Strategy in Syria and the Levant: “Operation Role Reversal”

Although I published this last Fall, it is still timely and is a rough outline for progress in the Levant. The response to this article was the genesis of a long series also published last Fall regarding a comprehensive strategy for the Levant and included the key points to a CS (communication strategy). Should there be more interest, I'll gladly repost the series. Please forgive the formatting issues here as that LinkedIn apparently doesn't care for translating my "Word" article to their formatting.

All best for your week,

Paul

A modified definition of Role Reversal: A strategy where an entity adopts the opposite of an expected role in order to achieve a specific objective in a relationship.

The premise that the US and its Allies are the “World’s Policemen” has long been interpreted as “saving the day” by way of use of force, followed by Stability Operations. Calling on the military to solve problems and without specific and well analyzed desired effects. This has long been a US “Achilles heel”.

There is no way around it, we must have a strategy to put the Syrian/ Iraq/Iranian/ Saudi/ISIS genies “back in the bottle”. I would suggest that the only way to do this will be to rebalance the Levant. Is this a super human task? Yes, of course it is. Must it be done? Right again. I’m not just talking about Syria. The Shia’s and Sunnis have been at each other’s throats since time immemorial. The US and Russians for 70+ years. The Israeli’s and Islam for millennia. These are just three examples with countless others if you get down to it. While the Middle East is seen from the outside in mostly religious tones, there are a myriad of cultural, ethnic, economic and geo-political grievances that impact any projected outcome.

Grievance resolution is nearly impossible to achieve with “bad actors” or as in ISIS’s case, Evil Actors still slinging bullets and bombs. Even the attempt to mercilessly eradicate this apparent evil will be fruitless so long as their perception and the perception of them is not degraded. Yes, I realize this is stating the obvious but this must be said “out loud” so that those advocating for a full on Military solution start pulling their heads out of the sand and start thinking comprehensively.

This leads me to the point of this writing effort. As noted, the world has come to expect the “world’s policemen” to stop the bleeding”. This though is not enough. Targeting ISIS leadership while degrading their logistics and funding simply create a power vacuum that without a comprehensive strategy of resolved grievance is guaranteed to fail. Case in point, we’ve had a “War on Radical Islamic terror” since 9-11 and the attraction to Radical Islam has not lessened. The bottom line is, “you can’t kill an idea” with a bullet or bomb.

As example, Sunni’s sorely and painfully disenfranchised in Iraq by Iranian backed Shia politicians in Baghdad are driven to ISIS merely for survival. This grievance, left unaddressed for nearly a decade has bolstered ISIS’s ranks more than any idea ever could have. The bottom line is both simple and barbaric; Iran is sacrificing the lives of innocent Sunnis in order to regain parity or as many could well argue hegemony in the region. The Saudis along with their GCC allies are guilty of the same in regard to the oppression of their minority (in most cases) Shia populations.

So, here’s the crux of what needs to be accomplished with the above stated; In order to succeed to lay the ground work for rebalancing the region, we must;

1. Effectively communicate! As an example; the Russians, though heavy-handed and in my opinion, dangerous in the region are understood fairly accurately by Middle Eastern “locals” because no one doubts their intentions of being self-serving regardless of the expense to innocents.

• Clearly communicate to the world just what we are trying to achieve. Behind White House doors, this type of Leadership may be going on but much like “grass roots” politics, in order to lead, we must communicate to “the people” not just senior leaders.
•  Employ mutually Supporting narratives specifically designed to effectively    articulate to all involved entities/ States or different target audience
•   Every target audience has a different “credible voice (s)”
•   Speed and accuracy increases credibility
•   Reporting; Be first, be accurate and be honest with news, events and the proceedings of grievance resolution
•   Stop ignoring Social Media. This is the primary communication method of this generation and could be our most effective tool and is currently our biggest communication vulnerability.
•  Paint ISIS and/ or every bad actor accurately. For example; there are no credible scholars within Islam that interpret ISIS’s actions as Islamic. Amplify their hypocrisy relentlessly with credible voices
• This communication must be both simple and understandable from the tribes battling over water rights all the way up to critical leaders of both States and entities.

2.  Mitigate suffering equitably across the spectrum of Allies, partners and/ or enemies must be demonstrated by way of actions such as HA, Humanitarian Aid, safe venues for grievance resolution and most of all security.

• We must engage effectively and I don’t mean just with words. From a long history of dealing with Middle Easterners I’ve learned an unassailable truth. Regardless of religion, ethnicity or culture, Middle Easterners interpret truth by way of actions rather than words. Grievances must be addressed with action so that they are accurately interpreted
• Regardless of the cold-hearted that get so much attention in the news, if we mitigate suffering and explain why we’re doing it, we achieve Allies rather than disgruntled potential threats to the homeland and/ or further “recruits” for ISIS and their cohorts. It’s human nature, people long remember who has helped them and sadly, even longer who has hurt them.

 3.  Part of our targeting effort must be in support of creating access to localities where the most critical of HA is to be delivered.

• To this end, we are not going to be able to “defeat” ISIS but we can demonstrate that killing (much as a rabid animal, the resident EVIL of terrorism is not curable) ISIS leadership down to at least the third tier is but an opportunity to achieve stability.

4.   The responsibility for stability then shifts to those directly impacted to resolve grievance or achieve the conditions for resolving grievance i.e. truces/ peace talks etc.

We must achieve or at least loudly and demonstrably attempt to achieve by way of kinetics the environment that provides access for non-kinetic efforts. In this case, eradicating Evil by way of Kinetic efforts must be both visible and communicated as what is required to set the conditions for the Non-Kinetic

5.   Diplomacy; Only diplomacy and the pressure of public opinion will sway leaders of what we are trying to achieve at the top. Diplomats must convey (and I’m not saying this is easy) that we are laser focused on rebalancing, mitigating suffering, enabling conflict/ grievance resolution and not in continued support for oppression. Again, it’s the Middle East and we must demonstrate by actions that we mean what we say.

As noted, this is only a simple outline for potential success. I’m not Pollyannaish in believing in miracles. I don’t expect quick success. I do realize that the military is currently the only entity capable of supporting this plan. Of course, it will take nearly the same level of military commitment that we applied to the Cold War and it will be expensive. We also must bring the same focus on whom and what we are fighting that we had during the Cold War. In the end, though, we have few options and the long-term cost of nearly exclusive application of Kinetic efforts will undoubtedly bring more of what we are currently experiencing. One of my favorite quotes is “doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results is truly the definition of crazy”. Ok, I may not have quoted exactly, but you get the point.

As you can see from the brief outline, Kinetic activity is only mentioned briefly and is only in support of the Non-Kinetic. This is the Role Reversal I was speaking of. By focusing on the comprehensive approach and relegating the Kinetic to a supporting Role, we have gone a long way towards mitigating the world’s expectations/ perception that there is both a military solution and that is all that they can count on the US for. We must in my opinion change this long held expectation that puts the responsibility for keeping peace back onto the local “stake-holders”. It will not be easy and as always with a major paradigm shift, things will get worse before they get better. As always, I’m willing to be wrong but demonstrating we’re “crazy” by the above definition will do us little good either.