When leading from behind is a good thing

Fiscal pressures mandate a defense strategy that accounts for the requisite resources to execute it. Accordingly, it is a propitious time to revisit our NATO commitments. Recently, European President Jean-Claude Juncker called for the formation of a 'European Army' in response to the amplified Russian threat to member states.  Others have called for a consolidated EU Air Force because of the evident benefits of pooling large investments in procurement, operation, and sustainment. Operation Atalanta comprised of EU naval forces which deter acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast has been an undeniable success, but making this European naval force even more remarkable is the juxtaposition with NATO maritime forces

conducting related Operation Ocean Shield counter-piracy operations. Furthermore, both NATO and EU maritime forces operate with Combined Task Force 151 which is the US led multinational counter piracy naval task force. Participating countries are compelled to calibrate their level of commitment to these maritime forces notwithstanding national tasking. It is worth noting that nontraditional partners like Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and even China have joined the counter piracy operations.  Cynics might argue that the rush to join in counter piracy is because piracy is an easy target with an adversary that poses no realistic threat to coalition forces.  By any measure, a sophisticated multi-million dollar ship chasing an outboard powered skiff does not make a lot of sense. The point is that the EU maritime forces are extremely capable and are effectively interchangeable with their counterpart maritime forces.  From the standpoint of command and control, NATO and EU maritime forces enjoy a close relationship to the point where their respective operations centers are collocated.  It would seem to be a no brainer to advance this proof of concept to the next level, and have the EU maritime forces supplant NATO’s.   There are at least three unquestionable benefits: (1) unity of effort, (2) fiscal efficiencies and (3) consistency with US strategy. 

(1) Because the same forces and capabilities form the basis of both EU and NATO defense efforts ("separable, but not separate”), current doctrine  espouses no duplication of what was done effectively under NATO, no decoupling from the US and NATO, and no discrimination against non-EU members such as Turkey. While for the most part, this approach has been successful, there is no doubt that there is duplication of effort (e.g. counter piracy) resulting in separate chains of command that may or may not be aligned.  Consolidating these operations would be of obvious benefit to the unity of effort.  

(2) The drumbeat to rebalance our contribution to NATO was initially sounded by Secretary Gates who famously warned that the alliance risked “a collective military irrelevance” if it continued to rely on the generosity of the US taxpayer which according to NATO’s 2013 annual report was about  73 percent of the alliance’s defense expenditures. Worse is while the US contribution has been increasing our European partners are shrinking their investment.  Secretary Hegel has warned that if the Europeans do not invest in their security, the US will rebalance to partners that share the burden more equitably.  Shifting the cost of mutual security from NATO to the EU, would make the EU responsible for enforcing compliance with contribution guidelines (at least 2% of GDP). The raison d'être for EU defense forces is independence from US control. Now is an opportune occasion for the EU to pick up the slack. Obviously, this transition will need to be a phased approach, maybe taking as long as ten years.  

(3)  US naval strategy has for some time been shifting to an emphasis on promoting and supporting global maritime partnerships. Recently the commander of US naval forces in the Pacific signaled a willingness to support a combined ASEAN maritime patrol in the South China Sea should ASEAN members take the lead. With the stark recognition that the US cannot do it alone, the US must increase its reliance on maritime partnerships. Consistent with these realities, our strategy should include charting a course for consolidating EU and NATO efforts. 

When did lying become acceptable?

In a recent New York Times opinion piece Justin McBrayer laments how this country has lost its moral compass. He and his philosophy professor colleagues have observed that the overwhelming majority of college freshmen in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true.  He makes the point that this troubling phenomenon is rooted in the Common Core standards that  require that students be able to “distinguish among fact, opinion, and reasoned judgment in a text.”  For example, using these evolving standards “all men are created equal” and “drug dealers belong in prison” are considered to be opinions, because these assertions cannot be tested or proven, and are supposedly subjective determinations. The implications are not just academic, because if there are no moral truths how does society prosecute criminal transgressions, or if all humans are not created equal, then why vote for any political system that doesn't benefit you over others? The corollary of turning opinion into fact is equally pernicious. Over the last twenty years this country has tolerated what are simply bold faced lies made to support an agenda or position. "I did not have sex...”, Mitt Romney was a murderer, Ferguson suspect had his hands up, Benghazi was about a video, emails lost at the IRS, and the list goes on. News stories used to be spun depending on the desired impact, these days stories are simply invented. The result is that younger generations are rightfully suspicious of any information that may be politicized.

