A Better Peace: The War Room Podcast

It's natural to ask what can we gain from this 'old war'? ... You can read [history] in a book, but when you actually walk the field, it rams home into your head and stays there In an earlier episode of A BETTER PEACE, Learning Strategy by Walking the Ground, Andrew Hill and Len Fullenkamp talked about the value of staff rides. In this follow-up discussion, Christian Keller and Jacqueline E. Whitt focus in on battlefield staff rides covering the U.S. Civil War. Carlisle, Pennsylvania is near several key Civil War battles, including Gettysburg and Antietam, now preserved as historical sites administered by the U.S. National Park Service. These sites allow visitors to visualize the stories of the battle and analyze the tactical and strategic decisions made by leaders on both the Union and Confederate sides. Christian and Jacqueline discuss the best way to approach visiting a Civil War battlefield to get the most out of the experience -- preparing for the visit through reading and study; walking the ground; and post-visit reflection.     Christian Keller is Professor of History at the U.S. Army War College. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or the Department of Defense. Photo: Battlefield cannons arrayed at Antietam National Battlefield Memorial. Photo Credit: Original photo uncredited from Pxhere.com, public domain. Modified by Tom Galvin.

'Is Remote Warfare Cheaper?' 'So that's a really hard question to answer. ... We actually have very little data' A BETTER PEACE explores the implications of NATO members' ongoing shift away from large-scale coalition operations to smaller-scale operations that rely primarily on local forces, militias, or other groups supported by Western resources, training, and small numbers of personnel (i.e., "remote warfare").  While the shift appears to allow NATO partners to manage risk and limit their boots on the ground, the longer-term strategic implications and the potential effects on preparedness for conventional warfare are debatable. Additionally, there are persistent myths about remote operations being 'cleaner' or 'cheaper' forms of warfare. Are they true? Or are they merely transferring more risk and cost? Addressing these topics are special guest Emily Knowles of the Oxford Research Group's Remote Warfare Program and A BETTER PEACE Editor Jacqueline E. Whitt.     Emily Knowles is Program Director of the Oxford Research Group's Remote Warfare Program. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Photo: U.S. Army Sgt. Kevin Murphy (right) instructs Iraqi army soldiers on individual movement techniques during a class at the Ghuzlani Warrior Training Center, Iraq, in 2011. Photo Credit: Sergeant Shawn Miller, United States Army

At the end of the day, what Putin really wants to re-structure European relationships [from the EU's] rules-based Europe towards a [transactionally-based] Great Power Europe A BETTER PEACE presents "Russia, Great Power Competition, & Politics of Hybrid War" where Mitchell Orenstein and Darrell Driver discuss the history of great power dynamics and interests in Europe before the European Union, and lens that history as a lens to understand Russian interests and motivations. How does the current European structure disadvantage Russia? What is Russia's alternative vision and how do her current actions (e.g., hybrid warfare) and policies enable that vision? How does this affect nations sandwiched between Russia and the western powers? Therefore, what are options for the U.S.?   Mitchell Orenstein is Professor of Russian and East European Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Darrell Driver is the Director of European Studies at the U.S. Army War College and a colonel in the U.S. Army. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Photo: A Russian military honor guard welcomes the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during a 2009 wreath-laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Moscow, Russia. Photo Credit: U.S. Navy photo/MC1 Chad J. McNeeley

What if we spent one day on Herodotus, one day on Thucydides, and one day on Xenophon [at the War College]? Students with a basic foundation of ancient military history are likely to know about Thucydides and his accounts of the Peloponnesian War from both strategic and operational perspectives. But it would be an oversight to stop there, as there were other important war historians in antiquity. This episode in A BETTER PEACE's Great Strategists series explores two of them -- Herodotus, who wrote about the rise of the Persian Empire, and Xenophon, who fought in Cyrus the Younger's latter campaign to capture the Persian throne. Herodotus became known as the Father of History but according to our guest speaker Rob Farley, his methods would likely not pass muster in contemporary historian circles. Yet over the centuries that followed, his insights on how Xerxes the Great built his Army were significant and relevant to military leaders. Xenophon, as mercenary and soldier, provided rich details into the battles he fought and the manners in which ancient militaries were led and managed. Together with Thucydides, these writers and thinkers provide a great canon to understand the ancient ways of war. A BETTER PEACE editor Jacqueline E. Whitt moderates.     Rob Farley is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Kentucky and Visiting Professor at the U.S. Army War College. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Image: Xenophon and the Ten Thousand coming in sight of the sea (published 1881 in the Illustrated History of the World, public domain)

