The Apple Cart Theory

The Apple Cart Theory

Much like the proverbial “apple cart” that has been upset, the ME (Middle East) has nearly completely come unbalanced and most of the apples have toppled out. In order to get the cart loaded, balanced and once again going down the road we must put the apples back in balance them and pull it down the road carefully. In order to do that, everyone must agree to some extent on how to load the cart and assist in pulling it in the same direction.

Situation: For decades, the US has been the entity largely responsible for pulling the ME cart down the road. The apples in the cart, although jostling around have in a sense remained balanced enough to allow slow progress. Of course, there have been bumps along the way such as several Israeli/ Palestinian wars/ Arab wars, the Arab Spring, Syria, the unhinging of the other long time major regional player prior to Camp David, the Russians and so on. Although these bumps have often slowed or halted progress, the cart at least remained mostly full and more or less balanced.

Discussion: At the toppling of Iraq in 2003, a series of events took place that have nearly completely upset the cart and left nearly all of the Apples on the ground, some rotting. As of today, the Russians, Syria and Hezbollah (popularly called the Axis) are the actors getting much of the attention in headlines. Many are calling for some level of action to counter their actions especially since the Axis efforts are seen by many as a significant challenge to US power. I believe that the Axis in some respects may be even provoking a response in support of their own agenda. I also believe that being in a reactive mode to highly volatile events characteristic of the ME is the wrong approach.

Regardless of the criticism so prevalent in the press, the US is still the “big dog” in the region. This dog may be beaten up and injured but make no mistake, the US is still the primary force, militarily, economically and influentially. The Axis may see this as an opportunity, but to continue the analogy, there is still “lots of fight left in the dog”. Even having said this, when I say “fight” I am not necessarily recommending unfettered military action. The US still has many ways to wield power and demonstrate the remaining “fight”.

Like most, I do not see an exclusively military solution. Will there be military components to a solution? Yes, absolutely there will. Military or otherwise though requires a strategy. This brings me to the answer to a colleague’s question, that prompted this writing, “how does the Sunni world respond to Russia and China backing Shia Iran: Hezbollah for control of the entire region?” I don’t believe we should respond but rather should adopt a strategy and clearly communicate it that requires the Axis and other regional players to respond to us and that commits them to being part of a solution. Even if a strategy currently exists behind closed doors, the public absence of it is fomenting what seems to be daily escalating violence and tragedy.

We need a strategy because it is the absence of a “guiding” strong hand that in my opinion is missing from ME. Let me be clear though that I don’t believe the US should be unilaterally providing the guidance. As the “big dog” though, we do need to exercise our vision on the guidance. To what end and how much we do influence is the delicate aspect of this guidance. As Russia’s current meddling in pursuit of their own agenda complicates the situation and hampers re-balancing the apple cart demonstrates, in the absence of a communicated leadership role, lesser players will attempt to dominate the public perception of just who has the power to reassemble the apples in the cart.   Truth be told though, all Russia can currently and realistically do to the US in the ME is “nip away” at US influence and use their shameless IO (Information Operations) capability to overstate how much they’ve nipped. Although their actions are not a leadership role, they are portraying it as such. To give them legitimacy, I recommend making them part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

At some point, and there’s no way around it, the regional players MUST take a decisive role in problem solving. Sure, post WWI, Sykes-Picot etc…, the West set the wheels in motion for today’s issues but like raising children, the most important thing you can “parent for your children is how to be self sustaining. With more than 50% of the global economies’ oil supply coming from the ME, and the ever-growing globalization of the economy, we cannot simply step back and say “fix it yourselves” and “grow up”. We must, like good parents, empower these nascent nations to become independent grown-ups. It is though in the midst of chaos difficult to “parent”.

Recommendation: So how do we in the US and/ or the West mitigate the chaos so that the “parenting” can begin? A comprehensive, long term strategy with built in variables and flexibility for this dynamic region is the only answer. This strategy, and let me say right up front, will be expensive over its life span. I truly though don’t see it as expensive as the $1.7 trillion we spent on Iraq the last time and sadly with nothing to show for it, save more tragedy. The strategy will also require as a cornerstone, a collaborative effort inclusive of all the players, be it State, Non-State or otherwise. Who will facilitate and shape this strategy? The only answer obvious to me is the US in a “first among equals” role. Is this a wanted position with so many domestic problems? Absolutely and loudly NO!  Is the “big dog” the only one that can effectively do it? Absolutely YES. Will it be hard for POTUS in his last year in office? Tragically, yes again. To return briefly to the apple cart analogy, if we risk waiting, only more tragedy and suffering will ensue and “more apples left lying on the ground will rot”. With so much chaos already occurring in the region we can ill afford another failed state.

So what would be the outline of the “Apple Cart Strategy”?

