Rough Road Ahead

The fog of war shows no signs of lifting.  Instead of throwing on our headlights and inching forward until the road clears, security professionals are doing their best to draw a new road map that will offer clear direction based on the measurements of morality and justice.  Moral cartography was the theme of the day at the Institute for National Security (INSS) conference on urban warfare here in Tel Aviv, Israel. 

If there was consensus among the presenters it was that the rules must be changed.  We are traversing terrain for which all the rules of the road harken back to the times of conventional warfare.  Armies fighting armies in uniform with internationally understood just war precepts.  The onset of terrorists and insurgents fighting in civilian clothing amongst an innocent civilian population proves that the rules of engagement have not adapted to the times.  General Stanley McChrystal (Ret.) reminded the audience that urban warfare is not a unique or new phenomenon, but our missions in these urban areas require overcoming evolving challenges.  This will only worsen as the world becomes more and more urbanized.

The second consensus of the day involved the idea of balance.  We must find the balance between the security of our soldiers and protecting the lives of the enemy’s civilians.  Major General Amos Yadlin described the question of what to do as a tragic dilemma between action and inaction.  Decision makers are pulled between two polls, at one end the willingness to harm civilians in order to hit terrorists and protect our citizens, and on the other allowing terrorists to escape for fear of harming civilians. 

General McChrystal also spoke of balance and what he called the paradox of urban warfare.  He described the recent wars in Afghanistan and in Iraq as struggles for the support of the people.  The civilians there had a choice between supporting insurgents and the security forces.  In order to win their support, the forces had to balance being credible and capable in their efforts to increase security with demonstrating care and concern for the innocent population.  Insurgents try to tip this balance, which is why military conduct in urban areas requires great discipline.  In this way fighting ethically is strategic, but both McChrystal and Yadlin emphasized that moral conduct is equally philosophical. 

In keeping with the discussion of balance, Major General Yadlin posed the question, to whom are we more obliged, our own soldiers or the enemy’s civilians?  Professor David Enoch called upon us to remember that the innocents on the opposing side are no less innocent as the ones on our side.  He argued that we must demonstrate a willingness to accept casualties of soldiers on our side in order to save civilians on the other side.  McChrystal too spoke of the willingness to sacrifice stating that it would go a long way in demonstrating the importance of mission. 

The key to ethical conduct in urban warfare and counterterrorism is to let moral principles guide strategy and tactics so as both to minimize the loss of life and God willing justify the losses that are unavoidable.  Fighting terrorists and insurgents ethically is an ongoing challenge, one made especially difficult by the lack of roadmap.  As we prepared to inch forward through the ethical fog, Professor Enoch left us with a sobering but important point, that in war the price is paid in blood.  


Today a new definition is needed to understand what it means to fight justly in these irregular times, because judging from the past stretch of road, there are curves ahead.