Telegraph-General Lord Richards: “The West is not thinking strategically about the Ukraine war. The former head of the British Army says the Government is leading a ‘let’s see how it goes strategy’ through a lack of decisiveness… Grand strategy is the stuff of great power. It is the generation, organisation and application of immense means in pursuit of high strategic aims. There was a time when the conduct of grand strategy was such a second nature for Britain’s elite that it did not even have a name… Both president George W Bush and prime minister Tony Blair had a relatively clear strategy for Iraq in 2003, but their tactics were (not for the first time) hopelessly flawed… As Commander of the International Security Assistance Force, like my US successors, I was forced to repeatedly question both Nato and UK strategy and tactics in Afghanistan but with little effect. Despite accepting the logic of my arguments, politicians back in Washington, London and elsewhere never took “ownership” of the campaign with the profound consequence that ends, ways and means were never in sync.
Last summer the campaign reached its strategic denouement and a chaotic withdrawal. Even then political leaders focused on, and at times seemed to revel in, a tactical withdrawal ignoring the hard truth – complete strategic failure. The withdrawal was only possible with the cooperation of an “enemy” who had killed and maimed thousands of Allied soldiers and tens of thousands of innocent civilians. Good strategy is about hard choices: In 2011, as Chief of the UK Defence Staff, I disagreed with Prime Minister David Cameron on the Libya strategy. It is on the public record that I was implacably opposed to regime change because of the long-term strategic consequences for a country that was inherently unstable. Like many politicians, both Cameron and French president Nicholas Sarkozy, helped by a strategically detached president Obama, confused politics, strategy and tactics. They were overly focused on the short–term and the tactical, and their respective political needs to be seen as the heroic victors of a war. Good strategy is about hard choices. As Chief of Defence Staff, my outstanding team devised a coherent Syria strategy which independent experts agreed had a good chance of leading to a successful strategic outcome. Once again, political leaders were not prepared to align ends, ways and means with Washington going as far as to say that `the General’s plan is more than the market can bear.’ What `market?’ Consequently, my advice was to let Assad win and quickly and to stop encouraging and supplying opposition groups with insufficient support to ensure their success. The price in deaths, ruined lives and destroyed cities would be too huge and a massive strategic setback for the West. Russia was already sensing an opportunity and so it proved. The West does not seem to know what the aims of the Ukraine should be… A similar lack of a coherent strategy is now apparent in Ukraine. There is, at best, what might be termed incremental strategy with again no early and decisive synchronisation of ends, ways and means. It is a `let’s see how it goes’ `strategy,’ in other words not really strategy at all. There is still little idea in London, Washington or elsewhere how `we’ want the war to pan out, or what sort of Russia we are seeking to shape, especially on the vital long-term issue of relations with China… Strategy is about choices and the more choices one needs to make to balance the ends, ways and means when pursuing the national interest, the more informed they need to be.
That means big clear thinking about big issues and a much better understanding of how to plausibly achieve our goals. This is a failing across government. It needs sorting out urgently if the UK is to successfully navigate its way through the perilous political, economic and military challenges ahead. On appointment, all ministers should attend an intensive tailored course on strategy, as must senior officials. And the organisation that should serve as HMG’s strategic conscience and executive branch – the strengthened staff of a more dominant National Security Council – must themselves be properly trained and qualified in the requisite skills. Importantly, as well as becoming strategy experts, they must have the moral courage robustly to speak truth unto power.”
The West is not thinking strategically about the Ukraine war (telegraph.co.uk)
