to China paints an even bleaker picture.

Regarding the “weak” rating, the Index concludes, “This is the logical consequence of years of sustained use, underfunding, poorly defined priorities, wildly shifting security policies, exceedingly poor discipline in program execution, and a profound lack of seriousness across the national security establishment even as threats to U.S. interests have surged.”

It is time to get serious!

Find the “2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength” at www.Heritage.org/military

Connect with Dakota on LinkedIn and follow him at The Heritage Foundation

About my guest:

Dakota Wood is a Senior Research Fellow, Defense Programs, Center for National Defense at The Heritage Foundation. He served America for two decades in the U.S. Marine Corps. His research and writing focuses on programs, capabilities, operational concepts, and strategies of the U.S. Department of Defense and military services to assess their utility in ensuring the United States has the ability to protect and promote its critical national security interests. Mr. Wood originated and currently serves as the editor for Heritage’s “Index of U.S. Military Strength.”

Other Podcasts:

Episodes on China’s Political Warfare:

• The Final Struggle interview with Ian Easton
• Political Warfare interview with Kerry Gershaneck

Episodes on the U.S. Navy:

• To Provide and Maintain a Navy interview with Dr. Jerry Hendrix
• The Wardroom interview with Thibaut Dellelloue

Diplomats and Admirals Interview with Dale Jenkins

How did the U.S. recover from the devastation of Pearl Harbor and win one of the most epic battles in naval history? Was war in the Pacific inevitable or were there diplomatic off ramps? Why did Japan attack America on December 7, 1941? Did America really know in advance that an attack was coming?

My guest Dale Jenkins helps answer these questions in his book, Diplomats and Admirals. We speak at length about these topics in our interview. I thought our deep dive into the Battle of Midway was especially fun.

Additional topics include:

• Diplomatic breakdowns that led to war between the U.S. and Japan
• How the Japanese were able to carry out the Pearl Harbor attack with “total surprise”
• U.S. intelligence that broke Japanese codes and learned about the Japanese plans at Midway
• How the U.S. won the Battle of Midway and nearly lost it all
• U.S. heroism at the Battle of Midway
• Lessons on leadership to include Admiral Nimitz’s battle plan
• The principles of carrier tactics and how carrier battles were fought and won

Dale Jenkins spent five years reading and researching. This book is a culmination of his efforts. I am glad to release this interview as we mark the anniversary of Pearl Harbor and remember the day that will live in infamy on December 7, 1941.

Listen to the interview and then check out Dale’s book Diplomats and Admirals. Here is a link to Dale’s website.

About the Author:

Dale Jenkins is passionate about the Navy and international affairs. As a former US Navy officer, Dale served on a destroyer in the Pacific, and for a time was home-ported in Yokosuka, Japan. His Pacific Fleet commitments took him to the Philippines, Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore. While on active duty he was awarded the Navy/Marine Corps Expeditionary Medal. His business career was primarily in international banking. He was also a staff director at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. Dale currently serves on the Samuel Eliot Morison Committee of the Naval Order of the United States, New York, and as a Regional Director of the Naval War College Foundation. As a result of his active duty experience and new revelations, Dale provides insights into the diplomacy and strategies of the Pacific region. He has degrees in history and business from Harvard and Columbia.

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the interview and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth. Check out the website: www.professionalmilitaryeducation.com

To request additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Crisis of Command

Stuart Scheller served in the Marine Corps as an infantry officer for seventeen years. His five deployments included combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. When he was a Lieutenant Colonel, Scheller served as a battalion commander at the Marine Corps School of Infantry (SOI).

In the summer of 2021, U.S. forces withdrew from Afghanistan. The withdrawal was poorly planned and hastily executed. The Taliban took over the entire country and surrounded Kabul airport. As Marines scrambled to secure the airport, a suicide attack caused the tragic deaths of 13 U.S. servicemembers. Frustrated by these events, Stuart Scheller felt compelled to speak out.

Scheller made a public video that criticized military leadership. Shortly after releasing the video, he was fired from his job as a battalion commander. He then publicly resigned from the Marine Corps and continued to be critical of both the military and Marine Corps leadership. As a result, he was placed in the brig and court-martialed before leaving the Marine Corps in December 2021. The public nature of his call for accountability stirred a lot of controversy. In the interview, we speak about Scheller’s insistence on accountability.

Topics of the Interview include:

• What motivated Stuart Scheller to join the Marine Corps
• How he became disillusioned with the overall strategy in Afghanistan
• Moral courage and when it’s time to speak up
• What was going through his head as he prepared to make his first public call for accountability
• How the actions of General John K. Singlaub in the 1970s influenced his criticism of General McKenzie
• Stuart Scheller’s contrarian views to include his thoughts on General Mattis
• The movie Black Hawk Dawn, the publication Task & Purpose, and books by Malcolm Gladwell
• Scheller’s current political causes to include his support for Senate candidate Don Bolduc in New Hampshire

More Information

Check out the videos: Stuart Scheller’s first video, second video (from the bus), and third video

Stuart Scheller’s website: https://authenticamericans.com/

Follow him on Twitter: @stuartscheller and Facebook

Check out his book: Crisis of Command

Check out my recent article on accountability at The American Mind. Also, my book review of Angelo Codevilla’s book, America’s Rise and Fall among Nations.

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the interview and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth. Check out the website: www.professionalmilitaryeducation.com

To request additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

 

What is the state of the Japanese Military

In this PME podcast interview, I spoke with retired Marine Colonel Grant Newsham on the state of the Japanese Military. The Japanese military is called the Japan Self-Defense Force (JSDF). It is comprised of the Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF), which has 150,000 people. The JSDF also has a Navy and Air Force that each have 50,000 personnel. The JSDF is surprisingly formidable. Contrary to popular belief, Japan is not strictly pacifist. In fact, they have all the resources they need to project military power.

So what is the problem? Because of Japan’s World War II experience, there has been an understandable “reticence” to allow the military to train and conduct operations that would make them a strong fighting force. Japan has had the resources, but not always had the will to combine and employ them.

Grant speaks to some of the internal attitudes. He describes a belief in Japan that “we don’t want to do that again” meaning build up strong military capabilities. Thus, the military has been underfunded and underappreciated. However, among the average Japanese citizen, Grant describes that there is a “latent understanding” about the necessity of the JSDF. Furthermore, the rise of China’s military has shifted opinion amongst the Japanese “ruling class” (i.e. politicians).

Shifting attitudes toward the Japanese Military

In 2011, a deadly earthquake and tsunami hit northern Japan. The military responded to conduct humanitarian aid and disaster relief (HADR) operations. However, despite the quick response, the Japanese were not trained or ready to do HADR operations. As a result, many people died in the aftermath of the earthquake. This turned into a wake-up call. Japan needed the capability to operate with amphibious capabilities needed to conduct operations such as HADR.

Additionally, the Ryukyu Island chains were undefended. Looking at the map, one can see that the southern chain of islands stretches down to Taiwan. Grant says that China believes this chain of islands belongs to them and that they “intend” to take them. Grant claims that these islands were poorly defended and “if you’re not there, you’re not interested.”

Finally, Japanese military leaders realized that their joint forces were not adequate. They needed the capability to integrate their air, ground, and navy together.

Making Progress

In 2013, Japanese ships floated across the Pacific Ocean to San Clemente Island, which is off the coast of southern California. There were three ships carrying units from the Japan Ground Self-Defense Forces (GSDF). The JSDF conducted two exercises with the United States Marine Corps called Exercise Dawn Blitz 2013 and Exercise Iron Fist 2013. Grant describes these exercises as historic and the culmination of Japan’s push to integrate their forces and build their amphibious capabilities. Furthermore, it was the first time that the Americans began to work with the Japanese as equals. Also, I remember supporting the exercise as part of the opposition forces (OPFOR). The GSDF charged up the high bluff of San Clemente Island while we shot at them with blank rounds!

There were a number of liaison officers (including Grant) that worked to make this progress happen. They learned that the Japanese have their way of doing things and did not try to impose the Marine Corps way on them. Grant explains that the Japanese do not think in the same linear fashion that America’s military thinks. They don’t necessarily apply “crawl, walk, run.” Grant says, “They basically put together a MEU and sent it to southern California.” In doing so, they just started running!

The Japanese apply a Confucian approach to learning in contrast to the more Socratic approach used by the Americans. In some cases, they started training without resources like proper communications. Their goal was to just do it, and learn from mistakes along the way.

What are the current Japanese and the American combined capabilities?

A lot of progress has been made. Not too many years ago, the thought of Japanese amphibious operations would have been unheard of. Japanese officers would have been fired for suggesting it and “drummed out of the service.” But, sensitivities have faded. The Japanese and Americans are conducting joint drills using F-35s. Japanese helicopters are also landing on U.S. Navy ships. Check out the video to watch the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (MSDF) land their SH-60J on the deck of a U.S. Navy destroyer.

Additionally, this week USNI News is covering the Reagan Carrier Strike Group (CSG) conducting joint training with the Japanese and the Canadians. The 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU), which is part of the Tripoli Amphibious Ready Group (ARG) is also taking part in the training with the Reagan CSG. Check out the article at USNI.

While progress has been made, there are still other challenges and steps that can be taken. For example, Grant points out that there is no joint U.S. and Japanese HQs in Japan. In fact, the Japanese don’t even have one for their own forces. While these are current shortcomings, Grant indicates that they could be remedied soon as Japan and the U.S. continue to focus on the Chinese threat.

Around the Indo-Pacific

China

Will they take action against Taiwan? China isn’t even making veiled threats. Grant says, “China is making no illusions that they are coming… there is no deal to be cut with the PRC” They are aiming to take Taiwan by force. It is not a matter of if but when. This is why the American and Japanese partnership is critical.

It can help deter Chinese aggression to have a strong joint capability between the U.S. and a treaty allies like Japan. Grant thinks that the Chinese want to “teach Japan a lesson.” They also have designs on the Senkaku Islands and Ryukyu chain (see above).

Additionally, the Chinese Communist Party is using COVID lockdowns to condition the population. Grant’s theory is that the lockdowns make it easier to control the Chinese people and remove opposition to Xi Jinping.

I asked Grant, “What is one thing that the United States could do right now to better deter China?” His answer is blunt: “Stop funding their military.” American businesses and Wall Street have been pouring billions of dollars into China.

One another financial vulnerability is that the Chinese currency does not have a lot of use outside of China. Grant explains, “That is something that rarely gets attention. The Chinese currency is not freely convertible… it has to pay in U.S. dollars.”

North Korea

Grant Newsham explains, “It really is a prison camp of a nation.” Without nuclear weapons, no one would pay attention to them. Their nuclear capabilities and missile tests have worked well thus far. The Kim regime sees long-range nuclear weapons as a guarantee of its own safety. Additionally, Grant suggests that the Chinese have always benefited from a belligerent North Korea.

South Korea

Within South Korea, there is a hard core leftist element that Grant describes as “pro-North Korea.” They typically see the U.S. as the problem. This complicates the U.S. relationship with South Korea. Grant explains that the hard left politicians are often elected for economic reasons. As a result, the average South Korean does not view Americans as the problem like the extreme leftist politicians. There is a conservative president now but there still exist strong factions of pro-North Korean leftists.

Australia

The U.S. has partnered with Australian Defense Force (ADF) to use Darwin, Australia as a power projection hub. It is one of several places where the American military has a staging area in the Indo-Pacific. America’s relationship with Australia is solid, but it needs attention. America cannot take the relationship for granted.

In 2015, I deployed to Darwin, Australia as part of the Marine Rotational Force-Darwin (MRF-D). This was a great opportunity to train and develop a stronger relationship between the U.S. and ADF.

About Grant Newsham:

Grant Newsham is a Senior Fellow with the Center for Security Policy. He is also a Research Fellow at the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies focusing on Asia/Pacific defense, political and economic matters. Newsham is a retired U.S. Marine Colonel and was the first U.S. Marine Liaison Officer to the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force. He also served as reserve head of intelligence for Marine Forces Pacific, and was the U.S. Marine Attaché, US Embassy Tokyo on two occasions.

Next March, he is planning to publish a book called When China Attacks.

Check out Grant’s work at the Center for Security Policy. Find Grant on Twitter: @NewshamGrant

Additional Podcast interviews:

• The Final Struggle interview
• China’s political warfare interview
• China’s Stealth War interview
• The Chinese Invasion threat interview

On this episode of the PME podcast, I welcome back Ian Easton. Ian recently published a book called The Final Struggle: Inside China’s Global Strategy.

