Fourth Generation War Evolves Fifth Emerges T X

Fourth Generation War Evolves, Fifth Emerges T. X. Hammes August 2007 1

Marine Palm Pilot 2

Purpose How and why warfare changes Recent evolutions in fourth generation Potential fifth generation What’s after that 3

4 GW is Just a Model Varied terminology used in descriptions Toffler’s Waves l Forms of Energy l Generations of RMAs l Fourth Generation Construct Focus on modern war l Simple l AQ uses it l 4

War Reflects Society Economic Political Social Technology “Military institutions and the manner in which they employ violence depended on the economic, social and political conditions of their respective states. ” On War, Clausewitz, Paret translation, pg. 6. 5

Four Generations Massed Manpower – Napoleonic Massed Firepower – WW I Mechanized War – WW II Insurgency (information) – dominant since WW II 6

Fourth Generation War 7

China Mao – Political struggle is PRIMARY Organized all of society Three phases l l l One – Political organization Two – Guerrilla fight – “change correlation of forces” Three – Conventional fight – ONLY after Phase II is successful First to write it down 8

Vietnam Imitated and improved on Mao Used international networks to change correlation of forces Tet 68 disaster tactically, strategic victory Used political power to negate US military power Still ended with conventional invasion 9

Nicaragua Coalition of insurgent groups NEVER sought military victory Target was US Congress l International media, celebrities, mainline Christian churches Defeated Somoza politically No Phase III offensive 10

Palestinians – Intifada I First Intifada spontaneous eruption l l l Organized within weeks Loosely affiliated – “self organizing web” Never even had a military aspect Multiple messages l l l International – children vs. powerful army Israelis – Israel proper safe, occupied zone unsafe Palestinians – We are holding our own Result – 1993 Oslo Accords 11

Intifada I - Children vs Army The Lasting Images 12

Al Aqsa Intifada Reverses roles Israel back to besieged l Palestinians back to ruthless terrorists l US position l No negotiation until terror stops l Supports Israeli security techniques l l Includes seizure of more territory on West Bank 13

Al Aqsa Intifada – Oppression 14

Suicide Bombers 15

Afghans vs. Soviets No unified resistance – changing coalitions Essentially tribal = network l Overlaid religious and xenophobic aspects l Massive killing failed Broke Soviet will 16

Al Qaeda “Fourth Generation Wars have. . . proven the superiority of the weaker power. ” Ubeid al-Qurashi Jan 2002 Proto-typical non-nation state 4 GW enemy l l l Transnational coalition of willing Idea based Global network of local insurgents Strategic guidance is vertical Tactical support is horizontal 17

Iraq Classic 4 GW approach l "The war is very long, and always think of this as the beginning. And always make the enemy think that yesterday was better than today. '‘ ZARQAWI Tribal, ethnic and religious networks Was Network of the willing l Sunni Salifi, Sunni secular, Shia radicals, Free Lancers, Foreign Jihadists Now the predictable civil war 18

Hizbollah-Israeli Summer War Hizb understood political aspects Built political base – services l Fought political fight l Saw victory is secured after fighting l High-low mix Long range missiles Israeli focus l 122 mm Rockets most effective l Technological surprise – C 802, UAV l Lateral escalation! 19

Will we go back to 3 GW? War is “contest of opposing wills” Cost of hightech vs insurgency Record of success l Conventional = Status quo l Unconventional = Change l 5 -0 versus Superpowers 20

4 th Generation – Insurgency Evolved Direct attack on minds of decision makers Uses all available networks – political, economic, social and military Superior political will defeats greater economic and military power. Wars are measured in decades. Political, Protracted, Networked 21

Key Changes in 4 GW since Mao Strategic Shift Organizational Shift Participants Increase Weapons 22

Strategic Shift – Insurgents’ View NOT a military campaign Strategic Communications Campaign Supported by interagency efforts l Military action is NOT primary l Military action cannot solve the problem l 23

Operational Shift Coalition of the willing Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq l Often hate each other l Transdimensional Identify, recruit, indoctrinate, train, deploy, control l Attack l Fund l 24

Participants Armed groups Clans, tribes Criminals Private Military Companies l State use as well 25

Weapons of Mass Disruption Previous Incidents 26

Anthrax and Ricin Capitol Hill Included a warning and instructions 27

Bombings Madrid London 28

Weapons of Mass Destruction Practical Methods 29

Chemical: Bhopal One temporary morgue 30 Killed = 15, 000 Long term injury = 200, 000

HYE: Oklahoma City Truckload of Ammonium Nitrate 31

Texas City Ship Explosion Rail Cars – 3 / 4 Mile from zero 32

HYE: Texas City Ship Explosion Shipload of Ammonium Nitrate 33

Summary of 4 GW Conflict is now Strategic Communications Focus is outsiders l Internal conflict still bloody l Enemy will be shifting “coalition of the willing” Many more players with various motivations Cheaper, deadlier weapons 34

Fifth Generation Emerges 35

S Curves Innovation/Technology Development Institutionalization Maturation Rapid Growth Adoption Innovation Experimentation 36

Generations of War Prevalence/Performance 5 th – All of Society 4 th – All of Govt. 3 d – Combined Arms 2 d – Branches Time 37

5 GW Incubating Now Political – Pressure on nation state Economic – Smaller Entities Social – Loyalty to cause not nation Technology - Bio tech, Nano-tech, Always on Net 38

Foreshadowing Attacks l l Capitol Hill -- anthrax - no information London, Madrid – bombs – no connection Increasing “cause” attacks l Earth Liberation, Animal Liberation Fronts Several areas – cyber, nano, bio Biological advances l l Synthetic biology – Dr. Venter Australians and Mouse Pox Carlson’s Curve British student 39

5 GW Goal Stop Globalization l Potential “coalition of the willing” Globalization losers l Fundamentalist movements l Environmental radicals l l Destroy ‘trust’ – inhibit movement Information – physical not cyber l Personnel – relationships l Material - containers l 40

Nightmare 5 GW Super empowered individual or small group Uses increasing power of knowledge creates “off the shelf” technology Loyalty to “cause” not nation Anthrax on Capitol Hill Smallpox Worldwide 41

Beyond 5 GW 42

Rate of Change Kurzweil’s SINGULARITY Change is exponential not linear l Overestimate in short term l Underestimate in long term l 43

Bottom Line 21 st Century will not bring 100 years of progress It will be 20, 000 years 44

Additional Information www. d-n-i. net “The Sling and the Stone” txhammes@excite. com 45