In this section we will discuss a model which I use when teaching how to develop strategic vision at the U.S. Army War College. Earlier I started out describing our prophetic prowess in predicting the destruction of the Berlin Wall. The following method was used in an earlier form to make successful forecasts of future events. This model, although negative in structure, actually provides positive solutions of serious problems facing us in the next decade.
The Aversion Policy Model is a structural, conceptual model. That structure is presented in Figure 2. Here is how it works. Select an important domestic or international, political issue. In the ensuing discussion I have selected the economy, war, the environment, political disputes and the drug war. Travel to the right along the timeline through 1992 and beyond. We should already see some events in the near term, although they have not as yet taken place, e.g., EC 92.
Farther along the timeline things concerning our chosen issue become cloudy and much less visible. Within that foggy environ try to articulate the worst thing that could possibly happen--a real catastrophic event or situation. You must make a strong case for your catastrophe. For instance, if you selected the U.S. economy as your issue, your catastrophe might be worldwide depression or something worse, which I'll describe later on. Once your catastrophe is determined, you can now work backwards in the model to determine what events must precede your catastrophe-events that lead into your scenario. You will find as you move backwards in a logical sequence one event must precede the next, finally arriving at the present or near term.
Now return to your catastrophe and predicted events, which must occur to "feed" it, and start identifying national policies and alternatives which would avert the events you have selected and the ultimate catastrophe itself. These are your options. Select the key options and then think about how the military can help support those policy options.
This will provide you with military missions which should be accomplished to support national policy options to preclude or avert your catastrophe. To develop a strategic vision you must go beyond developing military missions in support of policy options on one single issue. You must take several issues through the model before your aperture of understanding and learning is opened wide enough to develop strategic vision.
Imagine a mountain with only room for one person at the top. The higher up the mountain you climb, the more you can see. But only the man at the top can see it all, make the choices, set the priorities, point the direction. He's the President. You and I can develop this kind of perspective only by sequentially understanding each view, each issue. Then and only then can we develop policy which is logical in terms of its interrelational self.
The Economy
The first issue is the U.S. economy. I have previously offered conjecture that this issue will be the one which leads us into the next war-trade war or real war. With the reunification of Germany stirring up old fears in Europe, EC 92 will probably become EC 93 or EC 94. The economic integration of Europe was not without criticism on both sides of the Atlantic before the recent events in Eastern Europe took place. Now we can certainly see along this timeline a stretchout of this major event. Continuing out the timeline, my catastrophe is not worldwide depression, which is certainly bad, but is what I call "economic slavery."
Economic slavery means that we Americans are enslaved by a foreign power through ownership of all you can see. In such a catastrophe one need not dig too deep into imagination to see the Japanese with ownership of everything vital to us. We would be relegated to low skill labor while they enjoyed their management positions and great wealth. You couldn't borrow money unless they said you could and so forth. This would be the ultimate economic catastrophe as far as I am concerned.
Following the timeline from the present we see
tremendous Japanese investment in U.S. real estate,
industry, banking, energy, and information industries.
Twenty-five percent of California's banking
institutions (the solvent ones I might add) are already
owned by Japan! [9]
Imagine the "Japanese economic army"
marching from west to east and taking over everything
worthwhile-seizing the terrain without firing a shot.
[10]
It is no wonder that Mr. Bush will face his biggest
reelection challenge on this one issue.
How can we avert this catastrophic vision? What are the policy options?
The first aversion policy which comes to mind is the establishment of trade barriers. But is this a good choice? No. Our national objective states " . . . free market economies (fair and open international trading system) . . ." We're moving in the wrong direction. If we alter this protectionist option to address ownership investment rather than establish trade
barriers, we might find an appropriate policy. I call this aversion policy "legislative denial."
What I intend is federal legislation which denies foreign ownership in the specific service, knowledge, informational, science and technology industries. Such a law would be applicable to all foreign investment to avoid a subtle racism criticism, but would only apply to those excluded industries. Foreign investment could be allowed in all U.S. companies not excluded. In effect this would allow foreign capital to flow into light and heavy manufacturing, industry, agriculture, moderate-level technologies and real estate, but would deny ownership in the financial, medical, informational, and educational market places to include the following technologies and sciences [11] :
Technologies:
Sciences:
In projecting what post-industrial societies will look like, Mr. Charles W. Taylor, noted futurist, sees that the above sciences and technologies will characterize the modern world in 2010. When added to the knowledge, information and service industries, these fields will comprise 80 percent of the American work force. [12] This option is the most significant in catastrophe aversion.
Other options are available, including development of a "Buy America" campaign if feasible in the global economy, development of closer U.S. Government/U.S. business joint ventures, and development and expansion of USSR and East European markets (some analysts even view the new Soviet Union as being as promising as the last century's development of the American West).