Topics of discussion include:

• The prospect of China invading Taiwan and an update from Ian’s first book, The Chinese Invasion Threat
• Is Xi Jinping on drugs? Hard to tell. But Ian does mention that his dad and sister were purged. He also spent seven years living in a cave.
• We discuss “Xi Jinping Thought” which is Marxism infused with Xi Jinping’s worldview and his political philosophy.
• How China and Xi Jinping use euphemisms to promote dark ideas. For example, the idea of constructing “A Community of Common Destiny for all Mankind.”
• S. policies toward China and how previous administrations have and have not recognized threats from the PRC
• How TikTok poses a direct threat to U.S. national security
• China’s social credit system which uses big data analytics and mass surveillance
• How China uses predatory economic policies to its benefit while hurting the U.S.

Author Biography:

Ian Easton is a Senior Director at the Project 2049 Institute, where he studies defense and security issues involving the People’s Republic of China. Previously, he was a visiting fellow at the Japan Institute for International Affairs, a China analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses, and a researcher for the Asia Bureau of Defense News. Ian holds an M.A. in China Studies from National Chengchi University in Taiwan and a B.A. in International Studies from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. He studied Mandarin at Fudan University in Shanghai and National Taiwan Normal University in Taipei.

Books and Resources

Buy the book, The Final Struggle
Ian’s first book: The Chinese Invasion Threat

Previous interview with Ian on The Chinese Invasion Threat 

Follow him on Twitter @Ian_M_Easton and at the Project 2049 Institute

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the interview and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth.

I recently started a Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/pmecomplete Please consider showing your support for the show by becoming a patron.

To request additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Check out the website: www.professionalmilitaryeducation.com

The United States Navy is in troubled waters. More specifically, the surface Navy faces many challenges. In this episode of the podcast, we discuss why that is. My guest, Thibaut Delloue, is a former Navy officer. He has seen firsthand the problems that have plagued the US surface Navy for years.

Thibaut’s book, The Wardroom, begins as a memoir. However, it turns into a straightforward assessment of issues that have led to several high-profile accidents, which included the collisions of the USS John S. McCain and USS Fitzgerald. Both warships crashed in 2017 and resulted in the deaths of 17 sailors.

We discuss Thibaut’s experience as a surface warfare officer (SWO) to include his training and lack thereof. Thibaut served on the destroyer USS Carney. His experience included tracking Russian submarines and battling ISIS in Libya.

Topics of discussion:

• An overview of the surface Navy and the areas of operations known as “fleets”
• How a Navy officer becomes a SWO
• Why the current training and readiness pipeline is insufficient
• The inability of the surface Navy to be ready for future wars unless changes are made
• The leadership and command climate within the surface Navy that prioritizes bureaucracy over real leadership
• The recent spate of high-profile accidents and the many causes that led to them
• The difference between the US surface Navy and other Navies including the Chinese Navy

Thibaut has written about the military for publications like Task & Purpose, the US Naval Institute, War on the Rocks, and The War Horse. He now works in education in Nashville, Tennessee.

Check out his website to see more of his writings and background: https://thibautdelloue.com/

Check out the book: The Wardroom An Officer’s Tour at Sea and the Crisis of the US Navy

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the interview and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth.

I recently started a Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/pmecomplete Please consider showing your support for the show by becoming a patron.

To request additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Check out the website: www.professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Political Warfare poses an existential threat to the United States. Democracies worldwide are under attack. China is dedicated to destroying the American way of life and making the U.S. a “vassal state.” Moreover, they are seeking to win without fighting. Political warfare is the means to do that. In this episode of the PME podcast, Professor Kerry K. Gershaneck discusses the strategy and tactics of political warfare.

The notes and references below correspond with the interview.

About the Author

Professor Gershaneck is currently a Visiting Scholar (Taiwan Fellow) at the Graduate Institute of East Asian Studies, College of International Affairs, National Chengchi University, with special focus on the People’s Republic of China and their use of political warfare. For a total of seven years, Professor Gershaneck was the Distinguished Visiting Professor at the Royal Thai Naval Academy and the Distinguished Visiting Professor at Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy, Kingdom of Thailand.

Professor Gershaneck has extensive regional security and academic experience in the Asia-Pacific Region. He has consulted for the U.S. government, HQ North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the United Nations Command (UNC) in the Republic of Korea, the American Bar Association, and various Asia-Pacific-based organizations.  In academia, he has taught at the university level for more than 25 years, primarily in topics related to National Defense & Regional Security, International Relations, Strategic Communication, Crisis Communication, Leadership Development, and Journalism.

A “Mustang” Marine Corps officer, Professor Gershaneck’s military experience includes Special Warfare, Counterintelligence, Intelligence, Infantry, Armor, Strategic Communications and Public Affairs.  His awards include the Department of Defense Superior Service Medal and the Legion of Merit.

Uncovering China’s Political Warfare

Australia was one of the first countries to recognize China’s political warfare. Clive Hamilton, an Australian author and professor, wrote a book called Silent Invasion: China’s Influence in Australia. He has also given a series of talks and lectures on the threat of China’s political warfare (see speech). This led to a movement in both Australia and New Zealand to uncover China’s political warfare efforts. In New Zealand, a professor named Anne-Marie Brady played an important role in exposing China. She wrote a policy paper called “Magic Weapons: China’s political influence activities under Xi Jinping” (See link).

America’s Political Warfare History

America conducted political warfare during the Cold War. President Dwight D. Eisenhower created the U.S. Information Agency on August 3, 1953 as part of a reorganization plan under the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948. The Smith-Mundt Act helped establish overseas cultural and educational programs as well as Voice of America (VOA). The mission was to counter the Soviet Union with a pro-America message across the world. President Bill Clinton abolished the USIA in October 1998 under the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act. Read more about the history of the USIA here. Alvin Snyder also wrote a book about the program called Warriors of Disinformation: How Lies, Videotape, and USIA Won the Cold War.

Post-Cold War Mindset

Professor Gershaneck discusses the phrase “end of history.” This is a reference to an essay written by Francis Fukuyama called “The End of History”. His essay became a book. The central thesis is that the end of the Cold War ushered in an era in which Western style liberal democracies would become an inevitable for all nations. Professor Gershaneck’s claim is that China’s emergence as a global power with an authoritarian system is a rebuttal to that Fukuyama thesis. Additionally, too many Western elites accepted Fukuyama’s claim without much critical thought. As a result, they were willfully blind to the threat that China posed.

Professor Gershaneck explains that political warfare is also tied into the idea of “unrestricted warfare.” At the end of the 1990s, two Chinese Colonels wrote a book called Unrestricted Warfare. Part of the book’s premise was that anything is on the table to include biological warfare, chemical warfare (i.e. drug warfare), and terrorism.

China’s Evolving Strategy

United Fronts were developed under Vladimir Lenin. The purpose was to form fronts with organizations that are not necessarily Communist. The goal is to co-opt these organizations. Professor Gershaneck explains that China has used United Fronts and put the practice “on steroids.” He refers to a Newsweek article on United Fronts that estimated there were approximately 600 United Fronts in the United States. Professor Gershaneck claims that the number is probably twice as high now.

Under Chinese law, all citizens are obligated to cooperate and support the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) intelligence efforts. As a result, Chinese citizens overseas play an important role in the promotion of the United Front Work Department’s goals and objectives. This provides a continuing infiltration and subversion in other nation’s internal affairs i.e. politics, education, media, and business.

Post-Mao

Deng Xiaoping became the leader of the PRC after Mao died. He served from 1978 to 1992. Deng Xiaoping said, “Hide your strength, bide your time.” Professor Gershaneck interprets this phrase as meaning that the PRC’s long-term ambitions were always to overtake America and become the dominant global power. Consequently, American and Western leaders have been blind to the true nature of the PRC regime.

In 1989, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) responded to a democratic uprising in China with a series of brutal crackdowns against protestors. This culminated in the Tiananmen Square massacre. The Tiananmen Square massacre was a slaughter not only in Tiananmen Square but across all of China. Protestors were hunted down, imprisoned, tortured, and never heard from again. This should have been a sign that China was not going to democratize in the image of Western nations. With respect to the Tiananmen Square massacre, Professor Gershaneck says, “You go to jail or you’re killed if you talk about it.” (See link).

Americans Have Not Recognized the China Threat

In the interview, Professor Gershaneck discusses why American businesses have been complicit in working with China. With a lot of deep thought, he suggests that many American businessman are “traitors.” He quotes a line from Lenin, who is reported to have said, “The Capitalists will sell us (the Communists) the rope we need to hang them.” Professor Gershaneck asserts that business leaders have sold out their country to make money.  He also says, “We have people in America that want to take the investment funds of the Thrift Savings Plan and use it to invest in China.” Recently Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has put pressure on the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB) and demanded an end to this practice.

American servicemembers’ retirement funds should never be used to finance an adversary of the United States, nor should they bankroll foreign weapons or technology designed to someday harm them.- Sen. Rubio

We can decouple from China and do it in a way that doesn’t make America go broke. -Professor Gershaneck

China’s Political Warfare Influences

The CCP is deeply influenced by the Soviet Union and an organization called the Communist International (Comintern). Mao worked closely with the Comintern going back to the 1920s. The CCP has adopted the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) of the Comintern. They continue to apply them to their modern-day political warfare campaign.

Political Warfare involves recruiting agents of influence to conduct espionage. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union was known to employ this tactic. In one of the most infamous “honeypot” incidents, a former Marine Corps Sergeant, Clayton J. Lonetree, was recruited by the KGB and eventually convicted of espionage on behalf of the Soviet KGB. Lonetree fell into a honeypot trap while serving on Marine Corps Security Guard detail at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in the early 1980s. In the present day, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence includes information about attempted espionage operations against Americans.

The CCP is using the same Soviet tactics in America across the political spectrum and at the highest levels of the U.S. military. For example, former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff Retired Admiral William Owens lobbied for the U.S. to stop arms sales to Taiwan and “review” the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). He wrote an article entitled “America must start treating China as a friend.” This article was published in the Financial Times in 2009. Owens also lobbied on behalf of Huawei Technologies in 2010. Huawei is a Chinese telecommunications company with close ties to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

China influences American media and film

The CCP has agents living in Hollywood that help censor content. The goal is to make sure that movies fit into the CCP’s vision of acceptable content for the Chinese people. There are 1.4 billion people living in China. As a result, movie producers comply with this process to ensure that their movies are able to reach this large audience. However, this has the effect of promoting pro-PRC messages and preventing content that might be critical of the CCP. For example, the recent film Maverick had a controversy over the Taiwan and Japanese flag on the bomber jacket of the lead character. The flags were initially censored. See article for more details.

Understanding Taiwan and China

Professor Gershaneck says, “The first thing that you have to understand is that Taiwan is a sovereign country.” However, the CCP claims Taiwan for many reasons including its vast technological resources specifically in the field of semiconductor technology. As a result, the idea of “reunification” has been falsely promoted by the current CCP regime. Taiwan and China were never unified nor were they historically recognized as one country. Thus, China’s plans are annexation not reunification.

Taiwan is governed by the Republic of China (ROC), which fled mainland China to what was then called the island of Formosa. ROC forces under Chiang Kai-Shek took over the island after losing the Chinese civil war to Mao’s Communists in 1949. Under the ROC, there was a 38-year period of authoritarianism called the “White Terror.” However, by the 1990s, Taiwan had liberalized and adopted a democratic form of government. Professor Gershaneck explains that this form of government now presents a threat to China.

Professor Gershaneck references Edgar Snow, who wrote on behalf of Mao Tse-Tung. Here is an article that appeared in The New Republic in which Snow recounts a four hour interview with Mao. We discussed Snow in the context of “reunification.” Professor Gershaneck explains that Mao saw Taiwan as separate. This is different from how the PRC currently views China and its adoption of a “One China” policy.

“One China”

We talked about the evolution of what is referred to as the “One China” policy. Professor Gershaneck explains that this goes back to the Nixon Administration and the diplomatic outreach to China to combat the Soviet Union. The policy is part of a CCP claim to territory that ranges from Taiwan to the South China Sea as far south as Singapore. Looking at a map, one can see the claims to the South China Sea represented by what is referred to as the “Nine-Dash Line”. During the Nixon administration, the U.S. recognized China’s claim but did not agree that these territories belonged to China.

As part of the opening with China, the United States no longer recognized the Republic of China diplomatically and instead recognized the PRC. This happened under President Jimmy Carter’s administration in 1979. In response, Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) that has allowed for U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and provided an implicit guarantee to protect Taiwan from invasion.

