Strategy in Iraq: A Problem of Social Engineering

Expeditionary operations are about achieving complex political aims, like democracy, respect for human rights and international law, through the application of both military and civilian means. As such, the operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq are essentially tasks of social engineering within the field of international politics. This means that the operational planning will take the form of a predictive, or even a grand theory, of social science. Through the application of variables x and y, the outcome will be z. However, despite a long tradition of positivist, predictive theory within the academic fields of political science and international relations, the empirical tests of such theory have often proved disappointing. Even the greatest historical changes in recent times, like the end of the Cold War and the democratisation of Eastern Europe, have been missed by predictive theory. The reason is simple. Human relations and politics are incredibly complex and include too many variables to create predictive theory. Even with the empirical facts of history on the table, social scientists cannot agree upon explanations for past events, which results in the multitude of theories within the social sciences.

Does this mean that expeditionary operations involving nation building or reconstruction is a futile attempt to shake life into the grand theories of social science? Yes and No! Without proper respect for the difficulty in engineering complex outcomes like democracy and respect for human rights, these operations may well turn out to be rather dangerous endeavours. However, with enough respect for the complexities involved, there may be a way to operate with the greater understanding that is clearly needed within international responses to complex emergencies.

It will always be extremely difficult to plan campaigns and actions by military and civilian agencies that will create specific social outcomes or effects. Not only is it very hard to create the intended effects, but the possible unintentional and cascading effects also have to be included in the equation. With stability and democracy as the end state of the post-conflict operation, what types of operations should be involved and who should perform them? The complexity seems staggering.

The effects sought after in Iraq are complex and highly political, and the activities required to achieve them were, and still are, equally complex. A problem that is often discussed in relation to this is the risk of information overload and the need for effective databases that can handle large amounts of information without drowning the most important pieces. The concept of Effects-Based Operations is closely connected to modern developments within command and control technology and especially the idea of Network Centric Warfare (NCW) or Network Enabled Capabilities (NEC).

However, the technological challenges of expeditionary operations are relatively minor compared to the challenge of understanding effects at a human and political level. It is also of great importance to understand that the human and political challenges of the effects-based approach can never be solved by technical means. The effects of body searching female Muslims, or of organising a barbecue for the local leadership during Ramadan, are not something that will come out of technological advances and improved networks and databases, but out of human understanding. This type of understanding requires experts in local politics, history and culture, that can provide estimates on reactions at the strategic centre of gravity - the hearts and minds of the local population.

(c) Robert Egnell

Thoughts on the Referendum in Kenya

The Kenyan people have with resounding clarity rejected Kenya's draft constitution and thereby caused the leader of the "Yes" campaign, President Mwai Kibaki, a humiliating defeat. The new constitution would have introduced the post of a prime minister and provided greater rights for women, devolution and land reform. The president has therefore argued that the new constitution would be a modernising measure. In the eyes of an outsider there were, nevertheless, also number of not so modern reforms like banning same-sex marriages, and outlawing abortion - unless permitted by parliament. However, the key issue in the constitution is according to most analysts the introduction of the post of a prime minister. Although this was originally a move to devolve the powers of the presidency it was by the opposition seen as quite the opposite - an attempt to strengthen Kibaki's own position as president.

Mr Kibaki came to power in 2002 by promising to introduce free primary education, to deliver a new constitution and to end corruption. Although Kibaki has introduced free primary education, corruption is widely held to be widespread, also within the government. A voter, Yonah Opiyo, told Reuters "We were voting to show our frustrations, we were rebelling against the government's empty promises".

Not everyone voted with the difficult technical structures of the executive powers in mind. A Maasai man interviewed by the Citizen argued that the question of granting equal rights to women was enough to vote no. “No real man takes an order from a woman”. It therefore seems as if President Kibaki had the rather impossible task of facing his normal political opposition, a disillusioned electorate, as well as the conservative forces in the country.

So what is next? Can Kibaki remain in power after splitting the cabinet over the referendum and being humiliated by the defeat? The referendum was not a vote of confidence on the president’s three year-old administration. However, it is obvious that many Kenyans voted "No" as a vote of dissatisfaction with the work of the government. This surely means trouble for Kibaki, but there may be an even bigger problem for the ruling elite – that of true democracy!

Kenyan political analyst, Martin Kimani, argued before the election that “whatever the answer, what I am taking out of the situation is the extent to which Kenyans have become increasingly comfortable with the idea of competitive politics being decided at the ballot box.” Violence and reports of irregularities surrounding the referendum were very limited, and there have been no jailing of opposition politicians like in Uganda.

