Following Two Discussions

There are two items up on Small Wars Journal we want to get linked on the blog. The first is from Dave Kilcullen. While it is easy to be blinded by the class in which he handles his disagreement with the wars, the ideas matter a lot too. Follow the links.

The second item is a new paper by Matt Armstrong, Rethinking Smith-Mundt. If you have not been following the discussion on MountainRunner regarding Smith-Mundt, it really is worth some time to look into it. I wasn't following it until recently, but Matt is on to something here.

Ignoring the importance of linking policy with the psychology of information to persuade and dissuade, American public diplomacy and strategic communication increasingly became an irrelevant whisper and beauty contest in stark contrast to the adversary’s propaganda of words and deeds. In the war of ideas, the United States is largely unarmed and has accordingly fallen in global influence and stature, increasing vulnerabilities not only in the military domain, but in economic, financial, and diplomatic realms too.

Want an example? Ask yourself why the price of oil jumps whenever Iran threatens to shut down the Persian Gulf. The US Navy is the most powerful naval force in history. Iran's Navy is essentially a handful of boats with a few weapons, and several hundred plastic speedboats.

And yet who has the real information dominance on the topic. It matters, because the whole world buys gas and shouldn't be paying more because some Persian makes a gesture or threat. Think about it.