Current Events

Professor Gershaneck says, “The Chinese Communist Party is nothing if not expert at generating a crisis, initiating a crisis, and then exploiting it in any way that it can.” We discuss the recent visit of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan. Her visit was intended to show support and solidarity to the small nation of 23.57 million people that sits less than 100 miles offshore from a CCP dominated nation of 1.4 billion.

Professor Gershaneck suggests that Speaker Pelosi’s visit gave the PLA cover to conduct military exercises and make threats. In fact, these exercises and the response had been planned for months. In the wake of the visit, the PRC ramped up its military intimidation, which is a form of political warfare. Additionally, China fired missiles into Japan’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

China is going to continue what they are already practicing. They are going to push using aviation assets and building up their Navy. Professor Gershaneck thinks that the PRC’s timeline for an invasion of Taiwan is within the next two years. He also believes that Xi Jinping will use his third term for a potential invasion. Unless the United States shows assertiveness and backbone, China under Xi Jinping will seize the opportunity to take action against Taiwan.

Additional Books and Resources

Professor Gershaneck has written extensively for news, foreign policy, and academic publications in Asia, Europe, and the U.S.  His books are listed below:

Political Warfare: Strategies for Combating China’s Plan to “Win without Fighting”.  Quantico, Virginia: Marine Corps University Press, 2020.

Media Warfare: Taiwan’s Battle for the Cognitive Domain. Washington D.C.: The Center for Security Policy, 2021.

A New Japan-U.S. Alliance to Deal with the Threat from China. Tokyo, Japan: Seirindo, 2022. (Co-Author, in Japanese)

Japan 2040: A Stark Appraisal. Washington D.C.: Center for Security Policy, 2021

Professor Gershaneck laments that Reuters headlines always claim that China is either “angered, upset, or irked.” Here is an example: “Angry China stages more drills near Taiwan as U.S. lawmakers visit”

Wolf Warrior diplomacy article

VOA article “How 1930s Reporter from Missouri Became China’s Ideal Journalist”

Clive Hamilton keynote speech

Two articles related to Chinese influence on campus. One is from Yale News and the other from Human Rights Watch. Both articles take a different side of the debate.

A few additional articles from recent events:

An article on the Solomon Islands Prime Minister and another article related to China’s influence over the Solomon Islands and how it has disrupted Coast Guard operations.

In this episode of the PME Podcast, I interview Wesley Morgan. Wes is a journalist and author, who wrote a book called The Hardest Place: The American Military Adrift in Afghanistan’s Pech Valley. The book draws on hundreds of interviews and firsthand accounts from former commanding officers to the soldiers that spent months in the field. The Hardest Place provides a unique insight into many of the mistakes that drew the American military deeper into eastern Afghanistan as well as the country more broadly. In reflecting on and learning from 20 years of war in Afghanistan, this book is a must read.

Wesley Morgan’s book: The Hardest Place

Topics of discussion include:

• How the U.S. got involved in the Pech Valley and how operations grew larger over time
• The evolution of American strategy from a counterterrorism mission to counterinsurgency
• The difficulty of obtaining accurate and reliable intelligence
• How the military got caught in the middle of tribal disputes
• Challenges with command and control
• The U.S. experience in the Pech vs. the Soviet experience
• The arrival of ISIS in the Pech Valley and how their presence changed operations
• How the complexity of the operational environment hindered U.S. efforts in the Pech and Afghanistan overall

Books and Resources

• The Bear Went Over the Mountain is a book about the Soviet Union military experience in eastern Afghanistan
• David Kilcullen’s The Accidental Guerilla. This book uses the Pech Valley as a case study on counterinsurgency success
• Ronald Fry’s book Hammerhead Six
• Sebastian Junger’s book, War and movie Restrepo
• Books on Counterinsurgency: Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife, Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice, The U.S. Army and Marines Counterinsurgency Field Manual
• Interview with Sebastian Junger
• Interview with Michael Gordon
• Featured Image source. Photo by Spc. Jon H. Arguello July 10, 2007

Follow Wes on Twitter: @wesleymorgan

Check out the book The Hardest Place: The American Military Adrift in Afghanistan’s Pech Valley

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the interview and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth.

I recently started a Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/pmecomplete Please consider showing your support for the show by becoming a patron.

To request additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Degrade and Destroy: An Interview with Michael Gordon

Michael Gordon is the author of Degrade and Destroy: The Inside Story of the War Against the Islamic State, from Barack Obama to Donald Trump. He is currently a National Security Correspondent with The Wall Street Journal. He has covered wars and conflicts for over 35 years with The Wall Street Journal and previously with The New York Times.

In this interview, we discus the last decade of conflict against the Islamic State in which the United States applied a “by, with and through” strategy. This strategy supported Iraqi Security Forces and Syrian Democratic Forces with U.S. advisors in the field as well as multiple intelligence and air assets. Topics covered include the following:

• The conditions that allowed ISIS to capture territory in Iraq and Syria
• The capture of Mosul followed by the U.S. developing a strategy to respond
• The “By, With and Through” strategy that the U.S. employed based on a Special Forces concept to back local forces in the field of combat
• Where the term “Degrade and Destroy” came from and the strategic implications of how it shaped into “Operation Inherent Resolve”. Link to Degrade and Destroy speech.
• Michael discusses his frontline view of the conflict while embedded with Iraq’s Counterterrorism Service (CTS) and Kurdish Peshmerga forces
• The early struggle to take back Mosul and how it led to Lieutenant General Townsend’s “Tactical Directive One”
• The difference between the Battle of Mosul and the Battle of Raqqa
• How the U.S. and Russia faced off in Syria
• The current state of “Operation Inherent Resolve” and the current disposition of the Islamic State
• Lessons learned from “Operation Inherent Resolve”

Michael Gordon Bibliography:

Degrade and Destroy: The Inside Story of the War Against the Islamic State, From Barack Obama to Donald Trump

The Endgame: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Iraq, from George W. Bush to Barack Obama

COBRA II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq

The Generals’ War

Article: “How the War Against ISIS Was Won”

Follow and contact Michael Gordon:

Twitter: @mgordonwsj  LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelgordonwsj/

E-mail: Michael.gordon@wsj.com and mgwsj@protonmail.com

 

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like the interview and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes, Spotify, or Audible. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth. To request additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Check out the website: www.professionalmilitaryeducation.com

“How a Marine Artillery Battery Beat ISIS”

March 2016- The Marine artillery battery did not shower for a month. They slept in the dirt every night. They had no expectations for a hot meal or cold drink. From the beginning of their insert into northern Iraq, they took enemy fire from rockets and a combined arms attack. For their part, the Marines fired back with a steady barrage of artillery rounds. In fact, there was only one 24 hour period in which the artillery guns were silent. Through the long, hot days and austere conditions, the Marines of Echo Battery, Battalion Landing Team (BLT) 2/6, maintained a high level of esprit de corps, discipline, and resolve. Their mission was simple: Hit the enemy, ISIS, with artillery fire to set the conditions for the recapture of Mosul in northern Iraq.

The Mission

By the time the Marines inserted into northern Iraq in between the friendly Kurdish controlled town of Erbil and the enemy ISIS controlled town of Mosul, the battle against ISIS was still in doubt. By March 2016, Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) with the support of a U.S. backed coalition were able to wrest control of Anbar province to include the cities of Ramadi and Fallujah. But ISIS forces still controlled large swaths of northern Iraq and Syria. Foreign fighters were flocking from all parts of the globe to fight and maintain territorial control of what ISIS had claimed as an Islamic Caliphate.

In late 2015, the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) was forward deployed as a Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) in the Central Command (CENTCOM) Area of Responsibility (AOR). The MEU had conventional Marine forces. This included an artillery battery from 2nd Battalion, 10th Marines out of Camp  Lejeune, NC. The battery was part of BLT 2/6. A Joint Task Force out of Erbil, Iraq needed artillery to support Iraqi Security Forces. With no Army units available, the Marines got the call.

Echo Battery, 2/10

The Marines of Echo Battery come from all parts of America. The Commanding Officer was Captain Dave Palka (now Lieutenant Colonel). Palka was raised in West Chester County, NY mostly in Yonkers. His father was a Union Iron Worker and his mother cleaned houses. He played sports and studied at a trade and technical school. After high school, he attended Kent State University in Ohio. Like many members of his generation, the 9/11 attacks motivated him to be a Marine and defend his country.

The other leaders of Battery E included First Sergeant Allen Smith, First Lieutenant Matt Ford, and the Battery Gunny, Gunnery Sergeant Scott Cook. Prior to deploying on the MEU, Echo Battery conducted training from the  Carolina Coast  and the waters off shore to the woods of Fort Pickett, Virginia. They sought to make the training tough and realistic. When I spoke with Palka, he explained, “We are going to do things that suck. We are going to do them often and we are going to do them together.” The tough training instilled disciplined habits of thought and action. Additionally, the training bred high levels of trust, cohesion, and love. While technical weapons proficiency is important, these intangible qualities would be the foundation of the unit’s success.

We are going to do things that suck. We are going to do them often and we are going to do them together. – Lt. Col. Dave Palka (USMC)

Practical Lessons for Unit Leaders

“PT was like church.” Palka’s Marines conducted physical fitness (PT) on a regular basis. They did it together too. Furthermore, they continued to do it on deployment. Palka believes in a link between physical fitness and mental toughness. As a result, maintaining physical strength was a high priority.

During training, Echo Battery did not use a fire watch. Instead they practiced setting in security at night. Furthermore, they would use opposing forces (OPFOR) to probe the security in the middle of the night. According to Palka, this helped develop a combat mindset. It set the tone for the unit that they were going to train how they would fight.

As mentioned, discipline was a crucial part of the unit’s success. This included gear and uniforms. By being disciplined in training with the way they wore their uniforms and took care of their gear, they were able to smoothly transition these skills into combat in Iraq. Palka mentions that their planning was very detailed down to the individual sleeping positions. As a result, by focusing on the little details in training and garrison, Echo Battery transferred these practices into combat.

Planning and Preparation

The six troop leading steps that complement the Marine Corps planning process is referred to as BAMCIS. The first part is “begin planning.” The plans came from a feasibility of support (FOS) request from a Combined Joint Task Force in support of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR). Echo Battery inserted into Kuwait to begin planning and preparation.

The “A” and “M” are arrange reconnaissance and make reconnaissance. The Marines conducted a pre-deployment site survey (PDSS) out of Erbil, Iraq. In the process, they determined good locations to set up firing positions. The Marines completed the planning. Palka issued the order to the battery on a large terrain model in Kuwait. As for the “S”, the supervision came in the form of rehearsals. Marines rehearsed simple things like getting on and off the helicopters.

Fire Base Bell Established

Fire Base Bell is named after Staff Sergeant Vincent J. Bell, who was killed in Afghanistan in 2011. Echo Battery Marines took pride in the name. The name engendered a sense of honor and legacy. The artillery Marines were reinforced with engineers and infantry Marines and a Q-53 Radar Section from the U.S. Army. Together, they were Task Force Spartan. The infantry Marines from Echo Company, 2/6 served as Task Force Spartan’s Security Force, responsible for providing perimeter security, and the overall defense of the fire base. The engineers constructed the eight foot berms surrounding the fire base, survivability positions, ammunition holding areas, and a detailed obstacle network in support of the fire base’s defense. The Q-53 radar section enhanced the battery’s organic radar capabilities and contributed greatly to an effective counterfire capability.

On March 13, 2016, an advanced party inserted and set conditions for the main body to arrive. However, it took less than 24 hours for the enemy to begin firing at them. Enemy fire from Katyusha rockets would remain a persistent part of life for the Marines. Nevertheless, by March 18, the entire unit was in place to include four M777A2 Howitzers. The Marines successfully established a “FIRECAP” with a pre-planned 32 round fire mission. With the guns in place, the Marines continued to dig and improve their position. A key tenet of life in the field is to always be improving defensive positions and establishing priorities of work. Task Force Spartan was no exception. The Marines filled thousands of sandbags.

Enemy Attacks

The Marines knew the risks and prepared for them. Part of combat is accepting risk and danger. War is

violent and chaotic. On March 19, ISIS launched 122mm Katyusha rockets. One of the rocket hits impacted Gun One and caused a mass casualty event. Among the Marines that were hit on the gun, the Howitzer Section Chief, Staff Sergeant Louis Cardin succumbed to his wounds and passed. He was 27 years old. Palka explained that the loss of SSgt Cardin was tough for the unit. He was a great Marine leader and a great man. SSgt Cardin put his Marines first and set the example in all his actions. R.I.P. SSgt Louis Frederick Cardin.

