Center for Strategic Leadership

Operational Security in an Age of Radical Transparency Dennis M Murphy Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "We often hearken back to the Cold War as a simpler time…not because of the danger it portended, but because of the nature of the threat. That bipolar world defined a clear enemy with an order of battle that could be templated and processes and methodologies that could be studied. It was a two dimensional world of good and bad. Operations security (OPSEC), defined as “select(ing) and execut(ing) measures that eliminate or reduce to an acceptable level the vulnerabilities of friendly actions to adversary exploitation,” was equally cut and dry. U.S. commanders in Europe were principally concerned with the Soviet-bloc spy taking pictures of the caserne motor pool. Troops were briefed prior to training exercises and deployments not to discuss dates, times or specifics of the operation under threat of military justice penalties. And that was that. Risk reduced…OPSEC considered and maintained. But, oh how the world has changed..."

Fighting Back: New Media and Military Operations Dennis M Murphy Study by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "The Israeli-Hezbollah War of 2006 provides recent, glaring evidence of how the current information environment has impacted the way warfare is conducted today. Hezbollah masterfully manipulated and controlled that environment to its advantage, using (at times staged and altered) photographs and videos to garner regional and worldwide support. If this doesn’t sound new, it shouldn’t…especially if you are an Israeli. Hamas effectively used the same techniques to turn the Battle of Jenin in April, 2002 into not only a strategic informational victory, but a historical legend of resistance that lives on today in the hearts and minds of Palestinians."

Leadership in the Era of the Human Singularity: New Demands, New Skills, New Response, The Proteus Monograph Series, Volume 2, Issue 4 Barton Kunstler Study by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership, Proteus Monograph Series Fellows Program "The “human singularity” refers to the integration of technology into the human body so that levels of mental acuity and physical ability eclipse all previous known levels. Because of the unique character of these enhanced human specimens, they will represent a singularity in human history, something unique and to which a new set of laws may well apply. A broad front of converging core technologies, such as nanotechnology, bioengineering, supercomputing, materials development, and robotics, may make such individuals commonplace by 2030; indeed, significant steps have already been taken to achieve this goal, and the singularity could arrive earlier."

Counterfactual Reasoning: A Basic Guide for Analysts, Strategists, and Decision Makers, The Proteus Monograph Series, Volume 2, Issue 5 Noel Hendrickson Study by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership Proteus Monograph Series Fellows Program "Counterfactual reasoning is the process of evaluating conditional claims about alternate possibilities and their consequences (i.e., “What If” statements). These alternatives can be either past possibilities (e.g., “If the United States had not abolished the Iraqi army in 2003, then the Iraqi insurgency would have been significantly smaller in 2005”) or future possibilities (e.g., “If Iran had nuclear weapons, then it would provide this technology to Hezbollah”). Counterfactuals are essential to intelligence analysis because they are implicit in all strategic assessments. For, any proposal about the appropriate response to a particular situation (past or future) assumes that certain things would or might occur if that response were made."

Transformation of the Azerbaijani Armed Forces Mr Ritchie L Dion, Prof Bernard F Griffard, Prof James W Shufelt Jr Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "The South Caucasus region is bounded by the Black Sea in the west and the Caspian Sea in the east, by Russia in the north, Turkey in the west and Iran in the south. This region, in combination with the Russian North Caucasus, is often regarded as the land bridge where the East and the West meet. Within this geographically confined space three small, yet completely dissimilar nations have emerged – Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. The history of the region and the present character of its peoples are inextricably tied to the legacy of the several empires that have ruled over this region. Each left a legacy, for better or worse, within the three nations. Despite this legacy, or in some cases even because of it, each country has managed to develop their own distinct character, culture and history. "

Experimentation in Support of DoD's Homeland Defense and Civil Support Joint Operating Concept Prof Bert B Tussing Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "On 23 and 24 September 2008, the Center for Strategic Leadership hosted a “Limited Objective Experiment” (LOE) in support of the validation and refinement of the Department of Defense’s (DoD)Homeland Defense and Civil Support Joint Operating Concept (HD-CS JOC). The event was the fourth in a series that envisions a total of 12 such experiments, all designed to help describe how Joint Force Commanders will conduct and support operations in this regime eight to twenty years in the future. Previous LOE’s were hosted and facilitated by the National Defense University and the Naval Postgraduate School’s Center for Homeland Defense and Security. The last two experiments have been hosted and conducted by CSL at Collins Hall."

Military Transformation Challenges: Moldova and Montenegro Prof Bernard F Griffard Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "The dissolution of the Soviet Bloc and the disintegration of Yugoslavia produced 22 new independent governments across Europe and Central Asia. Prior to 1991 these countries were part of integrated economic and military structures where they contributed what was required and shared in the benefits of their closed loop systems. For those smaller entities at the lower end of the viability spectrum, independence, with the resulting disappearance of the economic and defense security blankets, has been more of a cold shower than a warm bath. "

Collins Center Update, Volume 10, Issue 4 (Fall 2008) COL Eric Ashworth & LTC Eric McEldowney, Mr. William O. Waddell, COL (Ret.) B.F. Griffard, COL (Ret.) Arthur L. Bradshaw Collins Center Update by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership

State Emergency Management Staff Training and Evaluation LTC Anthony Abbott Student Academic Research Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in its recently released National Preparedness Guidelines, serious gaps exist between ‘all hazards’ risks and the resources and capabilities available for responding to those risks. Key factors such as time constraints, staff size and organization, money, and the range of possible hazards leaves state emergency management agencies with tough resource allocation decisions. State agencies must decide what hazards to plan for, how to best allocate limited financial resources, prioritize training tasks, schedule and manage time available, and identify and quantify acceptable risks to all hazards. An efficient method of prioritizing these resources along with metrics for quantifying results is needed."