israel

Choosing to Lose

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Middle East, Uncategorized , , , ,

Unless we’re willing to inflict enormous pain on those we were supposed to help, the Iranian people, or put boots on the ground, or some combination of the two, we have a lost war with the Iranian theocracy. Awishy-washy nuclear deal, akin to, but maybe not as good as the one Obama negotiated, will end our involvement.

This conclusion leaves our Gulf allies in a precarious situation. Iran illustrated how it can hit their infrastructure anytime with rockets and drones. Closing the Strait of Hormuz or changing tolls remains subject to Iran’s whims. Spending billions on this outcome, we expected much better. Faith in America’s ability to protect our friends and allies is now questionable.

A recent feel-good story in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) shows both a possible path to right the war’s trend and exposes the lack of proper action that put us in this situation in the first place. Going into the war, the different radars that alert troops to incoming drones and missiles, and the interceptors used to shoot them down, didn’t talk to one another. This situation required a large number of personnel to monitor many monitors. This lack of integration may have contributed to the loss of six soldiers in Kuwait.

On a trip to Europe. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll became aware of the incompatibility issue and how the Ukrainians resolved it using proper software. The secretary got the Dense Contractors and bureaucrats to waive objections, and the engineers got together and came up with a Google Maps-type single screen, allowing for the proper response to any threat. After demonstrating it worked, we are now achieving the needed integration.

While we have now solved a major battlefield problem, it raises the question: why wasn’t it done before we went to war? Didn’t we wargame before we committed? Drone warfare has been a key feature of the Ukraine war for years. We’re just now finding out how they handle them. We actually reverse-engineered the key Iranian drone for our use, so we should know all about them. Yet we lack drone dominance to control the area.

The Administration and Iran Hawks can loudly claim success in the war all they want, but the facts on the ground say otherwise. Giving statistics on how many ships we sunk, or bombs we dropped, sounds reminiscent of the Vietnam War body counts. If we sunk their Navy, why are we looking for mines in the Strait, and why are so few ships risking leaving? Hawks such as Condoleezza Rice can claim, “It has achieved enough to produce a far better Middle East.”

Our Gulf friends and allies turning to the Ukrainians for answers to Iran’s drone and rocket capabilities threatening them doesn’t sound like they feel the area is “more stable.” Can we assure them of safe passage of the Strait, now and into the future? The Strait was open before the war. How are they better off?

Continue reading →

Crossroads

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Middle East, Uncategorized , , , ,

Forgoing his son’s wedding, President Trump is in Washington promising to inform us of a decisive next move in the Iranian War. With the “ceasefire in effect for about a month, at the beginning of May, the Wall Street Journal editorialized that the administration must successfully finish the War. I agreed, but in an unpublished letter to the editor, I pointed out the changes needed, or we would fail:

To: WSJ letters to the editor

      Trump’s resolve on Iran at 60 Days.”

       The Journal’s editorial board is correct in stating that Trump’s abandonment of the War is unpalatable. However, this ignores the elephant in the room: the failure, from the start, to set clear goals, develop a strategy, and equip the military with the tools to achieve them. We attacked without the ‘why’ and ‘how’ being determined. We failed to anticipate the enemy’s likely countermeasures. Closing the Strait of Hormuz, and the widespread use of drones and rockets against our friends and us, weren’t anticipated and countered. Our lack of offensive and defensive drone capacity, or even of mine sweeping, shows a lack of real preparation.  

If we fail to rectify these shortcomings, dragging out an unfocused war will end with the same untrustworthy fanatics in control in Iran. The taste of defeat and humiliation will not only remain foul but will be much more costly.

It will likely take replacing the current ineffective military command with new, knowledgeable, and imaginative leadership to put a workable plan into action. With help from others, such as Ukraine and the Kurds, to fill in the gaps, there is still time to win this War, but not without recognizing how we went wrong in the first place.  Dave Davis, Phoenix, AZ 

If Trump decides to escalate from here, what visible signs will there be to hope for success? Some indication of armed revolt or turning of existing military units within Iran. Bombing and the blockade by themselves don’t directly threaten the ruling Iranian Regime. One has only to look at Cuba, where the people are living with next to nothing, and still the communists are in charge. The people can’t shoot back.

Conversely, a successful armed uprising is an existential threat. The Revolutionary Guard Corps. (IRGC) has no choice but to divert troops and resources to quickly suppress the uprising or ultimately face being crushed. However, moving to contain the revolt exposes the IRGC to the overwhelming U.S. and Israeli air power.

Continue reading →

Watershed Week

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

A watershed moment for Donald Trump’s second term, that’s what we may say in retrospect of this past week. Donald Trump’s two significant undertakings this time around, the Iran war and massive tariffs, are floundering. The war stalemate appears to only lead to pain for those we supposedly set out to help. The non-regime people of Iran, Israel, and our Gulf allies would benefit from the removal of the religious fanatics making existential threats far and wide. Instead, we’re dealing with a regime apparently more fanatical than the one featuring those we killed.

