The Will to Prevail

Mark Steyn did a nice piece a while back (May 2004) about what it will take to defeat our enemies. And why the language we use matters.

Let us start with what it will take to defeat our enemies.

We are in a guerilla war. That is the enemy does not consist of regular units with a chain of command but consists of irregular units, dispersed in the population, with no chain of command. Insurgencies do not have a high success rate (take the IRA, please) but they are painful and disruptive. The most notable aspect of a guerilla war is that they generally last a long time.

B.H.L. Hart in his classic book "Strategy" discusses this aspect. Guerillas are most often drawn from the criminal classes of society. Thus it is no accident that Saddam let all the criminals out of jail when he saw he was going down. He was preparing for the next phase of the war. France had a guerilla problem for 20 to 30 years post WW2 due to the underground army raised to attack Hitler's armies in France. However, the most instructive example is Spain. In Spain the Napoleon's armies were defeated by the whole country rising up in guerilla warfare. It was estimated that Napoleon's armies were losing 100 men a day to the guerillas. Far more than were lost in the battles against Wellington. However, it came at a price that is still being paid. The ETA movement, well known for its current bombing campaign in Spain, is a remnant of the Napoleonic Wars. The tail from that war is about 200 years and still going.

I think this war will be no different. Once all the state supporters of the guerillas have been defeated and peace and harmony reigns among nations, the disaffected will still cling to the banner of armed jihad. There will be a very long tail. And we are not even at the tail. Many nations are still supporting the guerillas.

Let me quote from the Steyn piece because I think it goes to the heart of the matter:

Goh Chok Tong, the prime minister of Singapore, was in Washington the other day and summed it up very well: ''The key issue is no longer WMD or even the role of the U.N. The central issue is America's credibility and will to prevail.'' In Britain, they used to say that the Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton — i.e., it was thanks to the fierce resolve inculcated by an English education. The war on terror will be lost in the talking shops of Washington — i.e., it will be thanks to the lack of resolve inculcated by excessive exposure to blow-dried pundits and Senate hearings. The war now has two fronts. In Iraq, the glass is half-full. In Washington, it's half-empty, and draining fast.

This war is not a test of power. You rarely defeat a super power by a head to head contest. This war is a test of wills. Which side can outlast the other.

Now that brings us to the language question. Why is the language we use so important? In a word: Morale. The word is derrived from the word moral. There is a reason for this. It is the justness of the cause that sustains when things go bad. Of course in warfare things always go bad. There is a reason medics are assigned to units in the field. In a guerilla war the most important component of a nations power is not the units in the field, as important as they are. The most important component is the home front and its will to prevail.

Let me refer back to the Steyn piece:

We always come back to that strong horse/weak horse thing. But the point to remember is that Osama bin Laden talked about who was seen as the strong horse: It's a perception issue. America may be, technically, the strong horse but, thanks to its press and its political class, the administration is showing dangerous signs of climbing into the rear end of the weak-horse burlesque suit.

I think some one on the blogs came up with the antidote. The enemy needs to be refered to as paramilitary death squads. Not insurgents, guerillas, militants, or even militia. Paramilitary death squads.

Because in a very long war words matter.

Either we have a stomach for this or we start studying sharia and plan to live under a caliph. If we intend to prevail we must buck up our morale not undermine it. In fact we must undermine the morale of the enemy. We must show him by words and deeds that he has no chance.

Update: 02:58z 7 August 2005

Ralph Peters discusses the topic in a recent column.

August 4, 2005 -- IN Iraq yesterday a roadside bomb killed 14 Marines. Two days earlier, six Marines from the same outfit were ambushed and killed. Yet those Marines were not the terrorists' primary target.

You were.

Our enemies know the Marines won't quit. But they hope you will.

Update: 12:45z 7 August 2005

I found the "paramilitary death squads" quote. It was one of the last things written by Steve Vincent:

Words matter. Words convey moral clarity. Without moral clarity, we will not succeed in Iraq. That is why the terms the press uses to cover this conflict are so vital. For example, take the word "“guerillas."” As you noted, mainstream media sources like the New York Times often use the terms "insurgents" or "“guerillas"” to describe the Sunni Triangle gunmen, as if these murderous thugs represented a traditional national liberation movement. But when the Times reports on similar groups of masked reactionary killers operating in Latin American countries, they utilize the phrase "paramilitary death squads."” Same murderers, different designations. Yet of the two, "insurgents" —and especially "“guerillas" —has a claim on our sympathies that "paramilitaries?” lacks. This is not semantics: imagine if the media routinely called the Sunni Triangle gunmen "right wing paramilitary death squads." Not only would the description be more accurate, but it would offer the American public a clear idea of the enemy in Iraq. And that, in turn, would bolster public attitudes toward the war.

Let me note in passing that Steve was killed by a paramilitary death squad that abducted him and then put five bullets in him and wounded his translator.

Words matter.

Update: 12:45z 7 August 2005

Roger Simon asks where are the stories of our heros in the MSM? There are some answers in the comments.