A little bit of self-promotion never hurt anybody, with the possible exception of the Unabomber. Last year I spent time in the bosom of the NATO ARRC, at the end of which I wrote up a short note of observations on the strengths and weaknesses of their stance in these tricky peacekeeping / COIN / humanitarian style operations – hybrid conflicts, as they’re unpopularly known.
This was only partly-solicited, since the ARRC Commander Lieutenant General Shirreff has his own board of civilian advisors already on hand, but nobody seemed to object. I didn’t expect anything to come of it; based on previous experience, I thought it would end up being filed in a waste paper basket by somebody who feels that lessons learned are beneath them.
I should have had more faith in the military machine. At the recent Chatham House event Unity of Purpose in Hybrid Conflict: Managing the Civilian/Military Disconnect and ‘Operationalizing’ The Comprehensive Approach, General Shirreff cited the note and expanded some of its key points – notably thinking in terms of a shared “problem space” rather than an adversarial battle space.
The military is top-down, so consideration of these ideas at the General’s level will translate into changes (admittedly transmitted via military internal comms) that reach down into the rest of the organisation. You can’t change a ship’s direction when you’re not on board, but it’s nice to know that not all organisations are conceptual black holes cough cough UN.