It should be no surprise to anyone that repeated engagement in the same behavior, under unchanged conditions, produces the same results. So, no one should be surprised that our repeated engagement in a series of “negotiations” with the Islamic Regime in Iran, with no fundamental change in conditions, has produced the exact same result…nothing. It’s clear that our behavior or the conditions we’ve imposed, or both, have to change.
That’s a question of strategy.
So, what’s strategy? It’s a process that links Ways, Means, and Costs to achieve a desired End. Sound strategy is never concluded, it’s continuous…that’s why it’s a process, not a product. It’s never something that the “Enlightened Among Us” can carve into marble tablets and store on a shelf. It continually evolves to meet conditions over time. And for national security strategies, the Enemy always gets a vote, as we say, so that’s a first-order condition that sound security strategies must accommodate.
A little definition:
- Ends – What is our ultimate, desired effect? What are we fighting for? Typically, this is a vital national interest OR a high-level, national-level objective that directly secures, defends, or advances that vital national interest.
2. Ways – That’s HOW we intend to do it. The methods we intend to employ to achieve that identified End.
3. Means – i.e., the TOOLS we need to get her done…The Tools we need to employ in our chosen methods or Ways to accomplish our desired End.
4. Costs – the Reality Check. i.e., can we AFFORD this strategy? Economically, diplomatically, etc. It doesn’t matter how grand and glorious your strategy is. In the end, you get only the strategy you can afford.
Sound strategy begins at the End…the place where vital interests are served. EVERYTHING nests in it. Okay, but how about applying the above to our conflict with Iran? Sure…that means starting at the End. To his great credit, Pres. Trump has clearly stated that He Wants to End… a permanently non-nuclear Iran.
Next…what are the Ways we’ve nested to that? At the start of Epic Fury, they were:
• Destroy Iran’s air force
• Destroy Iran’s navy
• Destroy Iran’s missiles, drones, and air defenses
• Destroy Iran’s defense industrial base.
[As an aside, and as we’ve discussed on our previous programs, these are eminently necessary military objectives, but none of them (or even all of them together) produce a permanently non-nuclear Iran…so something’s missing…and that would be an express objective to Topple the Regime.]
In any case, those were our initial Ways. We’ve since added: Collapse Iran’s Economy. We’re pursuing this, very logically BTW, through our blockade on shipping to/from Iranian ports. As the regime is critically dependent on oil exports, if those are shut down for long, the government becomes untenable.
But we have to acknowledge, there’s another Way that, over time, has become part of our strategy with Iran, and that’s to Negotiate a Deal with the regime to give up its nuclear weapons programs. We initiated combat to compel the regime to stop its nuke program, but then we stopped (inexplicably), and then we decided to Negotiate. I can’t understand that, but maybe I’m wrong, so let’s see if Negotiation is a viable course of action (COA) under the current conditions. That’s done by testing the COA for Suitability, Feasibility, and Acceptability.
- Suitability – CAN this COA do what we need it to do?
- Feasibility – can we actually EXECUTE this COA with the assets we have or those we can get? Is it realistic?
- Acceptability – Can we afford it?
Let’s apply these to see if Negotiating a Deal with Iran is viable for our purposes. Acceptable? Is negotiating acceptable? I think so, as compared to anything else, the costs to fly Jarrod Kushner and JD Vance over to Pakistan is minimal. Feasible? Is negotiating feasible? Obviously. We’re fully capable of flying out a team to negotiate. Suitable? Aha! That’s the problem. No memo signed by both parties can guarantee a permanently non-nuclear Iran. By itself It imposes no compelling, physical reality. The Obama-era JCPOA didn’t do it, and no memo today can do any better.
Only overwhelming force can impose the necessary, new physical reality.
That means resumption of combat, promotion of economic collapse, and facilitation of a popular uprising and widespread revolt. If a war is worth fighting, it’s worth winning. Let’s get on with it.
We discussed all of this and more in the Frontlines Report this week. Click on the link to hear our chat: https://frontlinesoffreedom.com/show-959/
Ernie Audino, Brigadier General, US Army (Ret), Host of Frontlines Report, the nation’s largest military talk radio show.