After the casualties were treated and evacuated, there was a need for the Marines to “get back on the gun.” In the ensuing days, the Marines would return to the spot where the rocket impacted and continue to fire rounds to defeat the enemy. Palka and leaders at every level throughout Task Force Spartan would set the tone for the mindset and attitude of the Marines. They allowed a time to reflect and pray. However, ultimately, the Marines had a mission to accomplish. Furthermore, the Marines were hungry to fight back. And fight they did, firing over 2,000 155mm artillery rounds over the course of 67 days.

Attack at Night

On the night of March 21, 2016, a squad sized element attacked Fire Base Bell. The enemy attacked with a combination of rifles, machine guns, grenades, and improvised explosive vests. The battle lasted two hours. During this time, the infantry Marines on perimeter security were able to repel the attack and kill four enemy fighters. Palka explained that the enemy were from different nationalities that included Chechens and Chinese. Additionally, the artillery Fire Direction Center (FDC) was able to manually compute firing data and fire illumination rounds that helped the infantry Marines defeat the enemy attack. There were no Marine casualties during the attack.

Life at the Fire Base

Over time the enemy attacks lightened. Palka says that one of the reasons is that an enemy leader, who

had critical indirect fires knowledge, was killed in a drone strike. The Marines continued to pummel the enemy with artillery rounds on a daily basis. While initial counterfire approval missions took 15 minutes, they eventually got to under two minutes. As a result, the Marines gained confidence with each fire mission.

While operating out of Fire Base Bell, the Marines continually wore their full personal protective equipment (PPE). Additionally, Marines learned how to manage the tempo of operations. At the outset, leaders struggled with getting enough sleep. But, with more experience, they learned to balance sleep schedules and look after each other’s rest. Palka explains that “self-care” is important for a leader to stay mentally fit in combat.

The Marines took pride in their hard living in the field. Palka said that one of the things that drew him to a combat arms profession like artillery was going to the field. Living in the dirt is a hallmark of the Marine Corps sense of toughness and fortitude. Task Force Spartan Marines relished this reputation.

Artillery Marines Setting New Milestones

Task Force Spartan achieved new milestones for the artillery community. First, they successfully employed a United States Army TPQ-53 Radar System and the AN/TPQ-50 LCMR system. The significance of the TPQ-53 Radar System is that it allowed Fire Base Bell to serve as a Target Processing Center (TPC). As a result, they were able to track enemy fires and quickly employ their own fires to degrade the enemy’s ability to operate on the battlefield.

Task Force Spartan also employed Precision Guidance Kit (PGK) fuzes. This was a historic milestone as the first Marine Corps artillery unit to fire these fuzes in combat. In the process, they were able to destroy an enemy controlled building, which killed two ISIS fighters. They also destroyed a vehicle borne improvised explosive device (VBIED).

One of the most remarkable achievements is the fact that not one of the four artillery cannons went down over 67 days. This is a testament to the unit’s proficiency. They continued to be combat capable through diligent maintenance and care for weapons and equipment.

Overall, the Marines ability to dominate the battlefield with artillery established the conditions for the re-taking of Mosul, which Iraqi Security Forces were able to do by July 20, 2017. The fire and fury that the Marines launched from the tubes of their artillery cannons set the tone for the battle that would ultimately lead to the end of ISIS’s territorial claims in Iraq and Syria.

The Aftermath

“It felt strange,” Palka said. One day they were in the middle of nowhere in northern Iraq, and the next day they were out. The Marines went from being hyper vigilant to being safe. The focus turned to preparing to go home. Oddly enough, when the Marines extracted from Fire Base Bell, the MEU was no longer in theater. Their ride (i.e. the USS Arlington and USS Oak Hill) had sailed away.

Nevertheless, the Marines were back in Kuwait where they conducted classes and training to return from deployment. Additionally, Palka took his officers out for PT. He sought to create a positive environment where the Marines could process what happened, talk about how they were feeling, and be honest with each other. It is worth noting that the Marines in this unit are undoubtedly tough and resilient. However, Palka recognizes that they are still human too. And as humans, they need to deal with very real human emotions. This is a testament to Palka’s exceptional leadership.

Five Years Later

Many of the Marines are out of the service. Several others like Palka have been promoted and stayed in. The unit has set up weekly Zoom calls where Marines can check in with one another and share what is going on in their lives. This is particularly important for some of the Marines that are struggling with life after the Marine Corps. Additionally, Echo Battery has instituted F.R.O.S.T. (Fast Response on Short Transmission) calls every six months. These calls are designed as a way to quickly check in with everyone that was in the unit.

Palka has struggled with telling this story only because he is very humble. However, he recognizes that this story must be told. This is a crucial piece of Marine Corps history. It is especially important to remember the legacy of Marines like SSgt Cardin.

There are other critical lessons from Echo Battery’s 67 days in Iraq. First, many artillery Marines might not have thought that they were going to employ artillery in a conventional manner. Who can blame them? So much of the last two decades of war has been dedicated to counter-insurgency (COIN). It is important to remember that the strategic and operational landscape can change quickly. One day the Marines are on ship and the next day they are in the middle of Iraq firing hundreds of artillery rounds each day. The story of Echo Battery is a call for Marines everywhere to take their jobs seriously and realize that all of the training and preparation exists for a reason.

How did the Marines beat the hell out of ISIS?

First, there is no substitute for great leadership. Palka received the Bronze Star with Valor and the Leftwich Trophy, and other Marines in Task Force Spartan were awarded for their valor. The Leftwich Trophy is a leadership award given to Captains. Second, tough and realistic training ensures units will be successful. As General Norman

Schwarzkopf once said, “The more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war.” Third, discipline matters. There is no excuse for leaders not to ruthlessly enforce habits of thought and habits of action. Leaders must instill a combat mindset in their units. Fourth, unit cohesion is crucial. As Palka explained, unit cohesion is born of enduring hardship as a unit. Finally, Palka and his Marines were extremely proficient and knew their weapons systems and their capabilities. They were technically savvy and experts in their field.

In conclusion, the combination of strong leadership, technical expertise, brilliance in the basics, and esprit de corps is an unstoppable recipe for success. Once the Marines got the greenlight, the enemy never had a chance.

Additional Resources:

Echo Battery Preparation for Deployment Video

Echo Battery Deployment Video

For more small unit leader resources, be sure to check out the podcasts on marksmanship, fieldcraft, and tactics:

1. On Combat Marksmanship podcast link
2. Fieldcraft podcast link
3. Tactics podcast link

Business Insider article on Echo Battery, 2/10

After 20 years of war in Afghanistan, the United States has removed all military forces. After the closure of Bagram Airbase, the U.S. backed Afghan government fell in less than two months. The Taliban moved fast and converged on the capital in Kabul. As a result, the Kabul Airport became the focal point of a frenzied pullout. The pullout from Afghanistan was a disaster. The lack of planning led to the death of thirteen military personnel. Eleven Marines, one Navy Corpsman, and one Soldier died. Click here for a full list of their names and pictures.

Thus, we take a bold step to begin investigating and learning from what happened. We must learn from our history and figure out a path forward. Our national pride depends on it. It was a pleasure to interview my guest, Mike Nelson. Mike’s insights are impressive. He draws on a vast wealth of knowledge and experience. Check out the podcast and the books that Mike and I recommend in our discussion.

About the Guest

Mike Nelson is a Visiting Fellow at George Mason University’s National Security Institute and an Army Special Forces veteran with multiple deployments to Operations Enduring Freedom, Iraqi Freedom, and Inherent Resolve.

Topics Covered:

• The rise of the Taliban in the 1990s after the Soviet Union
• The Taliban’s relationship with Al-Qaeda and the influence of the Haqqani Network
•  How the U.S. got involved in Afghanistan and why the U.S. decided to overthrow the Taliban
•  Task Force Dagger and how early success was counterproductive
•  Why some of the democracy efforts failed. Mike says, “We confused democracy with legitimacy.”
•  How lessons from the Iraq War were misapplied in Afghanistan specifically the “Surge” strategy
•  Why negotiations with the Taliban were flawed from the start
•  How Pakistan enabled the Taliban and worked against U.S. interests
•  The power dynamics in the region that include Russian and Chinese interests
•  The future of Afghanistan to include how terrorist groups might use the country for follow-on operations

Additional Books and Articles

Mike’s article here “It Was the Best of COIN, It Was the Worst of COIN”

Soldiers of God: With Islamic Warriors in Afghanistan and Pakistan

Afghanistan: A Cultural and Political History (Princeton Studies in Muslim Politics Book 45)

How Wars End: Why We Always Fight the Last Battle

Blood Year: The Unraveling of Western Counterterrorism

The Accidental Guerrilla: Fighting Small Wars in the Midst of a Big One

The Looming Tower Publisher: Vintage

Other Podcasts:

Interview on the rise of ISIS with Joby Warrick

Interview with Gideon Rose on “How Wars End”

Carl von Clausewitz’s Guide to Tactics and Theory of the Combat

This interview was a discussion with Olivia Garard about Carl von Clausewitz. Olivia annotated and edited Carl von Clausewitz’s Guide to Tactics and Theory of the Combat. This is a lesser-known work by the great Prussian military writer, who is best known for his book On War. However, in this work, we see Clausewitz’s thinking about tactics and combat take shape. Olivia’s Annotated Guide is meant to provide military thinkers with a useful tool to work through Clausewitz’s work. She calls the reading of Clausewitz a “mental field exercise.”

About Olivia: She served in the Marine Corps for six years as a UAS officer. She left as a Captain. Prior to the Marine Corps, she received a BA from Princeton University and also an MA from King’s College in London. She is a writer at War on the Rocks and at Strategy Bridge. The best way to keep up with her work is by following her Twitter: @teaandtactics

In the interview, we discuss:

• Olivia’s motivation to join the Marines.
• How she became interested in Clausewitz
• Who is Clausewitz and why should anyone care about him?
• What is war? What does it mean to have a “theory” of combat?
• The destructive act and the decisive act
• Clausewitz on the offense and defense
• Clausewitz on what a “moral” force means.
• Thoughts on leadership
• Reflections on Clausewitz and current events from cyber threats to China and Taiwan
• Thoughts on esprit de corps
• And we briefly touch on the concept of “Trinity of War”.

This was a very informative and interesting interview with someone who is extremely knowledgeable on the topic.

Resources

• • Get the book in PDF format here.
  • Article on sleep in the Marine Corps Gazette.
  • Want a hard copy of the Guide? Go to the following website . Or email mcu_press@usmcu.edu with name and address and request for copies.
  • To follow Olivia, check out @teaandtactics on Twitter.
  • On War, Indexed Edition by Carl von Clausewitz
  • Image source.
  • Ian Brown on MCDP-1 interview.
  • B.A. Friedman On Tactics interview.

War and money. Often the latter leads to the former. The desire for money and resources can be a cause of war. But, the topic of financial power as a tactic of warfare is an interesting one to study.

In the podcast interview, the Honorable Juan Zarate, explains how the United States Treasury Department has used financial power to achieve national security objectives. He speaks after having many years of experience serving at the U.S. Treasury.

Juan was working at the U.S. Treasury before and after 9/11. In the aftermath of 9/11, the Treasury Department deployed a number of tactics to track terrorist financing. The goal was to “follow the money” to disrupt the networks funding groups like Al-Qaeda.

About Juan Zarate

He began his career as a lawyer and worked at the Treasury Department under the Office of Enforcement prior to 9/11. He was the first-ever assistant secretary of the treasury for terrorist financing and financial crimes. In this capacity, he hunted terrorist financing and also Saddam Hussein’s assets after the invasion of Iraq.

From 2005 to 2009, he served as the deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security advisor for combating terrorism. During this time, he expanded on his work tracking terrorist financing and looked at using the same tactics more broadly.

Juan published the book, Treasury’s War: The Unleashing of a New Era of Financial Warfare in 2013. He currently serves as chairman and co-founder of FDD’s Center on Economic and Financial Power (CEFP). Finally, he is a global co-managing partner and chief strategy officer of K2 Integrity.

Expanded Powers

One of the critical developments after 9/11 was the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act. This act contained in it Section 311. Under Section 311 authority, the Treasury Department targeted banks tied to money laundering and illicit activity.

One of the most prominent examples occurred against Banco Delta Asia (BDA), which is a Macau-based bank. The Treasury Department discovered that the bank had ties to North Korea and was providing them access to the global banking system. At the time, North Korea was using counterfeit dollar bills called “supernotes”. They were also involved in illicit activity such as drug and cigarette smuggling.