The main components are;

1. Rebalancing the interests and security of the regional players. Let’s fine tune this broad statement. Every State or non- State actor has interests, grievances and concerns. There is currently no international mechanism that is effective to mediate these issues. So, we must first and foremost do the following;
   1. Place every resource available for facilitating collaborative talks seeking solution and that address every major non-terrorist entities’ interests. The sooner primary entities talk the sooner we see a decline in violence and the current tension between major players. It is to be acknowledged that a likely start is putting the Russians, Iranians, Saudis, US, select EU members and Turkey in the same room. Sooner rather than later, the Kurds, Israelis and a few others no matter how delicate must be included. (I can already hear the gasps inside the beltway at this suggestion but someone has to say out loud what has long been considered unutterable)
      1. The UN, although previously the mainstay of this type of effort is in its current posture not recommended for this role and a new, independent platform is likely a better venue
      2. Seek cease fire agreements as the first agenda item as well as an exclusion to continue fighting legitimate terrorist organizations
   2. As previously discussed in the paper “Strategy in Syria and the Levant: “Operation Role Reversal” https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/strategy-syria-levant-operation-role-reversal-paul-cobaugh?trk=pulse_spock-articles legitimate and perceived grievance lies at the heart of nearly all conflict. In the ME there are too many to list but Shia/ Sunni issues, the Israeli/ Palestinian conflict, water rights, terrorism, disenfranchised people, tribes, ethnicities etc. are a few.
      1. Establish a mechanism or effectively empower existing mechanisms for hearing grievances
      2. Note; Without modification, the UN is toxic to success considering its agendized voting record on Human Rights

• Remember, grievance just does not just pertain to major players but as far down as a local tribe angry over land rights with a competing tribe.

1. Alleviation of suffering Communicate clearly and demonstrate by actions that we intend to alleviate the suffering and threat to every segment of the populace currently at risk, regardless of race, culture, ethnicity or otherwise. This IS the moral “high ground” and is unassailable in premise
   1. Utilize military capabilities to target and protect those perpetrating the violence that can reasonably be construed as “a crime against humanity”. Does this mean Assad must go or desist from targeting his own people? Not yes, but absolutely YES! The Russians are responsible for leveraging this and in the absence of their will to achieve this effect we must “convince” them by action that we mean business. Absolutely, we will target ISIS, Al Nusra, Hezbollah, Shia militia or whoever shows a predilection for crimes against humanity?
   2. In order to be taken seriously in the ME, it has long been my experience that unless you act, your words will not be taken seriously. After making our resolve known, State support for crimes against humanity most certainly will lessen. Odd as it seems, these violent actions will in the end decrease the violence
   3. We most certainly will incur loud and overt criticism, especially when targeting criminals with State sponsors such as Hezbollah or the Shia militias in Iraq. Again, this will fade away as our resolve becomes known.

1.  Communicate; I spent the final years of my military career in an organization that thrived on a culture called “being flat”.  Although a gross over-simplification, it meant that from the Commander on down to the lowest level, everyone was nearly completely informed. Yes, without a doubt some information is for only decision-makers but by keeping everyone as informed as possible, it was far easier to keep everyone rowing in the same direction and “open communications” empowered a sense of common good and trust unparalleled anywhere else. Replicate this paradigm as much as possible
   1. Effectively communicating and sharing as much information as possible is essential for achieving a “way forward”
   2. Stick to our two primary objectives , reinforce them loud and often and especially reinforce the “talking points” with actions
   3. Communicate “in context” and resist the human nature to “spin” information
      1. Spin, until trust is established only serves to destroy credibility and without credibility, all chances for success are eliminated
         1. As example, the reporting coming out of Russia about Syrian and Russian Operations is so far from reality that there is at this time no way to establish trust
            1. No trust, no progress

Summary;

In this piece I’ve attempted to demonstrate the compelling need to take action now, discussed the tragic ramifications of not acting and made some very basic overarching recommendations on how to accomplish the recommendations. As mentioned in the previous piece regarding a Syrian Strategy, https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/strategy-syria-levant-operation-role-reversal-paul-cobaugh?trk=pulse_spock-articles I am not Pollyannaish. Yes, I can hear the reluctance and comments from inside the Beltway that I am suggesting too much, not being realistic or am thinking along the lines of Don Quixote. My answer to this though is that even if only half of what I recommend here is accomplished or initiated or in terms of the “Apple Cart” analogy, at least restacked the apples in the cart, then we will have gone a long way towards stemming the flow of blood and tragedy that the ME can no longer afford. To make it more personal to everyone reading this, what will happen at home should the downward spiral of events continue, would be an increase in terrorism, economic woes and unsustainable military action and cost  to the detriment of every man, woman and child.. If we cannot agree to implement some comprehensive strategy from a selfish “how it affects me” perspective then regardless of religion or belief we should adopt a strategy based on the all too apparent moral high ground.