So long as both sides greatly restrict shipping through the Straits of Hormuz, neither the Gulf States nor Iran can export Oil, natural gas, or fertilizer, or receive needed imports. The pain is spreading to energy and fertilizer importers worldwide. U.S. farmers are already complaining about the lack of affordable fertilizer. Airlines from Europe to Australia are warning about an impending jet fuel shortage.

This situation couldn’t be what the Trump administration foresaw when they, along with Israel, undertook the latest attack on Iran. Their goals are still unclear. As I’ve pointed out, without a clear objective and a strategy to gain it, an unfocused, poorly planned effort, even if backed by massive forces, can fail.

Putin’s Ukraine invasion should’ve been a cautionary tale. In both wars, the attackers failed to appreciate their opponents’ ability to resist and anticipate possible reactions. The nimble and imaginative Ukrainians smashed the ponderous Russian columns. Years later, the stalemate continues. Of course, Donald Trump has called Putin a “Genius.”

It boggles the mind to think our leaders were unaware of the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz and the ability of Iranian drones, anti-ship rockets, mines, and small, swift boats to close it. Yet, here we are.

Both sides claim the stalemate favors them. Only one can be right. The U.S. believes its blockade will severely cripple Iran’s economy. No oil going out or goods coming in will cause oil fields to shut down and shortages of everything.

Continue reading →

Anatomy of a Failure

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, The Middle East, Uncategorized , , , ,

We’ve ceased our offense against Iran, while the same Regime controls the vital Strait of Hormuz. Our Gulf allies are increasingly at the mercy of this ruthless gang. Israel is off bombing Hezbollah in Lebanon, trying to salvage something from this fiasco. Our other allies in Europe and Asia wonder why they’re suffering from this mess when nobody asked them. Yet the Trump administration expects them to clean it up.

How did the most powerful nation on earth end up behind the eight-ball? By breaking every rule for success. Presumably, we had an objective. We had already bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities, putting that program back, maybe for years. We controlled the skies over that nation. Having already mowed their capabilities, there is no need to mow again now.

\What was present was an Iran in dire straits. Sanctions, mismanagement of water resources, and the economy had sparked mass protests. The vast majority of Iranians demanded change. Other than those directly benefiting from the Regime, support evaporated. The Mullahs had never been in a weaker position. What was here was the chance to free the people to form a government that didn’t threaten their neighbors.

The Trump administration took notice. The President told the Iranian protesters we had their back. No question what our goal was, toppling the Regime. We started sending our forces to the area. The head Mullah and many of the key players in his government were killed from the air.

In the meantime, the Iranian government slaughtered in excess of 40,000 protesters. The streets went quiet. This result shouldn’t surprise anyone. We’ve seen this movie many times before. Ruthless dictatorial governments use their monopoly of weapons to trounce unarmed protestors. No matter how bad the government is, it stays in power because nobody can shoot back. Cubans have lived at the subsistence level for decades. Does it even have an economy? Still, the communists persist.

Oil-rich Venezuela has followed the same path. When faced with losing power, there is no limit to the pain the absolute rulers will inflict on their defenseless citizenry. The picture of an unarmed Tiananmen Square protester standing in front of massive tanks illustrates the imbalance.

The only successful revolutions in history took place where armed people existed from the start, or military units refused to fire on the people, and changed sides. Imagine how poorly our forefathers would’ve fared if only the redcoats had arms. Instead, we turned them back at Lexington and Concord. To have a “shot heard round the world, ” you have to have a gun. The minutemen had guns and knew how to use them. The rest is history.

Other revolutions, such as the French and Russian, saw military units refuse to fire on the people and turn against their rulers. No matter how great the air superiority, only armed resistance on the ground can drive out the despots.

Continue reading →

Remember the “Horns”

Dave Davis Commentary, Policy, Uncategorized , , , ,

War is an awful business. Once started, all sorts of things can go wrong. That’s why no one should ever go into it lightly. Yet, there are circumstances where you come to the conclusion you have no real choice but to attack.

Before you move, those who studied war, from Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, to B.H. Liddell Hart cautioned that you need a clear objective—one that eliminates the problem or problems causing your decision to go to war. In the present case, the administration determined that as long as the mullahs ruled Iran, we faced intolerable threats, from nuclear war, attacks by Iran or its allies on others in the Mideast, or disruption of major trade routes.

The timing seems right. Thanks to mainly Israeli actions, we control the air over Iran. Sanctions and the Mullahs’ mismanagement have weakened the Iranian economy to a point where businesspeople have joined the young in longing for change.

Having determined that the mullahs in power pose an existential threat, anything short of regime change won’t solve the problems. The mullahs must go.

With the objective in place, what’s our strategy for success? We pay all those military people with all those medals and ribbons to show us the path to victory. Having studied the art of war all their lives, they should know what works and what to avoid.

I didn’t spend a lifetime in the military, but I did go to a military school, where our dedicated commandant taught the required military science courses. We studied what worked, or didn’t work, throughout the ages. Using your superior numbers or resources to overpower, frankly, is wasteful and may result in a “Pyrrhic victory,” named after the King who lost so much in winning that he couldn’t continue his war against the Romans.

Continue reading →