When the Treasury Department “designated” BDA under the authority of Section 311, they signaled to the market that BDA was a “bad bank.” The market responded by looking at other banking relationships that could be tied to North Korea and re-assessing those relationships. As a result, those banks re-assessed their relationship with North Korea. The domino effect of the BDA designation caused North Korea to lose access to a lot of its banks. Therefore, they lost a significant amount of access to funds.

Mechanisms of Enforcement

The Treasury Department continues to use sanctions through the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC). The OFAC designation list is currently over 1,500 pages.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) of the US Department of the Treasury administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United​ States.

From the Treasury Department Website

The Treasury Department used sanctions against Iran. Juan mentions counterparty risk. In this case, business with Iran often entailed the risk of doing business with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Thus, designations were a tool to force companies to know their customer and counterparty relationships. To this day, companies continue to disclose the discovery of having done business with designated entity. The result can be a settlement that costs millions of dollars.

Current and Future Challenges

We discussed the use of sanctions by both Republican and Democratic administrations. In both cases, sanctions were a tool of national security. During the Obama administration, the goal was to drive the Iranian regime to the negotiating table.

During the Trump administration, the use of sanctions accelerated against Iran as the U.S. no longer recognized the nuclear agreement known as the JCPOA. Check out the interview “Iran Wars” for more information on the JCPOA and events leading up to the nuclear agreement.

The China Challenge

Additionally, President Trump signed Executive Order 13959 in November 2020 that specifically targeted Chinese investments tied to the military.

Key to the development of the PRC’s military, intelligence, and other security apparatuses is the country’s large, ostensibly private economy. Through the national strategy of Military-Civil Fusion, the PRC increases the size of the country’s military-industrial complex by compelling civilian Chinese companies to support its military and intelligence activities. Those companies, though remaining ostensibly private and civilian, directly support the PRC’s military, intelligence, and security apparatuses and aid in their development and modernization.

Executive Order 13959

This Executive Order prevents U.S. investors from buying Chinese companies that are directly tied to financing the Chinese military. But, how would an investor know that? Chinese businesses do not have the same disclosure requirements.

However, there might be some change on this front too. As recently as December 2020, Congress passed a law to try to force Chinese companies to meet U.S. accounting standards.

“The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act” passed with bipartisan support. In the bill, a company that does not comply with U.S. Public Accounting Oversight Boards audits can be de-listed. For example, if Alibaba (NYSE: BABA) does not comply, U.S. stock exchanges can de-list their stock. Investors will know longer be able to buy Alibaba stock on U.S. exchanges.

Financial Warfare Observations

In national defense, money wields a lot of power. With globalization and technology, the world has become more connected. This presents a new set of challenges and opportunities for the U.S. It is challenging because there are many avenues for a terrorist group or adversary to move money and hide assets. At the same time, the U.S. remains the dominant economy and Wall Street is the hub of international finance. This provides a lot of leverage.

Thus, the challenge moving forward is to retain that position. The Unites States must continue to have a growing economy and be the leader in global commerce. But, this challenge will not be easy as China has and continues to make rapid gains.

In the meantime, the U.S. can continue to use its leverage to set high standards of accountability. U.S. companies and investors should be cognizant of their investments and counterparties. The Treasury Department has enforced this accountability with respect to Iran and North Korea. It seems likely to continue this trend with regard to China.

Further Reading

Check out Juan Zarate’s book: Treasury’s War: The Unleashing of a New Era of Financial Warfare

Follow him on Twitter: @JCZarate1

U.S. Treasury Department website

“Stealth War” is war by non-military means. I discuss this topic with General Robert Spalding (USAF-Ret.). General Spalding’s book, Stealth War: How China Took Over While America’s Elite Slept, explores the nature of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). As martial scholars, we look at the way economics, politics, media, and technology can be weaponized. In the geopolitical power struggle between the U.S. and China, this is an important topic to study. I was honored to have General Spalding speak with me. Please check out the interview and notes below.

A New Cold War

During the Cold War of the 20th Century, the United States and the Soviet Union did not have economic relations. Today’s new cold war is different. The U.S. and China have extensive trade relations and are tied together through the globalized economy.

Chinese President Xi Jinping advocates for an open economy. Why? General Spalding makes the case that it benefits the CCP. For Western companies, the market opportunities are vast. There are over one billion people living in China. As the Chinese consumer class grows, there is an inescapable allure among multinational corporations to access this powerful market. But, this also gives the Chinese Communist Party significant leverage. Business in China also means business with the CCP. The Party becomes a joint partner. It is the price that businesses pay to access cheap labor capital and sell their products.

General Spalding highlights the ways in which the CCP has tried to exploit the free market. The argument he makes is that the CCP is a type of Trojan Horse. They are “open” for business because they understand that the free market can be used to enrich the party and strengthen the state. Furthermore, the Chinese Communist Party can use economic leverage for political gain and to impact U.S. citizens. For example, we discuss several cases in which China has sought to force American businesses to fire employees or censor free speech.

The most prominent case occurred when former Houston Rockets general manager, Daryl Morey, tweeted in favor of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protestors. The backlash from China was swift and there were reports of the PRC pressuring the NBA to fire Morey.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP)

The Chinese Communist Party is a totalitarian regime that rules its people through force. There is no freedom of religion, freedom of the press, or freedom of speech specifically political speech that the government might find subversive. General Spalding describes it as “rule by law” rather than “rule of law.” This means that the law is what the state decides it to be. On the other hand, in the American political system, the law is derived from the consent of the governed. The United States is a nation formed under the principle of inalienable rights i.e. rights that are intrinsic to the individual. This contrasts with a monarchy or a dictatorship where laws are decreed from on high. In China, the state grants rights. They can be stripped away as easily as they are granted. The state is supreme over the liberty of the individual.

In my interviews with General Spalding and Ian Easton (Episode 20), they both used the term “Orwellian” to describe the CCP. This is a reference to George Orwell, who wrote 1984 and Animal Farm. These novels seek to uncover the nature of totalitarian governments. Modern China appears to be an Orwellian nightmare with tight state control over the lives of its citizens to include an extensive social credit score.

General Spalding also referenced the massacre in Tiananmen Square. This was a Chinese student uprising during the late 1980s that was brutally suppressed by the CCP. It marked a turning point in modern China in which the state pushed further toward authoritarian rule. To this day, many Chinese citizens are unaware of what happened at Tiananmen Square. They don’t know the history of what their government did. All references are removed from the Internet, which is tightly controlled by the CCP.

Unrestricted Warfare and The Art of War

General Spalding references two books. The first one is called Unrestricted Warfare. This book was published by two PLA Colonels- Colonel Qiao Ling and Colonel Wang Xiangsu. It was written in the late 1990s. In the backdrop of the book’s publication, America had just defeated the Soviet Union during the Cold War and emerged as the sole superpower in the world. Furthermore, America had won a successful military campaign against Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War.

Thus, the two PLA Colonels identify America’s military and technological supremacy as being a significant force to overcome. What was the solution? War by other means. In this sense, Unrestricted Warfare has echoes of the great Chinese military strategist and author, Sun Tzu. Sun Tzu’s book, The Art of War, describes war being waged on multiple fronts to include diplomatic fronts. In my interview “On Strategy” with Sir Lawrence Freedman, we touched on a few of these principles. The principle of strategic power is to shape the battlefield in one’s favor before a shot is fired. The goal is to lay the groundwork for the enemy to capitulate to one’s will before blood is shed.

Applying that principle to the 21st Century, we see how there are numerous domains in which China can erode the United States and her power. First, there is the U.S. economic system which seeks open markets. As previously mentioned, that is one area of exploitation. There is also the domain of mass communications and disinformation. In the interview, we also discuss technologies that can be used for mass surveillance and espionage. There is also traditional espionage as evidence by the scandal of U.S. House of Representative Eric Swalwell (D.-Ca).

Is there a military solution?

No. That is the short answer. We have looked at possible military responses. But, as previously mentioned, this is not a war with significant military power. However, China is building and expanding their military especially their Navy, which includes two aircraft carriers- Liaoning and Shandong.

General Spalding also claims that American companies “helped finance” the Chinese construction of manmade islands in the South China Sea. The South China Sea remains hotly contested. China claims nearly all of the territory down to what is called the “Nine Dash Line.” This maritime area is economically vibrant with nearly $3.37 trillion in global trade activity annually and 11 billion barrels in untapped oil reserves (Source: CFR).

When I interviewed Ian Easton, he discussed the ability of China to invade Taiwan. General Spalding was adamant that such an invasion would take place. He suggests that it is not a matter of if but when.

In past episodes, I have sought to look at how the branches of the military like the Marine Corps are focusing on the threat that China poses in the Indo-Pacific. The Marine Corps Commandant, General Berger, crafted his Commandant’s Planning Guidance (CPG) off of the 2017 National Security Strategy (NSS). General Spalding helped develop the NSS. The Marine Corps has sought to answer the challenge of China’s belligerence in the Indo-Pacific. In my podcast with Lt. Col. Scott Cuomo, we talked about the concept of being “Not Openly at War, But Still Mostly at Peace.”

Other Topics: Technology, Hong Kong, COVID-19

The podcast includes other topics of discussion such as technology. General Spalding has focused his work on 5G technology. Fifth Generation (5G) technology is one in which the world is even more connected. Hard to believe! The speed of 5G will make the Internet of Things (IoT) a greater reality. IoT ties physical objects to the Internet. Every object becomes “smart”. The world is hyper connected in ways that are hard to imagine now. Thus, it is no surprise that the race to develop and exploit this technology has intensified among nation states.

Next, we discuss what happened in Hong Kong. The previous framework was “one country, two systems.” In 2019, massive pro-democracy protests took place in Hong Kong. The protests were in opposition to a national security law. Pro-Beijing lawmakers signed the national security law in June of 2020. As of 2020 the U.S. no longer recognized the autonomy of Hong Kong.

No reasonable person can assert today that Hong Kong maintains a high degree of autonomy from China, given facts on the ground.

-former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (May 27, 202, source: NBC)

Finally, we had an interesting discussion about COVID-19. It is worth listening to General Spalding’s perspective. He does not believe that the Chinese deliberately released the virus. But, he does claim that the cover-up of information and the disinformation that followed is a manifestation of China’s stealth war.

Books and Resources:

Stealth War: How China Took Over While America’s Elite Slept

Unrestricted Warfare: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America

The Chinese Invasion Threat: Taiwan’s Defense and American Strategy in Asia

The Art of War: The Essential Translation of the Classic Book of Life (Penguin Classics)

Stealth War Project

2017 National Security Strategy

General Spaldings Twitter: @robert_spalding

1984

Animal Farm: 75th Anniversary Edition

In this episode of the PME podcast, I speak with Ian Easton about the threat of China invading Taiwan. His book is called The Chinese Invasion Threat: Taiwan’s Defense and American Strategy in Asia. We chat about the history of Taiwan and its conflict with the People’s Republic of China. Ian details the longstanding ambitions of the PRC’s military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), to come up with plans to invade and conquer Taiwan. Check out the podcast and learn about what Ian calls the most consequential foreign policy challenge that America currently faces.

The Taiwanese Government

Taiwan calls itself the Republic of China (ROC). After the Chinese Civil War (1927-1949) that took place between the Communists and the Nationalists under Chiang Kai-shek, it was ruled by the Nationalists that lost the Civil War to Mao and the Communists. Taiwan no longer claims the Chinese mainland as its territory. However, it does consider itself the rightful China.

Additionally, Taiwan has developed as a free and democratic government. Unlike the PRC, it is not an Orwellian police state influence by Marxist-Leninist ideology. Therefore, it is ironic that it does not have diplomatic recognition from any European country other than the Vatican. Over the years, the world has been forced to take sides. The PRC has proved to be a more valuable economic partner and has been able to force the majority of countries to take its side.

Taiwan and the United States

The United States was always willing to come to Taiwan’s aid militarily throughout the Cold War. In 1978, the U.S. signed the Taiwan Relations Act. The major stipulation of the act was that the U.S. would continue to supply Taiwan with military arms and equipment and an implicit guarantee at military protection. However, Taiwan is not a treaty ally in the same way that South Korea and Japan are U.S. treaty allies.

Taiwan maintains an important geographic position in the Pacific. If it were to fall, it would jeopardize the safety and sovereignty of other treaty allies in the region. Additionally, China has sought to claim large swaths of the South China Sea to the south of Taiwan. These territorial claims have led to many aggressive actions on the part of the PRC to build military bases and challenge other governments like the Philippines.