President Kibaki therefore rightly argued that the referendum was a big step in the democracy of Kenya and even in defeat stated that "I would like to congratulate all of you for participating peacefully in this historic occasion". This neverthless means that the political genie of democracy has been let out of the bottle. The Kenyan people are getting used to the democratic form of expression and they are likely to demand compliance. As Kimani argues, “the overwhelming sense is that politicians must fight to convince us of their case.” The people have now moreover tasted the sweetness of victory in the face of the ruling powers and are likely to want more. This is a new and very healthy reality that has been added to the game of Kenyan politics – and the old guard of Kenyan politics better watch their backs!

(c) Robert Egnell

Museveni - A New Robert Mugabe in the Making

Uganda is heading towards national elections again next year. At the centre of attention is the incumbent President Yoweri Museveni. After 19 years in power, of which the last 9 have been part of his two presidential terms, the old man is desperately trying to cling on to power. He has amended the constitution to allow him to run for another term in office, and is now spending most of his time campaigning around the country on populist issues. On an even more serious note, he has recently arrested the popular opposition politician Dr Kizza Besigye, charged with treason and rape. Dr Besigye, who since his return from four years in exile after the previous election, is the biggest political threat to Musevenis power. Does anyone recognize these methods? So why are we not hearing more about this dictator in the making?

Museveni is, just like Mugabe once was, one of the sweethearts of western governments. He is following the orders by the IMF and the economic development in Uganda seems to move steadily in the right direction. However, the almost 19 years in power have certainly changed Museveni, as being at the centre of power for that amount of time would change any man or woman. The BBC reports that the signs are not good, and that he has become less tolerant of opposing views.

Some examples provided by the BBC: “When in June 2004, the government lost a ruling in the Constitutional Court, the president appeared on state television and lambasted the judges. And when he used the presidential jet to fly his daughter to Germany to give birth, he stated that some Ugandan doctors could not be trusted. Museveni's former friend Eriya Kategaya - with whom he began the struggle together against Idi Amin in 1971 - openly opposed the campaign to amend the constitution. When he did so, he was booted out of cabinet along with two other colleagues - despite the fact the two had been in power together for 17 years.”

"I don't know what all the fuss is about," Janat Mukwaya, Uganda's minister of justice, told BBC’s Focus On Africa. "He is a very patient man with a big heart. He is still intelligent and capable and he will know when to quit." The justice minister also insisted that "anybody who has served his country should not be fettered just because of the term limits". This show of complete disrespect for the constitution by the minister of justice of course shows that the rule of law is a long way away for the young “democracy” of Uganda.

Some of the worst plagues of Africa are the “revolutionary heroes”. Maddened by revolutionary wars and years at the pinnacle of power they take whatever liberties they can. Their status as heroes means that the peoples of Africa do not intervene again them until it is too late. Of course, the more wazungus like me detest him, the more he is liked by his own people, fuelled by the populist anti-western notions. Again Robert Mugabe provides a good example. Say what you want about the courage and charisma of Robert Mugabe - he is still a terribly power hungry man who would rather let his entire people die than personally step down from power. We do not want another African leader like him.

A New Logo for the Swedish Defence Forces

It was today revealed by a major Swedish newspaper (SvD) that the Swedish Defence Forces are changing their logo. The traditional shield, including the royal crown and a sword has been removed in exchange for a more acceptable civilian variant. The new logo looks like the three crowns of the Swedish ice hockey team. In other words, all the terrible connotations towards the use of weaponry in the old logo is gone and now replaced with this business type logo. It is according to military HQ supposed to “better reflect the new tasks of the Swedish military”. Sure it was a long time since the defence used swords, but removing all military connotations from the logo… Come on!

Yes, it is true that the Swedish defence is going through a process of adjustment in order to better deal with the threats of the contemporary strategic context. This includes more of international peace operations, and assisting civil society in times of crisis. The Swedish Defence Research Institute is moreover supposed to start competing with civilian institutions and think tanks for civilian clients who may need a security or risk analysis. These changes take the Swedish defence a very long way from the traditional core function of large scale warfare in case of a Russian invasion, but let us not forget that defending the territorial integrity of Sweden is still part of the defence’s list of tasks. The changes are all important and necessary to keep the modern military up to date. But changing the logo really seems like taking things a bit too far.

Rather than a useful adjustment to a changing context, this is evidence of an enormously oversized military HQ, filled with officers with nothing better to do than come up with new populist schemes. That they also broke the law by not consulting with the National Herald , or the officer corps for that matter, hardly makes thing better. The defence is still very much a military organisation, and its professionals are trained to apply deadly force for the benefit of Swedish and international security. Let us therefore keep a logo that reflects this reality.