Be sure to visit:
 |
Follow General Clark on Twitter!
http://twitter.com/GeneralClark
Obama must learn from Vietnam
 Much has been done in six months to deal with the ongoing war in Afghanistan. We have restated that our aim is to eliminate the threat of Al Qaeda; built a new leadership team, including Special Representative Richard Holbrooke; reinforced our troop strength and adjusted our tactics; and have begun augmenting our force with synchronized diplomatic, political and economic efforts.
But can we explain how all of this adds up to an effective strategy that will sustain American engagement in one of the world's least accessible regions?
The American people are growing increasingly wary. In a new CNN/Opinion research poll, fully 54% of respondents now say they oppose the U.S.-led fight against the Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies. Those are striking numbers, and a serious warning to the Obama administration.
The difficulty here lies less in PowerPoint presentations and more in the complexities of the war itself. Our real enemy, Al Qaeda, may now be more entrenched in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. Taking the fight directly into Pakistan with ground forces risks expanding the conflict and undercutting a fragile Pakistani civilian government.
The similarities to Vietnam are ominous. There, too, an insurgency was led and supported from outside the borders of the state in which our troops were fighting. There, too, sanctuaries across international borders stymied U.S. military efforts. There, too, broader political-strategic considerations weighed against military expansion of the conflict and forecast further struggles in the region.
And there, too, American public support slid away over time as our engagement ratcheted up and casualties mounted.
Our Vietnam experiences provide powerful lessons in how to explain strategy and retain public support, so we can ultimately succeed.
First, we must maintain a clear and unwavering purpose - and not overstate our accomplishments. In Vietnam, we seemed to change our objectives whenever they were seriously challenged. At one time or another we fought to halt Communist aggression from the North, to avoid the fall of the "Southeast Asian dominoes," to prevent a slaughter should the Viet Cong take over, and to maintain U.S. "credibility." And we kept promising "light at the end of the tunnel," until Tet shattered public expectations and support.
So in Afghanistan, we must avoid confusing Americans by citing too many justifications for our presence. We aren't there to create democracy for Afghans, stabilize a nuclear-armed Pakistan or deal with strategic rivalry on the subcontinent. These may be means to an end, but we must not lose public focus on Al Qaeda. And we must be cautious in claiming progress.
Second, we must realize that, as we ratchet up our military commitment against the insurgency in Afghanistan, we will take increased losses, and this will limit our political staying power. We must get the balance right between the urgency of the mission and the costs and risks of actions to speed up our success. In Vietnam it turned out there were actually extraordinary military measures that might have been decisive against the North, but we were self-deterred from taking them until it was too late. We should have gone after the North by air more heavily sooner; we should have cut off their base areas in Cambodia and Laos sooner and more effectively.
Our military must seek to find more effective measures against the enemy headquarters and base areas in Pakistan - and the Predator strikes are a good start. Let's not wait too long to act.
Finally, we gain nothing by blaming our hosts or their culture. In Vietnam, we constantly complained about the ineffectiveness of our allies and engineered the ouster of South Vietnamese leaders. In the end, we simply ended up owning the problem. In Southwest Asia today, Americans must recognize that local leaders and their institutions do not share our own priorities and values. We cannot really build a nation for other people, and the American public must not expect it. Instead we will be working quietly behind the scenes to focus greater regional efforts against Al Qaeda.
Our commitment to defeating Al Qaeda need be nothing like our tragedy in Vietnam - unless we make it so. Under the Obama administration, we are off to a good start. Let's learn from America's errors, not relive them.
Read More..
Tribute is not enough
Sign the pledge now.
 Each Memorial Day and Veterans Day, many of us take time to recognize the sacrifices of those men and women who have served in uniform.
But around the country, these solemn holidays often end up meaning little more than a chance to buy things on sale.