Additionally, Taiwan is America’s 10th largest trading partner. It makes advanced equipment such as microchips that power iPhones. As a result, the U.S. has a strong economic interest in Taiwan. Also, Ian claims that there are roughly 79,000 Americans who are currently working or traveling throughout Taiwan at any given time.

Why hasn’t Taiwan been invaded yet?

Taiwan is significantly overmatched militarily. In terms of raw numbers, it is a country of only 24 million people. Compare that to the PRC’s 1.3 billion people! Taiwan does not possess any nuclear deterrent capabilities.

While they may be outnumbered, Taiwan still has many advantages. First, the PLA does not know what the U.S. will do. The possibility of U.S. intervention and other countries coming to Taiwan’s defense is a consistent deterrent. Second, the Taiwan Straight is extremely difficult to cross. Even though it is a short distance, the waters can be treacherous. Third, Taiwan has a professional military and they have been able to build up their defense capacity since World War II. During World War II, the U.S. made the decision that Formosa (aka modern day Taiwan) was untenable for an invasion. The reasoning was that the casualties would be too high. Ian explains that a lot of the considerations during World War II remain in play for the PLA today. For example, Taiwan is one of the most mountainous islands in the Pacific.

China’s Military Growth

Under Xi Jinping, China has become more hostile. They have expanded their military into what they claim is their territory in the South China Sea. This includes artificially constructed islands that serve as military outposts. Additionally, the PLA has grown significantly. China has made significant investments in its military and especially its Navy.

Ian also explains that in 2020 China has become more aggressive against Taiwan and challenged Taiwan’s military defenses. On top of the military aggression, there are other domains in which the PRC seeks to lay the groundwork for an eventual invasion. They use cyber space, economic leverage, political disinformation, and espionage. There are many fronts in which they are trying to assert their influence and play the “long game” before invading. As a result, Ian says China’s number one war plan is an invasion and occupation of Taiwan.

Keep Learning

The Chinese Invasion Threat is an important book to study. Ian goes into a lot of detail and specifics not covered in the interview. This is a crucial issue for military and national defense planners. The Marine Corps continues to focus on the threats in the Indo-Pacific. For more information on this topic, my interview with Lt Col Cuomo gives an in depth look at the Marine Corps’ focus under General Berger’s planning guidance.

Check out Ian’s Book:

The Chinese Invasion Threat: Taiwan’s Defense and American Strategy in Asia

Follow Ian’s work at The Project 2049 Institute.

“There are no happy meals in the field.”

Marine Staff Sergeant Chad Skaggs

On Fieldcraft is an interview about how to not only survive but thrive in the field. I had the pleasure of interviewing Marine Staff Sergeant Chad Skaggs. Chad is a Marine’s Marine. He is an intense infantryman, and he wrote a book on fieldcraft.

He surveyed the landscape of resources on the field. After realizing there was a lack of information, Chad took initiative to write a book on the topic. In the interview, Chad provides some excellent tips on field survival.

Living in the field is tough. Advertisements make military training look like a giant Spartan race. Far from it. The challenges are more mundane. How to stay dry? How to wear gear properly? What type of clothing to wear? Chad shows that the little things make a big difference.

 

The way of our people…

Chad has talked with many infantry leaders about fieldcraft. Many infantrymen contributed to his thinking.

What he noticed was that there was no formal instruction on fieldcraft. A lot of Marines left school with different ideas of fieldcraft. So, Chad collaborated with some of the best minds in the infantry and tried to create a new doctrine.

“Everything we do has to be simple and effective.” He explains that we have to learn to use the things we have to their maximum effectiveness.

“Cotton Kills”

Chad does not like cotton. That comes through in the interview.

For the love of God, wear wool socks.

Marine Staff Sergeant Chad Skaggs

When we discussed clothing, he mentioned that cotton absorbs moisture. On the other hand, wool wicks moisture away. He says that with a simple transition to wool socks, infantrymen will not need to bring as many of them to the field. This is good because it saves space and reduces weight. There is the old adage “Ounces equal pounds, and pounds equal pain.”

 

Take Care of Your Feet

Wearing the right boots is important. However, it is also important to take care of your boots. People get lazy about it. After every field exercise boots should be carefully scrubbed and cleaned.

Chad explains that we do this so the boots retain their waterproofing ability. Taking care of ones boots requires discipline. Discipline is not just “keeping your hands out of your pockets.” This is a reference to a part of garrison life where hands in pocket is prohibited. It is often viewed as a contrast between “field discipline.” However, the two are not mutually exclusive. Chad emphasizes that simple forms of discipline like cleaning boots is extremely practical.

When able, an infantryman should always seek to air out and dry their feet. We talked about how blisters form. There is nothing worse than hiking with blisters. Blisters form when moist material rubs against the skin causing friction. Therefore, keeping feet dry and wearing wool socks is a necessity.

Hiking and using the ruck sack

I remember training with the old ILBE pack. It was a nightmare in terms of functionality. The Marine Corps upgraded to a much better ruck sack. The upgraded pack has a suspension system and straps to properly adjust the weight.

As Chad explains, the weight should be higher up on the pack. Ultimately, it should rest on one’s hips. The goal is for the weight to push a person forward. Too often when people fall out of hikes, their packs are a mess. Furthermore, they will be at the back of a hiking formation with their pack “pulling them backward.” The goal is not to fight against the weight in your pack, but to work with it. It will be heavy, but it can still be manageable.

Chad also provides pictures and images in the book that show where to compartmentalize certain items. Additionally, he always packs his pack the same way. This is useful because he knows where everything is at all times. As he explains, he can search in the dark for any item and know how to find it without using a light. This is tactically sound and something all infantryman should train to do.

“Get Comfortable Being Uncomfortable”

At one point, we joke that the “Fortnite Generation” is entering the Marine Corps. We still get a lot of Marines that grew up on farms and are acclimated to the outdoors. But, we also get many that do not have this background. While they want to challenge themselves, life in the field can become a shock to the system.

As I mentioned earlier, advertisements show a lot of physical training, obstacle courses, and endurance courses. But, that is a small fraction of the overall training. Waking up in the cold with little sleep and little food is where the real mental and physical challenge begins. It takes practice and needs to become conditioned as a habit. 

Many Marines have spent time going through the gauntlet of field training at places like 29 Palms, California. This can be a month of eating, sleeping, and living outside in the dirt with no shelter and no modern conveniences.

An infantryman has to embrace life in the field. The infantryman should feel confident in their ability to not just survive but thrive. They should be confident in how to employ their gear and equipment the right way. The goal is to get “comfortable being uncomfortable.”

Fieldcraft Resources

Chad has sought to write an important book on fieldcraft. There are other doctrinal publications which motivated him. There are also a few other books that he mentioned.

If the literature seems light, he assured me that the work is not done. He will continue to write more and make updates as needed. He will continue to pick people’s brains and catalogue the best practices.

For those in the military seeking the book, Chad’s e-mail can be found in the GAL. His personal e-mail is also skaggs.chad@gmail.com. You can also e-mail me. Tell me a little about yourself, your unit, and your experience in the field. We would like to keep learning from each other and pushing important knowledge to those serving out in the field.

Helpful Books mentioned– 

Charlie Rangers – Chad mentioned this book several times. 

MCIP 3-10A.4i w/Change 1 Marine Rifle Squad May 2020

Map Reading and Land Navigation and Marine Scouting and Patrolling

Ranger Handbook: TC 3-21.76, April 2017 Edition

Bushcraft 101: A Field Guide to the Art of Wilderness Survival

 

In this two-part podcast episode, I spoke with LtCol Scott Cuomo (USMC). He is the author of an article that appeared in the Marine Corps Gazette called, Not Yet Openly at War, But Still Mostly at Peace. He wrote the article with a team of Marines that include: Captain Olivia Garard, Major Jeff Cummings, and LtCol Noah Spataro.

 

The purpose of the article was to re-think what the Marine Corps should be doing in 2019 and beyond. The co-author team suggests that the Marine Corps needs to implement a “new big idea.” The “big idea” looks beyond the Marine Corps’ historical mission of Joint Forcible Entry Operations (JFEO). Essentially, the Marine Corps needs to consider a mission set beyond large scale amphibious assault operations.

LtCol Cuomo references a report that came out of the Senate Armed Services Committee and an article called “SASC Seeks Sweeping ‘Roles & Missions’ Report: Wither the Marines?”. This article served as a call to action to the Marine Corps to re-think their role in the modern defense era.

We look at the Marine Corps’ mission in the context of the 2017 National Security Strategy  and 2018 National Defense Strategy

The National Security Strategy states the following:

“China and Russia want to shape a world antithetical to U.S. values and interests. China seeks to displace the United States in the Indo-Pacific region, expand the reaches of its state-driven economic model, and reorder the region in its favor.” 

A bi-partisan, National Defense Commission Report concluded that the National Security Strategy was accurate in assessing the strategic threat. However, there needed to be clear operational concepts developed too. LtCol Cuomo dives into the weeds of the operational environment as we discuss the “Contact layer, the blunt layer, the surge layer, and the homeland defense layer.”   

LtCol Cuomo thinks that Marines need to be focused on operating in the “contact layer.” Moreover, the Marine Corps has a unique opportunity to do this right now. Bottom line: This is a defining moment in Marine Corps history.   

Commandant’s Planning Guidance

In the second part of the interview, we talk about the Marine Corps Commandants’ Planning Guidance (CPG). The CPG was published in July after General David Berger took over as the 38th Commandant of the Marine Corps.  

LtCol Cuomo mentions that General Berger was commander of the Marines in Pacific Command prior to becoming Commandant. Thus, the current Commandant has a good outlook on the challenges and problems taking place in the Indo-Pacific region.

We talk about several topics in the Commandant’s Planning Guidance to include: Force design, force modernization, III Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF), distributed operations in partnership with the Navy, and other ways that Marines can conduct distributed naval operations.

Check out some of the additional articles and resources mentioned in the interview:

“How We Lost the Great Pacific War”

“Geopolitical Gerrymandering and the Importance of Key Maritime Terrain” by Captain Olivia Garard (USMC)

Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America

The cover photo appeared in the February 2019 issue of the Marine Corps Gazette. Photo was taken by Sgt Devin Andrews, and appeared alongside the article Not Yet Openly at War, But Still Mostly at Peace.

For more great articles and information on Marine Corps operations, check out the Marine Corps Gazette.

Robert Coram is the author of an excellent biography called American Patriot: The Life and Wars of Colonel Bud Day.

Colonel Day is a larger than life figure. He is one of the most decorated veterans in American military history. This interview with Mr. Coram spans the course of Colonel Day’s life from his small-town upbringing in Iowa to his service as an Air Force pilot and prisoner of war (POW) in North Vietnam.

Colonel Day is best known for his time during the Vietnam War because he was shot down and imprisoned in the infamous Hanoi Hilton. In fact, he was cellmates with the late Senator John McCain. The two men served as POWs for five years until their release in the Spring of 1973. As a result of his steadfast commitment to resisting and upholding the Code of Conduct, Colonel Day was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor in 1976 by President Gerald Ford.

A recurring theme of Colonel Day’s legacy is honor. Colonel Day constantly repeated the phrase “return with honor” while being tortured by his North Vietnamese captors. This interview examines the core value of honor through the life and legacy of Colonel Bud Day. Robert Coram says that he was personally honored to have spent two and a half years with Colonel Day while writing the biography of his life. In talking to Mr. Coram, it was clear that he was greatly influenced by Colonel Day. I have no doubt that many other people will be influenced by the life and legacy of Colonel Bud Day, a great American Patriot.

Check out the book and the other biographies written by Robert Coram:
American Patriot: The Life and Wars of Colonel Bud Day
Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War
Brute: The Life of Victor Krulak, U.S. Marine
Double Ace: The Life of Robert Lee Scott Jr., Pilot, Hero, and Teller of Tall Tales

Episode 16 of the Professional Military Education podcast features Lt. Col Gregory Thiele (USMC-Ret.). He co-authored a book called  4th Generation Warfare Handbook with William S. Lind. The book explores the idea that military history has entered a new generation- the fourth one.

If you’re thinking, “Wait… there were three other ‘generations’ of warfare?” Then you are not alone. I asked Lt. Col Thiele about the other three. He provided an explanation that was interesting.

Listen to the interview!

The Four Generations of Warfare

Lt. Col Thiele claims that before the first generation of warfare, there were simply armed groups that fought each other for different reasons i.e. competition for land, resources, religious principles, etc… This is kind of a free for all type of era. I did not spend a lot of time on this specific categorization. There is no doubt that organized state sponsored armies have been fighting each other since Athens and Sparta. Thus, there is room to debate where Lt. Col Thiele chose to begin the generations. Nevertheless, here is where he starts.

