DEVELOPING STRATEGIC LEADERS FOR THE 21st CENTURY Jeffrey D. McCausland February 2008 Visit our website for other free publication downloads http://www.StrategicStudiesInstitute.army.mil/ To rate this publication click here. This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. As such, it is in the public domain, and under the provisions of Title 17, United States Code, Section 105, it may not be copyrighted. ***** The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. ***** This manuscript was funded by the U.S. Army War College External Research Associates Program. Information on this program is available on our website, www.StrategicStudiesInstitute. army.mil, at the Publishing button. ***** Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded to: Director, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 122 Forbes Ave., Carlisle, PA 17013-5244. ***** All Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) publications are available on the SSI homepage for electronic dissemination. Hard copies of this report also may be ordered from our homepage. SSI’s homepage address is: www.StrategicStudiesInstitute.army.mil. ***** The Strategic Studies Institute publishes a monthly e-mail newsletter to update the national security community on the research of our analysts, recent and forthcoming publications, and upcoming conferences sponsored by the Institute. Each newsletter also provides a strategic commentary by one of our research analysts. If you are interested in receiving this newsletter, please subscribe on our homepage at www.StrategicStudiesInstitute.army. mil/newsletter/. ISBN 1-58487-340-X ii FOREWORD Secretary of Defense Robert Gates delivered a remarkable speech at Kansas State University on November 26, 2007. In his address, the Secretary underscored the pressing need to greatly expand the nation’s “soft power” capabilities. Secretary Gates did not speak at length about current Department of Defense programs or the need to increase the defense budget dramatically. Rather, he called for significant increases in the capacity of other government agencies to work with the military in the rebuilding of societies in Iraq and Afghanistan and be prepared to counter the appeal of international terrorism globally. Clearly the attack on the World Trade Center and subsequent conflicts in both Iraq and Afghanistan changed forever how Americans think about “national security.” These events expanded not only the number and scope of issues, but also the overall complexity of the process. Consequently, the requirement for interagency decisionmaking accelerated, demands for greater policy flexibility increased, and an interagency process that was largely confined to a few departments of the Federal Government now involves a multitude of new players and allied states. Emerging analysis of the American interagency and intergovernmental processes has underscored the nation’s inability to respond effectively and coherently to contemporary national security demands. The 9/11 Commission and other studies have all recommended modifications to various organizations and the overall interagency process. These are clearly required, but there has not been sufficient attention focused on the nonmilitary human capital required to meet iii the challenges of the 21st century. Specifically, the Federal Government lacks a comprehensive process to ensure the recruitment, development, and retention of civilian leaders capable of effectively integrating the contributions of specialized government agencies on behalf of larger national security interests. This new security environment requires people who are not only substantively qualified and knowledgeable regarding policy issues, but who also possess the leadership abilities to direct large complex organizations. This monograph, by Dr. Jeffrey McCausland, focuses on the human capital required to succeed in the contemporary national security environment. It begins with an examination of the multitude of studies by both government and private agencies concerning this problem over the past 2 decades. It reviews the current development programs in three departments of the Federal Government—the Department of Defense, Department of State, and Central Intelligence Agency. Finally, the author outlines a proposal for a National Security Professional Program to meet this pressing need. DOUGLAS C. LOVELACE, JR. Director Strategic Studies Institute iv BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR JEFFREY D. MCCAUSLAND was appointed Visiting Professor of International Law and Diplomacy at the Penn State Dickinson School of Law in January 2007. He had previously served as Director of the Leader- ship in Conflict Initiative at Dickinson College since January 2004. He completed his active duty service in the United States Army in 2002, culminating his career with service as Dean of Academics, U.S. Army War College. Upon retirement, Dr. McCausland accepted the Class of 1961 Chair of Leadership at the United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland and served there from January 2002 to July 2004. He gradu- ated from the United States Military Academy at West Point in 1972 and was commissioned in field artillery. He is also a graduate of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. He holds both a Masters and Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. During his military career, Dr. Mc- Causland served in a variety of command and staff positions both in the United States and Europe. This included Director for Defense Policy and Arms Con- trol on the National Security Council Staff during the Kosovo crisis. He also worked on the Treaty on Con- ventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) as a member of the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Opera- tions, U.S. Army Staff, the Pentagon. Following this assignment he assumed command of a field artillery battalion stationed in Europe and deployed his unit to Saudi Arabia for Operations Desert Shield and Storm in 1990 and 1991. Dr. McCausland has both published and lectured broadly on military affairs, European security issues, the Gulf War, and leadership throughout the United States and over twelve countries. He has been a visiting v fellow at the Center for International Affairs, Harvard University; Conflict Studies Research Center, Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst; Stiftung Wissenshaft und Politk, Ebenhausen, Germany; George C. Marshall Center for European Security Studies, Garmisch, Germany; and the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London. He has served as a member of the Chief of Staff Army’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Training and Leader Development; the Character Review Panel for the Superintendent, U.S. Air Force Academy; and has provided advice and assistance to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force’s Aerospace Leader Development Panel. Dr. McCausland is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs based in New York. He is an adjunct fellow at both the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the RAND Corporation in Washington. He serves on the Board of Advisers to the National Committee on American Foreign Policy in New York and the Global Strategy Institute at CSIS. He has been a frequent commentator on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for CBS since early 