Armed conflict is a deadly business. We in the military profession have a moral obligation to examine what works and what doesn't work Traditional lists of prominent and successful strategic leaders are often biased toward celebrated historical figures. Of course, such figures were both heroes (to their own people) and villains (to the enemy) all at once. In the introductory essay to the Great Captains series, Jacqueline Whitt and Tom Galvin said that the podcasts would not constitute "hero worship," but instead allow listeners "to glean lessons about the great captains’ approaches to the problems of war and warfare and their understanding of the military art." Therefore, to be fair and complete, such a series must necessarily consider those that history would (and should) treat as villains. The purposes are to understand their motivations, place their actions in context, analyze the lasting impacts, and ultimately enable better preparation to face a similar leader in future. It is in this spirit that WAR ROOM presents a unique look at a most controversial figure, Osama bin Laden, who according to U.S. Army War College Professor Sparky Anderson, was successful at building and sustaining a grass-roots mobilization, understanding and adapting to the operational environment, and ultimately enabling a significant change in the character of war. Bin Laden's actions, beginning at Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, would eventually contribute to the prominence of non-state actors on the global stage. What can we learn from this story? The insights and implications are many, including the importance of knowing thy enemy. A BETTER PEACE Editor Jacqueline E. Whitt moderates.     Sparky Anderson is Professor of Strategy, Operations, and Plans at the U.S. Army War College and a colonel in the U.S. Army. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Photo: A guide in a Herat, Afghanistan war museum describes a fight during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan depicted in a diorama. Photo Credit: REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi (AFGHANISTAN SOCIETY)

As the 'global' commander, he oversees all of the Army including the Army Air Corps in all of the theaters in World War II In this episode in our Great Captains series, we profile an officer whose extraordinary achievements depart slightly from those typical associated with the term 'great captains' as described by Napoleon. George Catlett Marshall Jr. was by any measure a tremendous strategic leader who presided over the U.S.'s national war effort in World War II and the subsequent reconstruction of Europe through the "Marshall Plan." Facing the need to rapidly grow the Army after 1939, Marshall leveraged his strong interpersonal relationships within the military and with Congress to get the necessary resources and support. Marshall was also renowned for speaking truth to power. Yet when the President made a decision that Marshall disagreed with, Marshall complied with all his energy. Despite not having served as a field army commander, U.S. Army War College Professor Bill Johnsen makes the case that George Marshall has earned the title of 'great captain.' A BETTER PEACE editor Jacqueline E. Whitt moderates.     Bill Johnsen is Professor of Military History and Strategy at the U.S. Army War College. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Photo: Official U.S. Army portrait, public domain

Elections in Nigeria are not about issues. They are about personality and personal and ethnic alliances A BETTER PEACE welcomes Ambassador John Campbell to the studio to discuss the upcoming Nigerian elections and describe the very complex political and social landscape in Nigeria. Contrary to the mythical 'north-south' divide, Nigeria comprises about 350 different ethnic groups and languages such that being Muslim or Christian is just one differentiating factor. With 20,000 candidates vying for political office on the 16th of February, this weekend could signal a significant change in direction for the country.     John Campbell is the Ralph Bunche Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies at the Council of Foreign Relations. Chris Wyatt is a colonel in the U.S. Army and Director of African Studies at the U.S. Army War College. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers are do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Image: Map of Nigeria from the United Nations, public domain. Image composed by Tom Galvin

If Moldova is never in the news, I doubt policy makers are ever really thinking about Moldova If you were a news editor, which story would you run first -- a moderate earthquake in Italy or a larger earthquake in Sri Lanka? In the U.S., the Italian earthquake would be more likely due to the connections between the U.S. and Italy at both national and societal levels. According to Amanda Cronkhite, post-doctoral fellow at the U.S. Army War College, the newsworthiness of a story is often measured by factors unrelated to the story itself. For this podcast, the focus is on the story's location and how it influences how long a story may run or whether the story will run at all (and where). To what extent does this affect the way people follow the news? A BETTER PEACE Editor Jacqueline E. Whitt moderates.     Amanda Cronkhite is a post-doctoral fellow at the U.S. Army War College. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Photo: Pixabay, via Pexels.com. Creative Commons license.

Don't love the military too much, and don't love the other institutions too little It is well-known that poll after poll shows the military ranks as the most trusted institution in the U.S. And, it is equally known that the opposite was true a mere few decades ago. The numbers belie the persistent tensions that exist between U.S. society and its military, tensions that have been tempered through long-standing civil-military norms. Where did these norms come from, and do they suggest that the comtemporary military's positive esteem is on shaky ground? A BETTER PEACE welcomes U.S. Army War College professor Marybeth Ulrich to discuss principles of civil-military relations as practiced in the U.S. and how they help explain U.S. society's high regard for its armed forces ... at least for now. A BETTER PEACE Editor Jacqueline E. Whitt moderates.     Marybeth Ulrich is Professor of Government and the General Maxwell D. Taylor Chair of the Profession of Arms at the U.S. Army War College. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense.

The approach that the government often takes to acquisition of [intellectual property] rights is something that's completely anathema to working with tech companies Managing and regulating intellectual property (IP) rights is central to the functioning of a working economy. The intellectual work behind the development of new products, publications, or innovative ideas is vital and must be protected in some way. Hence, governments establish both legal frameworks and norms designed to provide this protection. However, determining who owns what and why has been a dynamic process since IP rights were codified and systematized in the 20th century. And there are many challenges raised with respect to ideas that contribute to capabilities vital to national security. A BETTER PEACE welcomes Rob Farley, a researcher in the area of intellectual property, to discuss the challenges of IP in the contemporary competitive global environment and what they mean to the U.S. A BETTER PEACE Editor Jacqueline E. Whitt moderates.     Rob Farley is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Kentucky and Visiting Professor at the U.S. Army War College. Jacqueline E. Whitt is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Army War College and the Editor of A BETTER PEACE. The views expressed in this presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army, or Department of Defense. Photo Credit: U.S. Army Photo, public domain.