First Generation

He claims the first generation begins after the Treaty of Westphalia and stretches to the American Civil War. He describes this generation as one in which line and column tactics developed to bring order and discipline to the battlefield. He says the tactics reflect a “culture of order.”

Second Generation

The second generation of warfare is one based on attrition. This is primarily a time in which heavily armed nation states slug it out by trying to throw more men and arms at each other. This generation takes place from the Civil War to World War I. Furthermore, Lt. Col Thiele claims that much of the modern day military mindset is still rooted in this second generation.

Third Generation

The third generation of warfare is one based on “maneuver.” It begins during World War I and thrives during World War II with the German blitzkrieg. This is a type of warfare in which enemy systems are attacked. The enemy strengths are avoided while speed and decisiveness are massed against areas in which they are weakest. Lt Col Thiele mentions John Boyd as someone who recognized this generation and this style of maneuver warfare.

Fourth Generation Warfare (i.e. 4GW)

Lt. Col Thiele suggests that we are in a new generation in which traditional state on state wars are becoming relics of the past. The idea is that the fourth generation is a type of throw back to the days prior to the Treaty of Westphalia. The only difference is that the state is now engaged with non-state actors. As a result, Lt. he refers to this era as a “devolution of warfare” or the “democratization of warfare.”

This idea of “democratization of warfare” is an interesting one. In some ways, it can be seen evolving with the rise of new technology such as communications via the Internet, which connects billions of people and allows for groups to spread their ideology and mobilize support. Social media platforms like Twitter were designed to give everyone a voice and a platform. We have seen the way in which terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS have skillfully used these technologies to their advantage.

As a result, I think that Lt. Col Thiele’s idea of the “democratization of warfare” is extremely thought provoking. It is also validated by recent history.

Light Infantry vs. Line Infantry

This is a critical part of 4GW, and one in which the two authors focus much of their time. Line infantry refers to conventional infantry tactics. Lt. Col Thiele uses the word “open space” in reference to it. This is basically uniformed conventional infantry forces fighting other uniformed forces with tanks, air support, and massive amounts of logistics in support.

Light infantry takes place on a different battlefield that has more complexity and nuance. These units need to be more “self-reliant” and must have a smaller logistical footprint. Furthermore, the use of violence is more selective and calculated. Also, light infantry uses the ambush more than close air support and artillery.

The idea of the light infantry is not a new idea. However, Lt. Col Thiele has refined it based on observations from recent history with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This type of fighting is one in which infantry units spend more time working with local populations, building goodwill, gathering intelligence, and then finding the right place and time to strike the enemy with swift violence.

Who is made for Fourth Generation Warfare?

As opposed to line infantry, light infantry seems to model the special forces. In our interview, Lt. Col Thiele suggested some similarities. Clearly, light infantry forces have to be more specialized and selective. Whoever joins these units will have to be physically tough, mentally resilient, and morally squared away.

However, this type of fight is not for everyone. The training demands a lot of hiking and extreme physical endurance. Additionally, light infantry training needs to incorporate free play to foster decision making against a real, thinking enemy.

These types of fighters will also have to be patient and disciplined. This means they will need to go long periods of time without access to Instagram and Snapchat. I know what you are thinking, “Where will America find such strong men?” Hopefully among the listeners of the PME Podcast!

Additional interviews related to this one include the following:

My interview with B.A. Friedman On Tactics

Also, my two interviews with Maj Ian Brown on John Boyd and maneuver warfare. Here is Part 1 and Part 2 of those interviews.

Additional Reading:

In 1989, Bill Lind published an article called The Changing Face of War: Into the Fourth Generation. This was initially published in the Marine Corps Gazette. Thirty years later, the article remains relevant and worth reading.

Lt. Col Thiele had one very specific book recommendation. The book is called Senator’s Son: An Iraq War Novel.

The 4GW Canon:

There are seven books. These appear in an appendix of 4GW Handbook. They are as follows:

1. The Enlightened Soldier: Scharnhorst and the Militarische Gesellschaft in Berlin, 1801-1805

2. The Seeds of Disaster: The Development of French Army Doctrine, 1919-39 (Stackpole Military History Series)

3. Stormtroop Tactics: Innovation in the German Army, 1914-1918

4. Command or Control?

5. The Breaking Point: Sedan and the Fall of France, 1940 (Stackpole Military History Series)

6. Fighting Power (Contributions in Military Studies)

7. The Transformation of War: The Most Radical Reinterpretation of Armed Conflict Since Clausewitz

Hampton Sides is the author of On Desperate Ground: The Marines at The Reservoir, the Korean War’s Greatest Battle.

The topic is the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir. This battle took place in the Fall and Winter of 1950 during the Korean War. Marines were surrounded at the Chosin Reservoir by over 100,000 of Mao’s Red Army forces. With their backs to the wall and facing total annihilation, they fought back with tenacity and determination. The fighting took place in sub-zero temperatures on unforgiving terrain. The Chinese attacked the Marines at night with wave after wave of soldiers storming the Marines’ positions. The fighting became hand to hand combat quickly. Marines used knives, bayonets, and helmets to repel the Chinese attackers.

In the end the Marines and Allied forces were able to execute a withdrawal from the Chosin Reservoir. They were surrounded by an overwhelming force and against all odds managed to execute a complicated maneuver to avoid destruction.

In the interview, Hampton discusses many topics to include:
– How the Korean War was a failure of intelligence
– The difference in leadership between Generals MacArthur and General Oliver P Smith
– The nature of the fighting and what it was like for the Marines on the ground
– How the war ended or rather how it didn’t end

Finally, in researching his book, Hampton talked to many veterans of the war. He explains how the Korean War became considered a “forgotten war.” However, books like On Desperate Ground help keep the memory of the Korean War and those veterans alive.

This episode is dedicated to the brave men and women who served our nation during the Korean War. We should never forget the service and sacrifice of so many great Americans.

Check out Hampton’s book:
On Desperate Ground: The Marines at The Reservoir, the Korean War’s Greatest Battle
Hampton Sides website: http://www.hamptonsides.com/

Additional Books/ Further Reading:
The Last Stand of Fox Company: A True Story of U.S. Marines in Combat

Give Me Tomorrow: The Korean War’s Greatest Untold Story–The Epic Stand of the Marines of George Company

The Coldest Winter: America and the Korean War

This Kind of War: The Classic Korean War History, Fiftieth Anniversary Edition

The Coldest Winter: America and the Korean War

Dr. Kori Schake co-authored, “Restoring Our National Security”, with Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis and James O. Ellis Jr. The chapter appeared in the book, Blueprint for America, which was published by Stanford Universities Hoover Institute.

I interviewed her on July 6, 2017. In our interview, we discussed a range of subjects related to American national security. Dr. Schake provided a lot of knowledge and insight into many of the challenges the U.S. currently faces in the world.

Dr. Schake is a professor of history at Stanford, and is a research fellow at the Hoover Institute. She also co-edited a book with Secretary Mattis called, Warriors and Citizens: American Views of our Military.

“Restoring our National Security” Interview

We had the following interview on July 6, 2017.

Interview Notes and References

At the beginning of the interview, Dr. Schake describes working with Secretary of Defense James Mattis. She says, “We are both argumentative.” Furthermore, she has had many long running debates with Secretary Mattis about the political composition of the Middle East.

Secretary Mattis is known for being outs”Kill the enemy!” That was Secretary Mattis’s advice to Captain Barret Schake, Kori’s nephew, who joined us in the interview. When Captain Schake told him that he flew military transport planes, then General Mattis clarified and told him to “land as close as possible to the enemy.”

Dr. Schake also recalled a General Mattis quote on the military in which he said, “It’s a lot of fun if you don’t care about getting promoted.”

On Strategy

Moving on to the topic of strategy, I asked Dr. Schake about her definition of strategy. She defines it as, “The way you connect political objectives to their execution. How you identify the means and array them so you have the highest likelihood of being able to carry out your objectives.” She says that, “Strategy is fundamentally a political undertaking.” Political objectives must dictate the scope of military planning and operations. Additionally, Dr. Schake echoes several of the principles that I discussed in interviews with Sir Lawrence Freedman and Gideon Rose on How Wars End.

Finally, Captain Schake talks about his recent experience in Iraq, and the changing strategy that has occurred since his first deployment in 2016 and his second deployment in 2017.

Iran

On Iran, we talk about the influence of Iran in Iraq. Dr. Schake claims that Iran is “absolutely a threat” and explains why she considers them to be a major source of instability in the region. “Iran has to decide if it wants to be a revolutionary movement or a state.” This quote is attributed to Secretary of Mattis. On Iran, Dr. Schake claims that the U.S. and Iran want “different outcomes” in the Middle East.

In my interview with Jay Solomon, we talked about Iran in depth, and the nuclear deal between the U.S. and Iran.

Dr. Schake mentions a program in which Iranians cast protest votes for “fake candidates.” She explains that it was part of a process of exposing repressive governments and supporting opposition movements in Iran. Next, we draw a distinction between the way that the U.S. has been involved in foreign elections, and what Russia has done. Moreover, the U.S. has worked to promote free societies while the Russians have repressed free societies.

I reference the 1953 CIA coup in which the U.S. overthrew the freely elected government in Iran, and put the Shah in power. Check out the book All the Shah’s Men by Steven Kinzer for more information on the U.S. backed coup d’état.

Russia

“This Russian government is genuinely evil. They mean us harm. They will do us harm when they have the opportunity.” For more information, I talked about Vladimir Putin in an interview with Steven Lee Myers on his book, The New Tsar.

According to Dr. Schake, the U.S. has “allies by choice” whereas Russia has “allies by force.” We talk about Russia’s “willful disregard for the difference for combatants and non-combatants in Syria” and their complicity of “war crimes in Syria.”

North Korea

Is North Korea high on Dr. Schake’s list of major threats that America faces? She describes North Korea’s fundamental purpose as regime survival, and, as a result, she does not see North Korea as a state willing to “use military force.” She says that North Korea is trying to achieve the objective of “regime preservation.”

Captain Schake does not see the possibility for a military response to North Korea considering their ability to target Seoul. However, he speculates on an “asymmetric” response to North Korea. In the July 2017 cover article for The Atlantic, Mark Bowden writes about four options for dealing with North Korea. These options range from full-scale military invention to “acceptance” of the status quo.

How Does the U.S. Maintain International Security?

Dr. Schake claims that our form of government continues to be a magnet for the best talent in the world, and offers people a better life. As a result, America has a lot of credibility and represents opportunity to many people in the world.

Warriors and Citizens

Secretary Mattis and Dr. Schake co-edited a book called Warriors and Citizens that looks at the changing nature of America’s attitude towards U.S. military leaders. Due to the military being held in high regard, Dr. Schake worries that the “suits can hide behind the uniform.” She adds that the public wants the military engaged in political life. However, she is concerned that this could harm the public’s respect for the military. The following interview with Task and Purpose relates to the topics in Warriors and Citizens.

Dr. Schake is publishing a book called Safe Passage. The book is a history of the transition from British to American dominance in the international order. It will be published in the fall of 2017 by Harvard University Press.

Follow Dr. Schake on Twitter @KoriSchake

Books Mentioned in the Interview:

Warriors and Citizens: American Views of Our Military

Blueprint for America

In the latest episode of the Professional Military Education podcast, I interviewed Wall Street Journal reporter Jay Solomon to discuss his book The Iran Wars: Spy Games, Bank Battles, and the Secret Deals that Reshaped the Middle East. I really enjoyed reading this book, and learned a lot about the history of Iran-U.S. relations since the Iranian Revolution of 1979. Mr. Solomon does a great job covering the conflict and the events that led to the nuclear deal that was completed in July 2015. In the interview, we discuss “irregular” forms of warfare that have been used to include cyberwar, economic sanctions, and proxy battles. We cover recent events in the Middle East and explore Iran’s role in Syria and their strategic objectives in the Middle East. The interview also looks at North Korea’s nuclear program as we talk about the differences and similarities between Iran and North Korea. The conversation is extremely informative. In two hours, Jay and I cover a lot of ground. Check out the interview and share with friends and family if you find it useful. Also, check out the notes and resources below. Enjoy!