Thousand Ship Navy Redux

As a guiding principle the Cooperative Strategy for the 21st Century Revision revisits the concept of a “global network of navies”.  In 2006 Admiral Mullen was a tireless proponent of the Thousand Ship Navy operating concept comprised of an “international fleet of like-minded nations”, foreign navies, commercial shipping companies, and merchant vessels. This concept was controversial with US policymakers because cynics saw a concept that outsourced maritime security due to an inadequate acquisition program, a shrinking shipbuilding capability, and a lack of political will for a strong Navy.  Allies were also critical because they regarded the concept a ploy by the US to gain control over their indigenous maritime assets and could possibly result in being orthogonal to a country’s national interest. Making the concept even more problematic was the long standing distrust between some US partners, particularly in Asia. The concept was not entirely thrown over the transom, as the notion of global maritime partnerships has gained traction due to the nexus of technologies like AIS and a general willingness among nations to share maritime information.  Successful examples usually include counter-piracy off Somalia, the Italian led Virtual Regional Maritime Traffic Center and the maritime center in Singapore established to ensure maritime security in the straits of Malacca.  The Thousand Ship Navy initiative is indeed a cautionary tale. The lesson learned is to build upon existing successes and move forward a strategy to further increase maritime security partnerships fleshed out in a study completed several years ago by The Naval Studies Board.

More about Google for the Brain

It has been almost four years since contemplating (see Google for the Brain) a neural prosthetic that would permit you to see Google results on your retina. So, it was with no surprise to learn that DARPA had recently announced the cortical modem concept. They envision a heads-up display or augmented reality projection appearing in your natural vision with no helmet or smart glasses produced from a device about the size of two coins and cost about $10. The full story can be found at http://www.cnet.com/news/scientists-propose-cortical-modem-implant-to-give-you-terminator-vision/

Leges sine moribus vanae

Prof. Simon Kuznets

“Education is the Most Powerful Weapon Which You Can Use to Change the World.” – Nelson Mandela

Whilst watching an interesting TED presentation, the speaker referenced the influential economist Simon Kuznets (who at one time during his long and distinguished career was a Penn faculty member.)  His research focused on using statistics to analyze empirical data which is foundational to econometrics, a branch of the dismal science made infamous at Wharton.

What makes his research particularly relevant to today's economic challenges is that his general theories of economic growth explained the phenomenon of income inequality.  Kuznets discovered the Inverted U-shaped relation between income inequality and economic growth. In poor countries, economic growth due to a shift from an agricultural to an industrial economy increases the income disparity between rich and poor.  In the long run, mass education decreases income inequality by providing greater opportunities and fostering more political empowerment.

While most nations in Africa (notwithstanding their endemic corruption) offer strikingly obvious examples of income inequality due to the tectonic shift from agriculture to industrial economies. Less clearly identifiable is the impact that innovation has had on increasing income inequality in more developed economies.  Simply put companies like Microsoft, Apple, Intel and Hewlett Packard have transformed the US economy and turned the page on a new chapter of economic growth which is largely the result of a well-developed educational delivery system and an environment that generally facilitates entrepreneurship. Consequently, astute observers have concluded that the conversation about income inequality should be more appropriately focused on educational inequality which is attributed to disparities that often fall along racial lines. For example, family background has been identified as the most influential factor in student achievement. Unfortunately, 15% of white children are raised in single-parent homes, as compared to 54% of African American children.  On the campaign trail,  Barack Obama talked about how there are more college age blacks in jail (or on probation) than in college. Professor Ivory Toldson at Howard University who has studied the issue concludes that the real problem is that because just getting into any college is considered a success there are not enough black students in competitive universities while over represented in community colleges. Of course, this is just another systemic example of where as a country we are settling for mediocrity in the name of democracy. 