2003. Dr. McCausland has appeared on MSNBC, CSPAN, CNN, Al Jazeera, the CBS Morning Show, and the CBS Evening News. He has been frequently interviewed by the New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, Wall Street Journal, and Boston Globe. vi SUMMARY Future historians will undoubtedly conclude that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), were a watershed in American history. The scope and focus of American national security policy changed forever in a few hours. America fought major wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in the aftermath of this historic day. The nation remains engaged in the daunting challenges of post- conflict stability operations and the creation of effective governance in both countries. These efforts will likely continue for many years, and similar challenges may arise. America in the 21st century is more threatened by failing states that are a breeding ground for terrorist movements than by the imminent attack by a hostile peer competitor. Some important lessons have emerged about this new security environment even as the “war on terrorism” continues both in America and around the globe. First, policymakers must remain engaged with challenges that predate the 2001 terrorist attacks such as globalization, international trade, the spread of AIDS, etc. They must, however, view these problems through a new lens and confront other emerging challenges. Furthermore, this condition is not temporary. The nation must expect that the threat of multiple crises will continue indefinitely. Finally, the challenge of international terrorism cannot be effectively confronted solely by the use of military force. It is fundamentally important that American national security strategy emphasizes the effective integration of all elements of national power—political, diplomatic, and economic, as well as military. These events of the first decade of the 21st century have changed how Americans must think about vii “national security.” They have dramatically expanded not only the number and scope of issues, but also the overall complexity of the process. Americans who felt safe at home and viewed security threats as distant from our shores no longer feel this way. Consequently, the requirement for interagency decisionmaking has accelerated, demands for greater policy flexibility have increased, and a process that was largely confined to a few agencies of the Federal Government now involves a multitude of new players and allied states. Clearly, the sad and apparently unexpected aftermath of the Iraq War underscores the critical need for significant changes in the planning of military operations, preparation for post-conflict requirements, and oversight of their execution. As the nation embarked on this new era, the 2002 National Security Strategy noted that we must “transform America’s national security institutions to meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.” The Bush administration responded initially with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, representing the largest change in the struct- ure of the Federal Government since the National Security Act of 1947. But we must also transform existing institutions, the policy process, and how we “think” about the defense of the nation. Furthermore, as General Richard Myers, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, observed, this transformation cannot wait—“it must take place as we wage the war on terrorism.” Yogi Berra was once asked by a sportswriter while he was serving as the manager of the New York Yankees what was the most important thing in developing a world championship team. Berra replied instantly, “Hire world championship players.” While viii this is true in sports and private enterprise, it is equally important in government. If America is to meet the multiple challenges of the 21st century, it is crucial that we develop a system that places the right people in the right places in government at the right moment. The nation critically needs civilian policymakers who can manage change and deal with the here and now. This monograph examines the development of career civil- ian leaders for strategic decisionmaking in the national security policy process. Such development must include the recruitment of quality personnel, experiential learning through a series of positions of increasing responsibility, training for specific tasks or missions, and continuous education that considers both policy and process. Consequently, it requires people who are not only substantively qualified and knowledgeable regarding policy issues but also possess the leadership abilities to direct large complex organizations. This analysis considers existing efforts in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), State Department, and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and provides appropriate recommendations for each. It also outlines the changes required to existing personnel manage- ment systems and development programs to create an effective cadre of civilian national security profession- als for the policy process. Clearly, these recommenda- tions may be applicable for other executive agencies as well. These three departments were selected because they have traditionally had the primary (if not exclusive) role in the development of foreign and defense policy. There are also obviously growing requirements for those with technical expertise, human resource management, finance/comptroller skills, etc. The development of personnel with these talents for these three agencies is not the subject of this monograph. ix Certain assumptions are crucial to this analysis. First, it is critical to understand that the words “train- ing” and “education” are different when considering human capital development. Training is concerned with teaching what to think and what the answers ought to be. Education is focused on teaching how to think and what the questions ought to be. Training is most frequently used when the goal is to prepare an individual or an organization to execute specified tasks. It often includes task repetition, not unlike an athletic team learning to execute plays, and normally is the preferred method of learning when the goal is to perform operations in which success, failure, and completion can be clearly measured. Education has more to do with how to think about problems and how to deal with challenges that may not lend themselves to outright solutions. It is a matter of intellect, thought, indirect leadership, advice, and consensus building. Second, we must also differentiate between “leadership” and “management.” Management is about coping with complexity. It is a response to a significant development of the 20th century, namely the emergence of large, complex organizations. Good management brings order to what would otherwise be chaos. Leadership, by contrast, is about coping with change. Management remains important for the day-to-day success of any organization and focuses on such issues as planning/budgeting, organizing/staffing, and controlling/problem solving. By contrast, leadership begins with setting direction and aligning people, as well as motivating them to success. The successful development of government policy for the war on terrorism wholly depends upon developing leaders of substance at all levels of executive agencies. They must be able to balance the pressing requirements of x