Here we have John Robb, a former USAF pilot in special operations who wrote a book called "
Brave New War," publishing a blog called "
Global Guerrilla." Robb is a student of 4th Generational Warfare (4GW), where the state loses its monopoly on war, and non-state actors engage in warfare, and where we see a return to a world of cultures, not merely states, engaged in conflict.
I'm quite concerned that writers such as Robb are not merely focused on 4GW as neutral bystanders, but are proponents of it, by first developing and writing about the techniques in books and papers, then publishing stories about current world events using a 4GW lens, thereby promoting 4GW which helps drive society into its use, leading to dramatic destabilization.
Here is a recent piece from Robb's blog...
SOCIAL SYSTEMS DISRUPTIONhttp://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2009/11/social-systems-disruption.html
For small groups of guerrillas, the shift in method towards the disruption of critical infrastructure has been fairly spectacular.* Not only have the physical results of this methodology been noteworthy, its also been able to generate social and economic rewards of a similar magnitude.
For example, Nigeria's
MEND (coordinated by innovator, and global guerrillas reader, Henry Okah) was able to disrupt the production of one million barrels a day of oil for years with relatively few attacks/people, and little money. Given that this production was light sweet crude and the tightness of the global oil markets (little slack), it's very likely that this disruption played a huge part in the rise of oil to $150 a barrel, which in turn forced the collapse of our fragile (akin to a termite, aka parasite, ridden structure) financial system in 2008. This success has forced the Nigerian government to capitulate and negotiate with the group. Another example has been the rise of India's
Naxalites, who through physical systems disruption (a process of innovative disconnection called Bandhs) has been able to exert economic and social control
over nearly a quarter of India.
However, once you get over the mental leap required to adopt physical systems disruption, it's fairly straight forward. From selection of targets (systempunkts) to the methodology of attack, the process is relatively scientific/tangible (although the results can be goosed with creativity/art). This isn't the case with the disruption of social systems/networks. The process required to
successfully disrupt social networks is very murky -- so much so that attempting it is often akin to playing horseshoes with live hand grenades. Classically, attempts at social system disruption are what we typically term terrorism. Terrorist methodology typically falls into following two categories (you can split the hair to get more, but why?):
- Symbolic. Attacks on people or places that hold high social or political value to create shock and over reaction. For example, the assassination of Pakistan's Bhutto or the attack on Iraq's golden mosque. Note that both failed to yield the desired result.
- Blood and guts. Attacks on the general population. Maximal body count to create maximal shock. Many, many examples. Fortunately, although it hasn't caused attacks to cease, this method of attack suffers accelerating diminishing returns due to desensitization.
Due to gross imprecision, fortunately, both techniques have historically been very, very weak in terms of measurable returns on effort and improvements in that attacking groups freedom of action/movement. In short, they are more likely to fail than succeed in achieving the disruption desired (usually via overreaction). The question is (for those interested in military and warfare theory): has, or will, an alternative methods emerge? I think so, and if so they will crowd out ineffective competitors and inevitably become the dominant strategies for small groups. What do you think?
Latest images Search KDR Register Log in 