 

However, as long as there is income inequality the simplistic and pernicious argument is that inequality is rooted in pervasive discrimination - no matter the wealth of evidence that students who are better prepared and are the product of stable family backgrounds perform better in school, thus assuring more chances of economic and other success in adulthood. Simple solutions like income redistribution do not solve a problem as complex as income inequality, or more correctly educational inequality.

Africa – Crucible for maritime domain awareness: What are the investment priorities?

Maritime domain awareness is critically positioned at the nexus of the technological and cultural implications of networking; the renewed impetus for data sharing across government and non-governmental organizations; and the general goodwill for building maritime partnerships. Notwithstanding the general recognition and support for improved maritime domain awareness there are significant challenges with regard to the development of common information sharing environments for the maritime domain. Both at national level and at the regional level, authorities responsible for defense, border control, customs, marine pollution, fisheries control, maritime safety and security, vessel traffic management, accident and disaster response, search and rescue as well as law enforcement are collecting information for their own purposes.  While the technological means exist to share this information, information sharing standards, agreements, and policies need to be in place in order to overcome the cultural, organizational and legal hurdles before these well recognized silos of information can be used successfully to “connect the dots.” 

Click here for the complete article.

Comment and Discussion

Africa’s Leaking Wound

(See M. Murphy, pp. 37–41, March 2013 Proceedings )
Dr. Edgar Bates (former Director, Maritime Domain Awareness, Naval Forces Europe/Naval Forces Africa) —Dr. Murphy is on target when focusing on the endemic corruption in Africa. Arguably, the Niger Delta’s illicit activity is caused because oil revenues are being siphoned off by government officials, and therefore the citizens do not see any tangible benefits from oil extraction, and they want a piece of the action. Equally pernicious, corrupt public officials in Africa are tolerated by their supporters as long as some of the spoils are shared with them, so reforms are not always welcome.
A significant mismatch is having the Navy component (NAVAF) perform law-enforcement training instead of allowing the Coast Guard to take the lead on providing fisheries enforcement and drug-interdiction training to African forces. With perceived deep pockets, the Navy is being tasked with noncombat activities that should be the responsibility of other government entities. In the words of former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michèle Flournoy, “We are not going to have a successful system if one part of the government is on steroids and the rest is on life support.”

As globalization forces the world’s economies to become more closely integrated and dependent, the Naval Studies Board concluded a few years ago that it is critical that nations coordinate and collectively integrate their maritime security activities by developing maritime partnerships. Notwithstanding the challenge of AFRICOM to first more effectively plan, prioritize, align, and implement U.S. government activities in a collaborative interagency environment, a more concerted effort is essential to coordinate activities with African countries and our European partners who have long-established equities and operational relationships. Having this sort of regional “scheduling conference” would reduce duplication of effort, create synergy, and conserve scarce resources. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has been critical that while some capacity-building activities appear to support AFRICOM’s mission, others do not because “AFRICOM is generally not measuring long-term effects of activities.”
The Maritime Domain Awareness Capability Maturity Model (MDA CMM) is a tool for assessing a country’s ability to monitor, patrol, and maintain its maritime environment; it was created at NAVAF for the exact purpose of providing key decision makers the metrics that measure return on investment and gauge a country’s relative improvements in maritime safety and security. According to the MDA CMM, the first of five levels is characterized by countries whose MDA systems are inadequately sustained, whereas at the optimum level countries take a leadership role in regional information sharing. The CMM is responsive to the GAO’s concerns and should be adopted by AFRICOM to help shape an effective investment strategy  See Proceedings Magazine - April 2013 Vol. 139/4/1,322