Warriors, not soldiers, dominate contemporary
battles. Insurgents, terrorists, and militias are once again
concerns for the organs of state security. As seen in the chaos of
the on-going conflict in Iraq, instability in Afghanistan and
Pakistan, and terrorist attacks worldwide, irregular warfare is now
the norm. In the aftermath of the Cold War, governments and their
military, police, and intelligence officers must develop new skills
in order to combat non-state soldiers. Richard H. Shultz, Jr.,
director of the International Security Studies Program at Tufts
University's Fletcher School and Andrea J. Dew, a research associate
at the same institution, have teamed up to examine the role of and
response to the tribes, clans, and ethnic groups that comprise the
non-state warriors of contemporary combat.
Over the past decade, I have spent much time
addressing the role of non-state actors in internal and
transnational conflicts. While developing the Los Angeles Terrorism
Early Warning Group, supervising and managing analytical teams to
assess both criminal and terrorist threats, I have found that
research and resources on contemporary adversaries in current and
emerging conflicts are essential to avoid intelligence failure. Yet,
intelligence failure is more the rule than the exception when
traditional forces face irregular forces—guerrillas or gangs. This
is due, in part, to the differences between soldiers and warriors.
As T. E. Lawrence, veteran of the Arab Revolt, noted, "Armies were
like plants, immobile as a whole, firm-rooted, nourished through
long stems to the head. We [guerrillas] might be a vapour, blowing
where we listed."[1]
Shultz and Dew attempt to explain the guerrilla
vapor to future conflict analysts. In the process, they have
assembled an important review of the current state of irregular
conflict. Their text, which effectively assesses the factors that
allow irregular forces to succeed against regular forces is a
valuable contribution to the literature on both terrorism and
insurgency. The authors cover the ground in eight chapters. The
first, "After the Cold War," sets the stage by providing a cogent
overview of the post-Cold War security environment and the resulting
changes in warfare. The next two chapters "Assessing Enemies" and "Tribes and Clans" are the most theoretically important. The
following four chapters are detailed case studies of the recent
conflicts in Somalia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, and Iraq; these review
the history, politics, and conduct of asymmetric warfare within a
tribal and clan context. A concluding chapter is entitled "When
Soldiers Fight Warriors: Lessons Learned for Policymakers, Military
Planners, and Intelligence Analysts."
Shultz and Dew argue that a new approach is
needed to understand non-state armed groups, and provide the
beginnings of just such an approach. Their most significant
contribution is their analytical framework for understanding the
tribes, clans, and families that fight non-state wars. (I would
argue that this template is also useful in understanding gangs.)
While the authors claim only to offer a structure for "military capability
analysis of internal warfare," I believe that structure may also be applied to
the larger sphere of transnational terrorism and global insurgency
practiced by the Salafist, Jihadi movement. Their schema comprises
six topics: 1) Concept of Warfare, 2) Organization and Command and
Control, 3) Area of Operations, 4) Types and Targets of Operations,
5) Constraints and Limitations (on violence and use of force), and
6) Role of Outside Actors.
Their investigation shows that state structure and the political organizing forms of the nation-state have little
to do with the ethos and loyalties of irregular combatants. The
concept of warfare of the "traditional" warriors studied here is
shaped by tribal, clan, sub-clan, family, and village connections.
All of the factions studied utilized small, fluid, and agile
self-organizing elements to conduct operations. They fought and
organized along devolved lines, linking with other proximate groups
to fight "outsiders." Their area of operations (AO) varied but
emphasized places where they could dominate the operational tempo and
shape the battle rhythm by their innate understanding of local
terrain—both geographic and human.
Urban areas increasingly become viable sites for
battle since the conventional army has difficulty negotiating its
urban canyons and dense, unfamiliar space. Urban fighting, with its
accompanying brutality, came to dominate the conflicts in Somalia,
Chechnya, and Iraq. Similarly, mountainous rural terrain that
challenged conventional forces was also exploited. In the case of
Chechnya and Iraq, extending the reach of the tribal warriors
through terrorist attacks elsewhere extended the scope of
operational space, challenging state forces. Chechen rebels
conducted attacks in Moscow, including attacks on transit systems
and apartment houses, and threatened to use radiological dispersal
devices—dirty bombs—in Russia. The 7/7 attacks against London's
Underground and buses could be viewed (internally at least) as an
extension of the jihadist defense against Western invaders in Iraq.
Raids and their modern variations were important
operational types for the irregular warriors in all of the conflicts
reported. In every case, the normal constraints on the use of
violence were eroded since the guerrillas believed they were facing
existential threats posed by groups outside their traditional social
structure. Barbarization, targeting women and non-combatants,
beheadings, suicide operations, and other terrorist tactics (such as
the Beslan School takeover in the Chechen conflict) became
acceptable. Suicide operations, such as the attacks conducted by the
Chechen "Black Widows" and the epidemic of suicide bombings in the
Iraqi Insurgency are examples of the operational tactics,
techniques, and procedures implemented by these non-state soldiers.