Yesterday I did an event with Jill Biden for a non-partisan, non-profit group called Beyond Tribute that's launching a campaign this Memorial Day to convince stores to donate a portion of their holiday promotion proceeds to medical treatment and family support for veterans. By Veterans Day, we hope to be able to raise significant money for veterans in need from the very businesses that usually capitalize on these solemn holidays.
But before businesses will sign on, they need to see that people are committed to truly honoring, and actually helping, former service members.
Sign the Memorial Day pledge to shop at Beyond Tribute business partners today and together we can do a lot of good for some people who really need it.
When I was on active duty as a four-star general in the U.S. Army, the soldiers I commanded were serving me, and they were serving the President.
But above all, they were serving America -- all of us.
So we all owe them a debt of gratitude, especially the troops who have sacrificed their health and well-being in the line of duty.
By signing the pledge to shop at Beyond Tribute businesses during the veterans national holidays, you're doing more than making your own personal commitment to help. You're also showing businesses that their customers will reward them if they do the right thing.
Sign the pledge now.
Anyone who has served, or has a loved one who's served, knows how important this help is.
That's why people like Walter Cronkite, philanthropist Jerome Kohlberg, and Kim Cattrall (Sex and the City's Samantha) have joined Beyond Tribute with me and pledged to do their shopping at participating businesses, too.
Join us in signing the pledge to do your Veterans Day shopping at Beyond Tribute businesses, then ask your friends and family to sign the pledge, too.
The troops we honor are real people, many of whom have very real injuries. They and their families need our help to get back on their feet. This is something we can all do that will really help them.
Sincerely,
Wes Clark
Abandoning Values Only Brings Defeat
Renewal of respect for international law, open justice, human dignity, and the Bill of Rights is the key to victory in the struggle against terrorists, explains former NATO commander and UCLA Burkle Center Senior Fellow Wesley K. Clark in this video op-ed. Torturing enemies is not merely wrong, he says, but "represents a path for defeat for the United States."
|
|
|
No Torture, No Exceptions
Washington Monthly
Torture—the word evokes images of dark, damp dungeons and outlandish punishments and pain. But torture can take many forms, and it lives today. Incredibly, Americans are part of it. And we must put a stop to it.
Torture is illegal, ineffective, and morally wrong. The United States has signed numerous treaties condemning torture and abjuring its practice. Those treaties are the law of the land. And, yes, waterboarding is torture: in the past, we convicted and punished foreign nationals for torture by waterboarding. There are no legal loopholes permitting torture in "exceptional cases." After all, those were the same excuses used by the torturers we once condemned.
The honor of the American man-at-arms is one of our most potent weapons. It is enshrined in the Geneva Conventions. It encourages our enemies to surrender to us on the battlefield. It protects any of our own soldiers who may have been captured. It encourages noncombatants and civilians to trust us and cooperate willingly. And it does not countenance the abuse of captives in our care.
We have known this from the outset of the Republic. General George Washington emphasized the proper treatment of Hessian prisoners during the Revolutionary War, reasoning that we might win them over. In many cases, we did just that. During the Civil War, we issued the Lieber Code, emphasizing that torture to gain confessions or information was never permissible. Ever since, it has been the standard to which the American armed forces have adhered. During World War II, we trained interrogators to elicit voluntary information from our adversaries, and it worked. Today, the FBI is firm in its belief that proper interrogation doesn’t require torture and that better information can be obtained without it.
Something in the American soul has always demanded fair treatment and respect for the individual. Perhaps it was our flight from the repression of the Old World and the practices of European monarchy. We were different. We expressed it in our Declaration of Independence. We captured it in our adaptation of English common law, in our trials by juries of peers, and in our spirit of justice. We were a better nation for it, more respected, more influential, and more secure. Certainly, we committed historical wrongs that today we wish we could set right, but overall we advanced, step by step, striving to live the values we professed.
Until now. Until weak, fearful leaders had so little belief in our values and principles that they gave away our birthright and proud claim in order to follow a shadowy emulation of the very dictatorships and tyrannies we had struggled against. For shame, America, that we aren’t brave enough and strong enough to live our values.
