U.S. Foreign Policy Goes Off the Rails
By Danny SjursenJanuary 23, 2020 "Information
Clearing House" -
In March 1906, on
the heels of the U.S. Army’s
massacre of some 1,000 men, women, and
children in the crater of a volcano in the
American-occupied Philippines, humorist Mark
Twain took his criticism public. A long-time
anti-imperialist, he flippantly
suggested that Old Glory should be
redesigned “with the white stripes painted
black and the stars replaced by the skull
and cross-bones.”
I got to thinking about that recently,
five years after I became an antiwar
dissenter (while still a major in the U.S.
Army), and in the wake of another near-war,
this time with Iran. I was struck yet again
by the way every single U.S. military
intervention in the Greater Middle East
since 9/11 has
backfired in wildly counterproductive
ways, destabilizing a vast expanse of the
planet stretching from West Africa to South
Asia.
Chaos, it seems, is now Washington’s
stock-in-trade. Perhaps, then, it’s time to
resurrect Twain’s comment -- only today
maybe those stars on our flag should be
replaced with the universal
symbol for chaos.
After all, our present administration,
however unhinged, hardly launched this
madness. President Trump’s rash, risky, and
repugnant
decision to assassinate Iranian Major
General Qassem Suleimani on the sovereign
soil of Iraq was only the latest version of
what has proven to be a pervasive state of
affairs. Still, that and Trump’s other
recent
escalations in the region do illustrate
an American chaos machine that’s gone off
the rails. And the very manner -- I’m loathe
to call it a “process” -- by which it’s
happened just demonstrates the way this
president has taken American chaos to its
dark but logical conclusion.
The Goldilocks Method
Any military officer worth his salt knows
full well the importance of understanding
the basic psychology of your commander.
President George W. Bush liked to
call himself “the decider,” an apt term
for any commander. Senior leaders don’t, as
a rule, actually do that much work in the
traditional sense. Rather, they hobnob with
superiors, buck up unit morale, evaluate and
mentor subordinates, and above all make key
decisions. It’s the operations staff
officers who analyze problems, present
options, and do the detailed planning once
the boss blesses or signs off on a
particular course of action.
Though they may toil thanklessly in the
shadows, however, those staffers possess
immense power to potentially circumscribe
the range of available options and so
influence the future mission. In other
words, to be a deft operations officer, you
need to know your commander’s mind, be able
translate his sparse guidance, and frame his
eventual choice in such a manner that the
boss leaves a “decision briefing” convinced
the plan was his own. Believe me, this is
the actual language military lifers use to
describe the tortured process of
decision-making.