Waging New Cold Wars: Gaining Advantage in Great Power Competition
Speaker: Ehlers, R. (JMark Services)
Date: 22 January 2021
Speaker Session Summary
SMA hosted a speaker session, presented by Dr. Robert Ehlers (JMark Services, Inc.), as a part of its new SMA IIJO Speaker Series.
Dr. Ehlers began by presenting the six goals of his presentation: 1) To foster thinking and action for informational aspects of great power rivalry (GPR), 2) to review key aspects of the Cold War experience that could be applied to modern-day GPR, 3) to encourage consideration of how these large-order factors apply to each member of the audience, 4) to provoke thought about how to exploit Chinese and Russian weaknesses in their messaging, 5) to export these thoughts to action in both the near-term and the long-term, and 6) to improve alignment and organizational structure and processes.
Dr. Ehlers then shifted his focus to the Cold War. He stated that the Cold War was a forty-five-year, information-dense, complex conflict. Information was always at the center of this conflict, and many audiences were targeted. Whichever side was better at attracting these audiences over time gained advantage over time in the conflict. He added that at its root, the Cold War was an ideological and philosophical contest for global primacy—both of which are fundamentally about information. The Cold War was also a long, messy “wrestling match” full of initiative shifts, Dr. Ehlers stated. Many military activities occurred—all of which supported the information aspect of PMESII (political, military, economic, social, infrastructure, and information). Furthermore, the Cold War involved a daily display and test of which “system” was superior, Dr. Ehlers explained, and this is what audiences focused on every day—Which nation kept its rhetoric and reality more well-aligned? A key measure of effectiveness of messaging during the Cold War was loyalty of global audiences to one nation’s system, and the key indicators were the views and realignments of audiences.
Next, Dr. Ehlers focused on a set of high-level dynamics that informed how each side performed during the Cold War. Unity of purpose is key. Americans need to be fundamentally united in their sense of purpose, and despite the US’s lack of unity right now, its population will eventually reunite, Dr. Ehlers argued. He also stressed the importance of meta-narratives and messages and proposed a meta-narrative for the present moment: “The United States, despite its imperfections, has greater freedom, prosperity, and equality of opportunity than any other great power, and its ‘arc of improvement’ has been notably superior.” He then posed a series of questions to help the US frame this meta-narrative in its messaging, including, “Is the US more or less free than the RF and PRC? Does this matter?” and “Do people have greater opportunity in the US than they would there?” Dr. Ehlers also emphasized the importance of unity of effort. Departments and agencies within the US government (USG) should coordinate, as should USG and allied and partner governments, Dr. Ehlers argued. During the Cold War, the entirety of the USG effort supported its meta-narrative. Dr. Ehlers stressed that the same must occur now.
GPR is different kind of fight that should be won without fighting, Dr. Ehlers stated next. The military is generally in a supporting but not visible role. Moreover, diplomats need to focus on what matters most. There are rarely any winners in great power wars, and there are never any informationally-inept winners, according to Dr. Ehlers. He then stressed the importance of innovation in winning the long struggle. One must think seriously about how to get their part of an effort integrated into standing planning groups for each major audience. How do you integrate and coordinate these efforts and come back to the problem with a new set of narratives and messages? Dr. Ehlers also advised that 1) “older” organizations make room for newer ones that are more appropriate for the modern world; 2) the USG engages with numerous target audiences in parallel; and 3) the USG allows for risk, failure, feedback, and learning.
Dr. Ehlers stated that patience is key in GPR as well. It is a long wrestling match. Setbacks and lengthy periods of disadvantage are normal, and steadiness of purpose, meta-narrative, and supporting narratives are vital. In a multiplicity of audiences, there is a long time horizon to influence, Dr. Ehlers added. A message projected to one will be received by all, which is important to keep in mind as well. Finally, the USG must be persistent, according to Dr. Ehlers. It must stay focused enough and develop enough expertise to get good at this great power conflict. He emphasized that if the conflict is generational, expertise should be too, and that education and training are vital to success.
Dr. Ehlers concluded by providing some notes on US adversaries. He stated that China and Russia are far from infallible; they are alienating many countries and audiences. Their meta-narratives and narratives—China’s, in particular—are wearing thin. Moreover, they fear the US’s alliances and partnerships. Internal problems are serious, especially in China, and they’re not as open to debate and dialogue as the USG tends to be. All of this information is grist for our informational mill, Dr. Ehlers stated.
Speaker Session Recording
Note: We are aware that many government IT providers have blocked access to YouTube from government machines during the pandemic in response to bandwidth limitations. We recommend viewing the recording on YouTube from a non-government computer or listening to the audio file (below), if you are in this position.
Comments