All of these policy options trigger actions on the part of the military and, thus, alter existing missions. Legislative denial ultimately means we must withdraw U.S. forces from our greatest competitors; "Buy America" would have procurement and thus, budget consequences; a partnership policy might trigger the use of military forces to improve economic competitiveness (will discuss in the Economic Integration Model); and developing the "Red" marketplace may require scores of "nationbuilding" advisors.
The Environment
In generically viewing the world environment issue, it may take a little imagination to view my selected catastrophe-artificial, subterranean life. The ultimate consequences of continuing to pollute and deplete our air, water and other natural resources could lead us to move underground for survival. This is close to the ultimate catastrophe, envisioned by many science fiction authors, if not environmentalists. But what policy options do we have to avert this catastrophe?
My first choice is to support a strong United Nations' resolution against polluting nations and enforce its provisions. Such an option would require additional military support from multinational forces for compliance.
Other options include passive ones encompassing increased investment in environmental protection, research and development. These passive options may require active military utilization of personnel and equipment.
A final option is to legislate waste elimination by requiring that every product package be biodegradable or serve an alternative or reusable need. In any option, environmental cleanup must be considered, and certainly one of the world's largest sources of organized, trained and skilled manpower (the U.S. military) will be involved, more so than in the past, to include cleanup and command, control and supervision of other involved U.S. Government agencies (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).
War
My issue of war leads us to its ultimate catastrophe -- nuclear war. Although we have used treaties like SALT I, SALT II, the ABM Treaty, the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the INF Treaty, and currently the START Treaty to raise the nuclear threshold of war, defense analysts now predict that 20 nations will be members of the nuclear club by the end of the decade. Perhaps the event which triggers such a nuclear war will start between two smaller, rival nations. The smaller, weaker of the two would preempt his larger foe. The ultimate treaty is not the ultimate aversion policy.
None of our treaties to date have articulated how a violation of the treaty will be punished. We must place signatory sanctions on multilateral treaties. We must fully develop SDI to preclude preemption or nuclear blackmail. An alternative policy option might entail a U.S - USSR bilateral treaty to punish any first users of nuclear weapons with a massive retaliatory nuclear strike from the superpowers. In support of treaties we know that the military will reduce its nuclear force structure and increase its intelligence and verification resources. Continued expenditure on SDI will also help develop and staff the U.S. Space Command for utilization. [13]
Drug War
A catastrophe stemming from losing the drug war may be previewed on your television set nightly. The catastrophe of failure may be expressed as anarchy, with roving bands of thugs, rapists, thieves and murderers. Our aversion policy list includes increasing supply-side effort, demand-side effort, enactment of strict gun control laws with mandatory sentencing, and use of Federal Government assets to transport the drug addicted to punitive, treatment, and/or education complexes.
Military support to the supply-side effort involves increased combat operations and interdiction efforts outside U.S. borders. We could reorganize the U.S. Coast Guard as a subordinate military service under the Department of Defense." Military support to demand-side effort would certainly encompass use of military bases, personnel and equipment on an escalating basis. Retired military could be recalled to active duty to provide job training, education, and other services to either inmates or patients, depending on whether we finally classify illegal drugs as a crime against society, or as a personal illness.
Political Dispute
The political dispute issue, whether over boundaries, religion, ethnic, or national rivalry can certainly lead to war. My chosen catastrophe is a conventional war of attrition -- a war in which we are participants, not bystanders. Another World War I, World War II, Korean or Vietnam War would be catastrophic, even for the winner. To avert a war of attrition we should opt for support of regional conferences on security and cooperation, patterned after the highly successful Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). The CSCE agreements reached have never been violated." This process of open political dialogue concerning security, economics, and human rights is applicable to all regions of the world. Our policy should be to actively support the establishment of regional CSCs around the world. In addition we should widen the applicability of "Open Skies" and "Open Seas" negotiations. We should insist upon teeth in United
Nations resolutions which establish sovereign, inviolate international borders and demand agreement of all UN member nations to mandatory economic sanctions for violators. Such options imply greater support to multinational forces; increased need for intelligence concerning agreement verification and compliance; more utilization of existing, qualified military advisors to civilian negotiations; but they also reduce the need for U.S. military assistance programs to warring nations.
Missions: Gains and Losses
These five issues, and their catastrophes and aversion policies, lead us to U.S. military mission gains and losses listed below:
Mission Gains
Mission Losses
The five issues presented here are only snapshots of
the "tip of the iceberg," issues which need to be
studied and addressed in the Aversion Policy Model, but
they have been representatives of worst case planning,
negative in approach, which brings about positive
change. We have now "sized" the military force and
determined its missions. We are now ready to determine
how we can resource the force.
Space
Multinational Forces
Environmental Cleanup
Drug War
Domestic Policy Support Forces (health, engineering, transport, communications, information,
intelligence, civil affairs, military police)
Research and DevelopmentNuclear Forces
Forward Stationed Forces
Procurement/Acquisitions
Military Assistance
Heavy Combat Forces
Back to Table of Contents Justifying the Army
Back to SSI List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 1990 by US Army War College.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com