While the authors mention these as an important factor, fuller
treatment of suicide operations by tribal fighters would have been a
welcome addition to their text.
Outside actors played a role in all of the case
studies. Bloody Mogadishu, Grozny, Afghanistan, and post-Saddam Iraq
all attracted foreign fighters—Mujahideen. These links to the global
jihadi movement and its vanguard al-Qaeda were found in varying
degrees, but certainly shape perception of the conflicts. Similarly,
Islam played a role in shaping the concept of war for the guerrillas
in all of the cases. This role is well described in each of the
conflicts studies, but additional inquiry is required to accurately
gauge its full impact and potentials in emerging conflicts. The
distinction between "tribal" defense and jihad also deserves further
exploration. This would be especially valuable in the sections on
Afghanistan and Iraq, as the Afghan tribes are now engaged in a new
set of conflicts against U.S. forces that in many ways mirrors the
operational settings faced by the Soviets, and Iraq is still
embroiled in insurgency (or what increasingly looks like multiple
insurgencies).
In several places the authors mention the links
between irregular, guerrilla warfare and criminal groups. The book
would have benefited from additional discussion in this area. Gangs,
organized crime, and transnational criminal networks contribute to
contemporary conflict. In some cases insurgencies look like criminal
insurgencies. Yet, a detailed evaluation of this facet of tribal
conflict is lacking here. Perhaps the authors or other scholars
building on their work, will explore this neglected dimension of
contemporary irregular warfare. Such an exploration would be
especially valuable in relation to Iraq. While the authors do a good
job of describing the historical situation and the traditional
Shia-Sunni divide, their book would have benefited from a deeper
examination of the complex Iraqi situation. They accurately describe
the early understanding of the current war by cataloging the range
of participants: former regime elements, Sunni Arabs, Rejectionists,
Financial Facilitators, Organized Crime, Sadr/Shiite Extremists,
Sunni Iraqi Islamists, and Foreign Islamists. Unfortunately,
detailed discussion of the interaction, cooperation, and competition
among these groups is lacking. The case study adequately describes
the impact of these "tribal" forces against U.S. and Coalition
forces, but does not completely account for the multiple intra-Iraqi
conflicts that punctuate the current situation.
Decentralized leadership, command, and control
are attributes of all the irregular forces discussed. This
traditional approach resulted in flexibility, adaptability, and the
ability of small units with local knowledge of terrain and
"geosocial" conditions to brutally engage unfamiliar adversaries. It
would be valuable to build upon this finding and explore the impact
of transnational linkages among networked adversaries and the use of
information systems and Internet connectivity in current and future
"tribal" wars. What happens when traditional values and warfighting
structures meet real time, planet-wide communications?
In all of the case studies, it becomes abundantly
clear that traditional warfare is relevant to today's struggles.
Indeed, traditional warrior codes of honor, tribal identification,
the centrality of conflict in tribal life, clan warfare,
retribution, reprisals, blood feuds, warlords, and informal martial
leadership are central to all these conflicts. For example, in Iraq,
Saddam devolved social control to tribal militias to maintain his
grasp on Iraq in the face of conflict with Iran. Consequently, those
militias dominated political competition within his Ministry of
Interior, a situation that sadly reverberates today as Iraq sorts
out its new political landscape.
Shultz and Dew's analysis of "hotbeds of
instability" sheds much needed light on asymmetric conflict and "Fourth Generation Warfare." They clarify just how modern non-state
warriors fight, recruit, find support, craft strategy, and apply
operational art. Historical, cultural, anthropological, and social
factors that favor such methods of warfare are described to
illustrate the functioning of non-state private armies. The authors
ably document the need to understand these factors to avoid
military misfortune.
Unfortunately the conventional forces that faced
the "tribal" fighters in these case studies failed to assess their
adversaries before engaging them on their home turf. It is to be
hoped that future intelligence officials, policymakers, and military
and security operators will consider and build upon this analytical
framework before embarking upon new wars of conquest or containment.
I, for one, will recommend this text to the intelligence analysts
and warfighters I work with to improve the chances of operational
success against the tribal fighters we will undoubtedly continue to
encounter in the future.
Los Angeles Sheriff's Department
Emergency Operations Bureau
jpsulliv@lasd.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] T. E.
Lawrence, "The Evolution of a Revolt,"
Army Quarterly and Defence Journal (Oct
1920), rpt. at Combat Studies Institute, U.S. Army Command and
General Staff College, Combined Arms Research Library <link>.
|