Skip to comments.Unconquerable Nation: Knowing Our Enemy, Strengthening Ourselves. (book review)
Posted on 10/02/2006 7:15:28 AM PDT by Valin
Brian Michael Jenkins from RAND, one of the foremost terrorism experts in the world who has been studying the subject since the 1970s, released a new book this week, entitled Unconquerable Nation: Knowing Our Enemy, Strengthening Ourselves. The full text of the book is available at this link in PDF format. Its the first full-length book that Jenkins has written since 9/11, and well worth the wait; its one of the best analyses of how weve waged the war on terror over these last five years, and offers solid recommendations about the course we need to follow in the coming years.
Jenkins takes the title of the book from Sun Tzu: Being unconquerable lies with yourself. His overarching point in the book that Americas ability to prevail in the war on terror depends on a ethos of clear resolve and patient discipline, not fear and hasty reactive gestures. On that point, he writes:
This philosophy alters Americans mental model of todays conflict. It elevates the necessity of knowing the enemy, something we have not made sufficient effort to do. It moves us from relying almost exclusively on the projection of military power and viewing homeland security as physical protection to mobilizing our spirit, courage, and commitment. While we strive to destroy our terrorist enemies by reducing their capabilities, thwarting their plans, frustrating their strategy, and crushing their spirit, we must also rely on our own psychological strength to defeat the terror they would create. Instead of issuing constant warnings and alarms, we must project stoicism and resolve. Instead of surrendering our liberties in the name of security, we must embrace liberty as the source and sustenance of our security.
The section on Basic Beliefs from pages 14-16 distills his key observation about the war on terror over the last five years:
The enemies we face have changed fundamentally. Patterns of armed conflict have also changed. Unrelenting pressure on the al Qaeda organization and its terrorist allies has forced the jihadists to operate at a lower, but still lethal, level. However, the United States has neglected the political war. Although President George W. Bush warns Americans that the war on terrorism will take a while, it is not clear that either those in the administration or average citizens at home fully comprehend what that meansor the great challenge it presents, especially to an impatient society. Americans must be ferociously pragmatic for the long term. The invasion of Iraq was a dangerous distraction. In the longer struggle against the jihadists and future terrorist foes, we will ultimately prevail. Americas courage is its ultimate source of security. Homeland security begins at home. Whatever we do, American values must be preserved.
These may be truisms, but if so, theyre important ones, and they arent discussed enough in the dialogue between our nations leaders and the American public today. As a result, too many people in the United States are unable to put threats to the nation in context, and become overly influenced by fear. Too many people expect perfect security, an unrealistic objective in a free society. Too many people believe that you can win the war on terror by taking moral or legal shortcuts, and dont account for the long-run negative impact that these decisions have on our ability to build the foundations of support that we need at home and abroad to be successful. And too many people believe that it can be won without shared sacrifice and civic participation, something that our nations leaders have not asked the entire American people to make on the homefront.
Chapter Five of the book concerns homeland security. Before I summarize it, let me implore you to read the whole chapter, not just this overview. He begins the chapter by analyzing the millenial tensions and the changes in societal context - a globalized economy, dangerous new technologies - that created a kind of fin de siècle apprehension even before 9/11. The attacks of 9/11 made this national mood combustible, putting the country on edge, but in a schizophrenic way: Dire warnings of imminent danger were accompanied by admonitions for Americans to go on about their business as usual.
He then describes how post-9/11 uncertainties caused a shift in the nations risk analyses from threat-based assessments to vulnerability based-assessments. Because the threats were amorphous and often unknowable, officials were forced to look at vulnerabilities. But vulnerabilities are everywhere in a free society, causing a scramble for prioritization. Jenkins describes how this competition for resources leads to threat advocacy, which different stakeholders and interest groups competing to highlight their vulnerabilities, and officials and the media focusing attention on the latest attack or plot, rather than developing a consistent risk-based framework that prioritizes resources and can combat multiple threats simultaneously.
Jenkins then offers a series of principles and recommendations about how the United States can better face the foe within, as summarized in this paragraph:
We need to spend the next several years doing things very differently. We need to get more realistic about risk. We need to increase preparedness by educating and mobilizing all Americans to participate in homeland security. Amid the proliferating bollards and barriers and gates and guards, we need to understand security better and to accept its limitationsyet we must also take the opportunity to rebuild Americas decaying infrastructure. We need to improve local intelligence without succumbing to national paranoia about sleeper cells and fifth columns. We need to build a better legal framework for preventive interventions against terrorists, but we also need to ensure proper oversight to prevent the abuse of those preventive interventions. In all these areas of conduct, we need to remember our core national values and to uphold them as we move forward. Otherwise, the terrorists will truly have won, even without following through on any of their plans of attack. Their terror alone will have sufficed. We will have unilaterally surrendered.
Each of these excellent points is covered in more detail in the section that follows, from pages 153-176. The section entitled Enlist the Public is particularly good. Jenkins writes:
The best way to increase our ability as a nation to respond to disasters, natural or man-made, is to enlist all citizens through education and engagement, which also happens to be a very good way to reduce the persistent anxieties that afflict us. We have not done this.
The federal governments decision to tell citizens to go on living their lives, offering only the vague admonition to be vigilant, has encouraged dependency, rather than promoting self-reliance, Jenkins says. He argues that there needs to be a much strong commitment to public education on homeland security, and that doesnt mean websites and pamphlets. Instead, he says:
We need to aggressively educate the public through all media, in the classrooms, at town halls, in civic meetings, through professional organizations, and in volunteer groups. This means more than speeches in front of the American flag. The basic course should include how to deal with the spectrum of threats we face, from dirty bombs to natural epidemics, with the emphasis on sound, easy-to-understand science aimed at dispelling mythology and inoculating the community against alarming rumors and panic.
He goes on to talk about other elements of civic education and preparedness, one that resembles the concept of total security utilized in Scandinavian countries (see this book for more info).
I could go on with the review, but Ill stop there, and finish by noting that the book contains an excellent bibliography, taken from Jenkins own library and broken into a number of categories. Overall, an excellent book - highly recommended.
.pdf is here:
On a quick skim, appears well worth reading.
Book TV Programs
A Weekly Look at Selected Book TV Programs
I have heard a couple of RAND experts speak in seminars. They do have many good ideas but certainly not all the answers. I think the education network on preparing, mitigating, responding, and recovering from terrorists' attacks has expanded geometrically in the last 5 years. One point this guy left out though is that he who controls the narrative wins the war. Unfortunately, much of the narrative is not controlled by the pro-American side. This seriously undermines efforts to deal with the purveyors of mass murder and child sacrifice.
Does he recommend ending Muslim immigration to the U.S.? No? Then he ain't saying sh*t.
Thank you for your input. Rest assured that I will give it all the consideration that it merits.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.