 

Key Takeaways:

• The U.S. historically supported Iran as an ally in the region against the Soviet Union. Iran is a Shiite dominated country. They view themselves as the historical great power in the region upholding the legacy of the Persian Empire.
• The Islamic Revolution of 1979 changed U.S. foreign policy overnight. An ally was swiftly replaced with a foe, whose leader, Ayatollah Khomeini, called America “the great Satan.”
• To counter the U.S., Iran allies with enemies of America to include Sunni groups and secular regimes. Their strategic objectives include spreading the Islamic revolution to other countries to include Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Palestinian territories.
• On November 4, 1979, Iranian students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. For the next 444 days, 52 Americans were held hostage in Iran. President Carter authorized Operation Eagle Claw, which was an attempt to free the hostages with a military rescue. However, a vicious sandstorm caused the rescue effort to fail before the helicopters could reach Tehran. A good book to read on this topic is Mark Bowden’s Guests of The Ayatollah. Guests of the Ayatollah: The First Battle in America’s War with Militant Islam By Mark Bowden
• The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps was established to protect the revolution at home, but they also use the Quds force to export the revolution abroad. The Quds force, which comes from the word al-Quds meaning “Jerusalem”, is led by Major General Qasem Soleimani The Quds force has mobilized “tens of thousands of fighters in Syria” and continues to actively support Hezbollah and Hamas. Mr. Solomon told me that a good writer to follow for information on Quds force is Ali Alfoneh with the American Enterprise Institute.
• Shortly after the Iranian Revolution, Saddam Hussein invaded Iran on September 22, 1980. Saddam saw Iran in a weakened military position, and sought to reclaim disputed territory with oil reserves. What followed was a bloody eight-year war in which Iraq eventually used deadly chemical weapons against Iran.
• After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, there appeared to be a slight window in which rapprochement between Iran and the U.S. might have happened. However, with fundamentally misaligned strategic interests, this window quickly closed.
• The U.S. invasion of Iraq evolved quickly into a proxy battle in which Iran sought to use the Quds force to assert their influence. They funded Shiite based militias and supported businesses and politicians that supported their interests. Part of the U.S. rationale for an invasion dated back to the thinking that Iraq might be a Shiite ally used to counter Iran. This thesis was developed in a book by David Wurmser called Tyranny’s Ally: AMERICA’S FAILURE TO DEFEAT SADDAM HUSSEIN.
• The Quds force under Sulemani continues to aggressively fund Shiite militias. The Quds force is used to serve Iran’s military and political objectives throughout the Middle East.
• The development of Iran’s nuclear program dated back to the 1950s, and was initially supported by the United States. However, as of 2002, reports surfaced that Iran had covertly worked to develop their nuclear program without UN knowledge. Here is a link to information on President Eisenhower’s speech “Atoms for Peace”
• Iran’s nuclear program accelerated under hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after his election in 2005.
• In 2006, the U.S. responded to Iran’s nuclear program with tough sanctions targeting companies that did business with Iran. The goal was to cut Iran off from the international banking system and by 2012 this goal was largely achieved.
• Another attempt to counter Iran’s nuclear program included the use of malware (aka the “Stuxnet” virus), which caused Iranian centrifuges to spin out of control. In response, Iran developed their own cyber weapons capabilities. Here is an article on Iran’s emerging cyber capabilities.
• When President Obama took office, he shifted the strategic focus to direct engagement with Iran. He indicated clearly that the U.S. did not want regime change in Iran. However, his policy included many initial hurdles to include Iran’s “Green” movement. Additionally, military action was not used against Syria. Mr. Solomon suggests that restraint against Syria was to prevent Iran from walking away from nuclear negotiations.
• In November 2013, an interim agreement was concluded and led to the final nuclear agreement in July 2015. U.S. diplomats scaled back on initial “redlines” to include no enrichment, no missiles, no arms exportation. In ten years after the agreement, Iran will be able to have an industrial scale program to produce as much fissile material as they want.
• Mr. Solomon says that Iran’s negotiators knew the US political system better than U.S. diplomats understood the Iranian political system. For example, Javad Zarif was a “very smooth, western educated diplomat,” who worked directly with Secretary of State John Kerry.
• Twice since the 2015 agreement, Iran has nearly breached the terms of the deal. In one case the U.S. bought heavy water used to create plutonium from Iran. Russia bought the heavy water in the second instance.
• As the Middle East continues to be mired in conflict, the IRGC retains significant influence. The U.S. must calculate the IRGC and Iran’s proxies with any action taken in the region.
• Can the Iran sanctions model work against North Korea? China is the most important decider of North Korea’s economic fate. Can cybertechnology be used against North Korea? Is it possible to disrupt North Korean supply chains that support their missile development? Sanctions have been used and China recently banned coal imports from North Korea in compliance with international agreements.

Another great book is David Crist’s The Twilight War: The Secret History of America’s Thirty-Year Conflict with Iran

Be sure to follow Mr. Solomon on Twitter @wsjsolomon and check out the book:
The Iran Wars: Spy Games, Bank Battles, and the Secret Deals That Reshaped the Middle East

HELP SPREAD THE WORD!

If you like this interview, and want to hear others, subscribe in iTunes. Support the show with written reviews, share on social media, and through word of mouth. For any requests for additional shows or guests, e-mail me: tim@professionalmilitaryeducation.com

Steven Lee Myers is a columnist for the New York Times and the author of The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin. Myers talks about the life and career of Vladimir Putin from his time as a KGB foreign intelligence officer to his current role as Russian president. The interview covers a wide range of Russian history from World War II to the current conflict in Ukraine. Check out the interview below and the “Welcome to Putinland” series on the blog. I have also included multiple articles and links for further reading below the show notes.

Key Takeaways/ Show Highlights:

• What is a Tsar? Myers explains the historical role of a Tsar in Russia.
• Vladimir Putin’s upbringing in Leningrad what is called Saint Petersburg today. His early childhood in the Soviet Union. Putin grows up with the legacy of the “Great Patriotic War,” and is exposed to tales of “heroism and suffering.” As he prepares for a career in the KGB, Myers explains that Putin comes of age in the “high water mark” of the Soviet era.
• Inspired by a movie called The Shield and the Sword, Putin decides to join the KGB. Putin joins the foreign intelligence branch of the KGB in 1975 and is initially stationed in his home town of Leningrad. Later he is sent to Dresden in East Germany.
• Putin serves in East Germany when the Soviet Union collapses. He watches with “horror” as thousands of protestors overrun the Stasi HQ’s. However, Putin defiantly protects the KGB villa.
• As Putin returns to Saint Petersburg (formerly Leningrad), he works for a democratic reformer named Anatoly Sobchak, and becomes Sobchak’s deputy.
• After Sobchak’s electoral defeat in 1996, Putin’s moves to Moscow. Eventually he is appointed by Boris Yeltsin to be head of the FSB, the Russian equivalent of the FBI and the domestic security branch of the former KGB.
• As Boris Yeltsin looks for a successor, he considers Putin and appoints him as prime minister as a new war in Chechnya begins.
• Putin becomes Yeltsin’s successor to the presidency. He doesn’t have a strong ideology when he becomes president. Myers characterizes his initial term as “buffet style” politics. However, Putin’s thinking is influenced by silovik thinking, which advocates for strong state security.
• Terrorism comes to Russia in the form of apartment bombings, metro attacks, the Nord-Ost Theater siege, and Beslan hostage crisis. Myers talks about the way this influenced Putin’s ideas concerning the role of the state. “He sensed weakness and didn’t want to show that weakness.”
• The Kursk submarine disaster is the first major political setback for Putin. Putin’s disdain for the media is inflamed over this incident.
• Myers talks about Putin’s growing animosity with America concerning withdrawal from the ABM treaty.
• Putin gives a critical speech at the 2007 Munich Conference in which Putin claims “the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way.” Myers explains that Russia thinks in terms of “spheres of influence.” Was this a warning to the West?
• Watching the events of the Arab Spring, Putin eventually decides to intervene to support the Assad government.
• A discussion of Russia’s actions in Crimea, and the blend of “hard and soft” power to include information operations, irregular forces, and cyber operations to achieve Russian military objectives.
• Myers explains that the war in Ukraine is currently in a “frozen conflict,” but the violence has not stopped.
• Myers discusses other issues to pay attention to such as events in Moldova and Georgia as well as disputed territory between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and current protests in Belarus.

Additional articles, papers, and important links:

1. An article from the Rand Blog on the conflict in Belarus. Mr. Meyrs mentioned Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka and the crackdown on protests. Link to the article- “Belarus: Between Russia and the West” 
2. Dr. Phillip Karber’s “Lessons Learned” from the Russo-Ukrainian War”. Dr. Karber personally observed fighting between Ukrainian and Russian forces. He documented those observations in his lessons learned. Dr. Karber’s objective was to analyze Russian “New Generation Warfare”, assess Ukrainian military capabilities, and observe the effectiveness of Minsk I and II ceasefires.
3. Dr. Karber and General Wesley Clark’s Report on Immediate Improvements Needed in Rapidly Implementing “Non-Lethal” U.S. Military Assistance for Defense of Ukraine.
4. Major Amos C. Fox’s article on The Russian Ukrainian War. Major Fox has also written extensively on the Battle of Debaltseve, which he claims has highlighted Russian “siege” warfare tactics and the efficiency of their Battalion Tactical Groups (BTGs). Additionally, Major Amos discusses Russia’s use of drones and artillery in an efficient “sensor -to-shooter system.”
5. Charles K. Bartles article “Getting Gerasimov Right“, this article is about Chief of Russian General Staff Gen. Valery Gerasimov, who has pioneered Russian “New Generation Warfare.”
6. Stratfor report on “Gaming a Russian Offensive”
7. Paper by Ray Finch from the Foreign Military Studies Office on “Vladimir Putin and the Russian Military”
8. A paper called “Brothers Disunited: Russia’s Use of Military Power in Ukraine” by Roger McDermott.
9. Another paper from the Foreign Military Studies Officer (FSMO). THINKING LIKE A RUSSIAN OFFICER: Basic Factors And Contemporary Thinking On The Nature Of War by Timothy Thomas.
10. Center for East European Policy Studies report on “War in Ukraine: Lessons for Europe”

 

For more information, the following organizations provide good analysis and reports:

• Foreign Military Studies Office (FSMO)
• The Potomac Foundation
• The RAND Corporation

In Episode 4 of the Professional Military Education (PME) podcast, I interviewed historian, S.C. Gwynne, on his book Rebel Yell: The Violence, Passion, and Redemption of Stonewall Jackson. There are some incredible historical lessons in this book. For military scholars, General Stonewall Jackson has an enduring legacy. There is a mythology about the man that has captivated people since Jackson’s era. Indeed, he was the celebrity of his time, and his fame reached across America to the salons of London and Paris where people compared his military adventures to Napoleon Bonaparte. Mr. Gwynne discusses how this came to be.

I took away two major lessons from studying Jackson. First, a military professional must have a robust library and maintain a well-rounded course of study. Jackson studied art, literature, and taught himself Spanish. He was a fantastic student and climbed toward the top of his class at West Point despite his poor educational upbringing in western Virginia. Second, maneuver warfare is about getting a military unit to the right place at the right time with the right gear and personnel. Jackson’s ability to maneuver on his enemy occurred through a brilliant combination of sheer will power, leadership, and an excellent system of organization. He pushed his men hard and was relentless. He also used great intelligence, which his staff gathered. With this intelligence, Jackson possessed the boldness to act on it. He took calculated risks, which paid off when his enemy was hesitant. Overall, I highly recommend the book, and the discussion I had with Mr. Gwynne is a great way to get into the subject matter.

Enjoy Episode 4 and please rate, review, and share!

Also, check out Civil War Trust to get more information and see some cool interactive maps that will help you follow along with the information we discuss.

My interview with Washington Post reporter, Joby Warrick, is now available on the Professional Military Education podcast and can also be streamed below. We had an important discussion about his Pulitzer Prize winning book, Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS. We talk about the history of the organization and its founder, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Mr. Warrick talks about the history of the terrorist group from its inception in a Jordanian prison to the the Iraq War and into the Arab Spring and Syrian Civil War. As we wade through the history, the past fight, the current fight, the conversation becomes a giant brainstorming session on effective strategies to defeat the terrorist group. I ask Mr. Warrick for his thoughts on defeating them, and he offers a few important points. Our discussion and his book is a great start. Indeed one cannot defeat an enemy without properly studying them and getting inside their heads. So I implore the listener to pay attention and take notes. Everyone has a role to play in this fight. Everyone has a role to play in a war of ideas. Like all wars, the battlefield does not define success. Success happens in the realm of national strategy, effective policy, and public opinion. Please listen, leave a review, and share this important conversation.