Today, in the struggle to finish off the extremists plotting against us, it won’t be torture and fear that win the day for America. Far from it. Nations that torture end up despised and defeated. No, to win we’ll have to live up to the values we profess, the belief in human rights, equal justice, fair trials, and the rule of law. These ideals are potent weapons. They will give us allies, friends, information, and security—but only if we live them.
We’ve done it before. In the thrust and parry of the cold war, America’s adherence to proper standards and international law won us respect, allies, friends, and, ultimately, the influence that helped bring down the Soviet system. And we can have the same success in our fight today. We just have to make more friends and fewer enemies. And in such a strategy, there’s no place for torture. Or for those who would torture.
Read more..
|
The Potency of Persuasion
Fortune
You’re in a tough negotiation. The guy across the table is unconcerned, backed up by his cronies, prepared to wait you out. There is no legal recourse. You need power, real power. Like this: "Mr. President, may I see you outside, alone, for just a moment." "Certainly," Serb President Slobodan Milosevic replies, with that smug self-assurance characteristic of his dictatorship. "Mr. President," I begin, looking at him eye to eye that day in 1998 and speaking in an even voice, "perhaps you don’t understand, but the United Nations has directed that you pull out your excess forces from Kosovo now. And if you don’t, NATO is going to tell me to bomb you, and I will bomb you good."
Not many people will ever have that kind of power, or have to use it. Power is essentially about achieving influence over others. Individuals strive for it, as do nations. Power serves to promote interests, compassionate or selfless interests. Employers exert it over employees, charitable donors over beneficiaries, regulators over businesses.
For years the U.S. used its nuclear arsenal to deter an attack by the Soviet Union, its system of laws and civil rights to win worldwide admiration, its wealth to support and influence international institutions.
Power is based on certain qualities or capabilities, but power itself is transactional and flows out of relationships, real or perceived. As a career Army officer, a commander in Vietnam, NATO commander during the Kosovo campaign, one-time presidential candidate, and now chairman of an investment bank, I have seen many kinds of power: the power of threats and of praise, of shock and surprise, and of a shared vision.
Sometimes threatening works, but it usually brings with it adverse consequences - like resentment and a desire to get even in some way. People don’t like to be reminded that they are inferior in power or status. And so, in business, it is important to motivate through the power of shared goals, shared objectives, and shared standards.
Leadership is the art of persuading the other fellow to want to do what you want him to do, General Eisenhower wisely taught us decades ago, and it remains the best recipe I know for developing power. But how do you persuade others to follow? I’ve found three ways to do so: through education, through participation, and through the idea of co-option.
Take training. An ounce of education upfront is worth a pound of threats later on. This is one of the reasons that businesses both big and small spend millions on training and educating their new arrivals and their managers, all the way to the top. Employee education is one of the most cost-effective investments that businesses can make. But it isn’t enough: Employees need to become vested in their work through participation. In the budget process, for example, team leaders are often required to present their own projections - in essence forming a contract to do their part to bring in revenues and hold down expenses. Such exercises are critical for empowering employees.
Co-option, the third step, is less tangible. It involves building and maintaining the emotional bonds of teamwork, loyalty, and trust. Essentially leaders have to sell themselves and their programs to their teams in order to influence.
As for Milosevic, well, he heard the threat, but he didn’t like it. He pulled back his troops, but only temporarily. Soon he resumed the ethnic cleansing, and, following through on our threat, we did bomb Yugoslavia. After 78 days of attacks, coupled with diplomacy, we broke his will and eventually his grip on power. He died in prison in 2006, awaiting conviction as a war criminal. But to this day I often think about how many lives could have been saved if we had successfully persuaded him to share our vision.
Even if the stakes aren’t as high, the same lessons should be applied to business - before you’re tempted to threaten, seek to build a community of shared interests. Then you won’t need to call in the U.S. Air Force.
Read More..
|