Leading without illusions | Caroline Glick | TEDxTelAvivUniversity
Carolyn Crawford argues that recognizing the complex nature of opponents is crucial for strategy, using the US invasion of Iraq, the Battle of France (1940), and the Cold War confrontation with the USSR to illustrate that strategic success requires adapting to reality rather than projecting one's own values onto an enemy. She argues that leaders must possess the intellectual and moral space to "take the world for what it is" and accept people for who they are. ## Speakers & Context - **Carolyn Crawford** — Embedded reporter with the US Army's thirdd infantry battalion during the Iraq invasion (March 2003). - The speaker recounts personal anecdotes from the invasion, contrasting her experiences with historical events like the 1944 liberation of France and the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. ## Theses & Positions - The key differentiator between a "gamble" and a "calculated risk" is the ability to observe and understand the opponent's odds, akin to poker rather than craps. - The US leadership in Iraq failed by insisting the enemy was akin to "the Parisians," failing to see that their enemy was "their enemy." - The French failure in 1940 stemmed from preparing for a war against an enemy they refused to recognize the nature of, rather than adapting to reality. - Effective leadership requires the ability to "take the world for what it is" and "accept people for who they are," moving beyond ideological projection. ## Concepts & Definitions - **Gamble vs. Calculated Risks:** The distinction lies in analyzing the opponent's odds versus relying on pure chance (dice roll). - **"Engine propelling the war":** The core, unacknowledged nature of the true enemy driving conflict (e.g., Iran in Iraq, or Hitler’s world-empire vision). - **Projection:** The error of imposing one's own values or expectations onto opposing groups or enemies. ## Mechanisms & Processes - **Understanding Opponents:** The process of observing opponents in a way that adapts strategy (e.g., Reagan shifting from confrontation to cooperation). - **Historical Comparison:** Using past conflicts (Iraq, Lebanon, France, Cold War) to build an argument for present-day strategic humility and realism. - **Strategic Adaptation:** Successfully pivoting a strategy when the perceived opponent changes (e.g., Reagan recognizing Gorbachev’s liberalization). ## Timeline & Sequence - **March 2003:** Crawford was embedded with the US Army's thirdd infantry battalion in Iraq on the eve of invasion. - **Pre-1944/1982 Experience:** Witnessing friendly jubilation in Iraq, comparing it to the celebratory receptions in Lebanon (1982). - **Post-2003 Incident:** The US casualties following the bombing at a roadblock manned by the 27th. - **1930s/1940:** The Maginot Line period leading up to the German invasion of France. - **1981:** Ronald Reagan took office, setting a goal to defeat the Soviet Union. - **1985:** Mikhail Gorbachev rose to power in the Soviet Union. - **1990:** The Soviet Union dissolved without war following negotiated agreements. ## Named Entities - **Scott Rudder** — Battalion Commander who advised caution to the speaker on the eve of the invasion. - **Saddam Hussein** — Figure that was initially perceived as the enemy by the US military. - **Hitler** — The dictator whose worldview the French initially failed to account for. - **Paul Renard** — The French Prime Minister noted for his leadership efforts. - **Ernest May** — Late professor from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government who educated the speaker. - **Ronald Reagan** — US President whose presidency and foreign policy shift (Confrontation to Cooperation) is used as a primary example. - **Mikhail Gorbachev** — Leader of the USSR who initiated policies of political and economic liberalization. ## Numbers & Data - The speaker noted the US military had the best forces, best arms, and best technology on the eve of the invasion. - US casualties mentioned: **3,000 men** died in Iraq before the US government acknowledged terrorism. - The French lost approximately **128,000** French soldiers in seven weeks of fighting against the Germans. - The US government took **three years** to acknowledge that terrorists were fighting US soldiers. - Reagan’s goal to defeat the Soviet Union started in **1981**. - Reagan successfully transitioned to negotiation when Gorbachev took office in **1985**. - Media recognition for Gorbachev: **Man of the Year for Time magazine in 1987** and **Man of the Decade in 1990**. ## Examples & Cases - **Iraq Celebration (2003):** Shiites at the roadside in Nasaria raised thumbs and shouted "go USA yay Bush," leading the speaker to intervene because they might be carrying grenades. - **Leadership Failure in Iraq:** The US government insisted on a strategy of defeating Saddam or Shiite/Sunni militias while ignoring the nature of the enemy. - **Maginot Line:** Built because the French perceived they were stronger than the Germans and predicted the invasion route, failing to account for Hitler's true goals. - **Reagan vs. Soviets:** Reagan started with confrontation (building new nuclear warheads, SDI Star Wars) against the USSR, pivoting after Gorbachev's reforms toward arms control negotiations. - **The "Butter" Analogy:** Comparing hitting a hard ball (doctrine) with a baseball bat when it turns into a stick of butter (new reality). ## Counterarguments & Caveats - The speaker notes that the US analogy between Iraq and France was apt, but the date should have been **1940**, not 1944. - The speaker acknowledges there are "a lot of differences between the Iraq war, the Battle of France and between the Cold War and Reagan presidency." ## Conclusions & Recommendations - Leadership strength is defined by the "ability to take the world for what it is," rather than holding onto preconceived notions of victory or enemy nature. - The ultimate skill is to be able to listen to and accept people who state they "hate us." ## Implications & Consequences - Ideological blindness leads to strategic failure, exemplified by ignoring the nature of the threat in Iraq and pre-war planning in France. - The Cold War lesson shows that strategic pivot (confrontation to cooperation) leads to peaceful dissolution of the enemy's power structure (USSR). ## Verbatim Moments - *"Carolyn we don't gamble we take calculated risks."* (Scott Rudder) - *"the difference between craps and poker in poker if you look at the cards and you pay attention to your opponents you can expand the odds of winning whereas in craps it's always a role of the dice"* - *"the question was did they understand their opponents"* - *"I thought they were the Americans the Iraqis were the French and Saddam Hussein was Hitler"* - *"I couldn't restrain myself I shouted out at the men what are you doing move them back they might be carrying grenades"* - *"it only took them one horrible occurrence in order to understand where they were"* - *"the Americans were not the French now"* - *"The most people on the ground in Paris when the Nazis watched in their most palpable emotion was not defeat was not sadness it was shock"* - *"The ability to take the world for what it is accept people for who they are and deal with it"*