Navy War College (part Deux)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Part two of post:

III. Y2K Onset/Unfolding Phases: Feedback on Policy "Do's and Don'ts"

INSTRUCTIONS: The slide below presents our generic advice to a notional country's elite regarding their potential "management" of the Y2K experience within their borders. For this pair of Y2K event phases, please offer your feedback along the following three lines:

Tell us what we got right (known knowns) Tell us what we got wrong (known unknowns) Tell us what you think we're missing (unknown unknowns).

Slide: Policy "Do's and Don'ts" for Onset/Unfolding Phases

A. What Advice We Got Right [additional comments on inputs appear within brackets]

There will be massive traffic jams and delays returning home from celebrations. [But not more than one would expect from any other large social event. The desire to participate will be offset by the desire to avoid inconvenience.] These concepts make excellent sense, but present DOD policies wouldn't allow CINCs or military commanders to carry them out. Be prepared for terrorist threats/attacks in conjunction with 1 January celebrations. [Major news opportunity.] Be very aware of international resentment of the U.S. [A combination of "let the buyer beware" reminder (i.e., we are suffering in the U.S. as well) with an offer of help/solutions apart from those who sold the IT goods/services.] Squashing rumors is hard if you don't know what's true. Punishing economic opportunists and panic-mongers can devolve into general repression of public voice. These policies need important preliminary set-up with community involvement -- a citizen's committee for handling rumors and illegal profiteering. [Nice point, but there is too much "all or nothing" justice going on now. Remember, the media is owned, lead, and run by people with their own opinions, not a neutral, unbiased, balanced voice.] Where to concentrate teams for traffic jams/grid lock or blackouts? [That should be known. Maybe the question is "how much is enough"?] A remarkable number of these axioms seem designed for life in the United States or like countries. It is not clear how to apply them in much of the international context. In effect, these "rules" seem to boil down to the old observation, "why can't everyone be English!" Need to work out priorities early on who will take care of traffic jams, etc. One concern of the National Guard is that they are being looked at to help the police with traffic jams, at the same time deliver generators to those in need, and also at the same time help deliver supplies, etc., and there are not enough people in the Guard to perform all those functions simultaneously. Don't use military except in dire consequences: this whole thing may look like a dire consequence--if not technically then perhaps sociologically/politically/etc. Think it will hard to protect military assets from this unless the SecDef policy is widely promulgated and sold, and has buy-in by the NCA. [If the U.S. experiences serious Y2K problems, helping cope with those problems will be the military's primary mission until they are resolved. If the military resists that mission, it will suffer the ire of the American people.] [Exactly the reason to predispose--to the maximum extent possible--the public to the strategic use of US forces to deal with international crises.] Definitely help beef up the International Piracy Center. Slow moving oil tankers in the Malacca Straits are a favorite target of pirates today. If tanker attacks were to increase after 1 January because of perception of Y2K problems in the small navies in SE Asia, current oil supplies could be threatened and tanker captains could refuse further shipments. Expect CNN and others to be tracking Y2K around the globe. Have plans in place to respond to "scare stories." May not be able to fix things immediately, but knowing what to say might be invaluable. What is really needed is a highly respected leader of impeccable character, an orator along the lines of FDR or Churchill who can connect with the populace. Observations like "don't let partygoers be stranded" not only seems like a U.S.-type question, but Hollywood to boot. One could imagine a number of people throughout the planet wonder if we would know an emergency if we saw it. ["Don't let partygoers be stranded" isn't solely a US problem. Many US citizens will be overseas to observe the New Years. If transportation systems go down, there may be a shortage of shelter for those individuals. The issue of protecting US citizens abroad in whatever climate emerges in that country may be a greater DOD issue than previously thought.] How do you punish panic mongers who may be speaking for entire communities without causing further alienation? These concepts are best put into action at the community level. This means good planning by community leaders, local government and DOD military base commanders. That kind of planning by and large has not taken place yet. The U.S. Coast Guard, though, is way ahead of DOD, and has carried out planning conversations with community stakeholders in all its areas of responsibility. DOD should seek White House support for doing the same thing. How do you prevent opportunists? If not careful, certain groups would take advantage of this event to cause civil uproar and use police actions or military actions as excuse to expand efforts. How does a CINC reduce exposure of his most vulnerable people? Should special consideration be given to modifying leave and rotation policies to reduce the size of the potentially endangered population? [This applies even more to State Department! Perhaps they should impose a 6-to-9 month moratorium on transferring dependents overseas (say from July 1999 to February 2000), liberal early transfers back to the US, and, closer to January 2000, perhaps even a moratorium on transferring non-essential personnel overseas.] Must engage communities in an ongoing dialogue to reduce the impact of rumormongering. [Key to this would be the idea of complete openness with regard to where the U.S. and world stand on Y2K crisis management and Y2K estimates.] Re: Punishing "panic mongers": Who does the defining of what is panic? I hear Gary North denounced quite a bit in many Y2K sessions as a panic monger or words to that effect, but it could arguably be said that he has done more that most to intellectually prepare thousands of people to think about the implications of Y2K. And he did it before most. So, we have an early total lack of leadership from the White House, (some) leadership in the Senate and House (but still inadequate), and strong pressures from Wall Street not to "rock the boat"--even against the Senate. Therefore, by definition, anyone who brings the (potential) bad news is viewed as a "panic monger" by the Establishment. This does not bode well. Those who reach very strong negative conclusions based on the data available should be challenged (and if necessary discredited) NOW in the free marketplace of ideas. Or, perhaps some compromise with some of their concerns should be attempted in open fora where all of these concerns and conspiracy theories can be discussed. Absent that, when the real panic hits, government's tendency could be to overreact, thereby bringing about a self-fulfillment of the predictions of those who are most conspiracy-minded. Though we may laugh at those who think that FEMA would somehow be charged to suspend the Constitution, how will we all react to a hare-brained, last minute, not well thought out Executive Order? [Great point. "Panic" and the consequences should be defined now, to prevent the backlog of appeals that may appear and defeat the notion of swift justice.] Looking for media cooperation in controlling Y2K-related rumors: many CNN reporters have already been told that they cannot take leave between Christmas and January of 2000 due to the Y2K story. This is going to be the next Monica Lewinsky for the media. If they could just link Monica to Y2K, they'd be in media heaven.

B. What Advice We Got Wrong [additional comments on inputs appear within brackets]

Traffic jams and blackouts are important; however, one of the most important functions of a Tiger Team may be ensuring information flow and having the ability to give the commander a framework for informed and prioritized decisions. "Do arrest economic opportunists quickly": Have to be careful of the perception of arresting Joe selling Kerosene for triple price, while CNN carries stories of currency traders and hedge funds making billions. Do we arrest them? Curtail their activities? [There is little if any law to support such arrests.] [I think the context under which goods are sold determines the legality.] [It's illegal to sell kerosene for triple price? Not last time I checked. This sounds like incipient panic mongering.] Don't be afraid to shut down financial systems if need be, but be careful to communicate with the public if that happens. If there is perception of weakness without knowledge of remediation, then there will be runs on banks and capital flight. [Communicate what with the public? That their money is frozen and they can't get it? Roosevelt's bank holiday of 1934 was a near thing--near to causing real social riot and rebellion. Why should the public believe the government's promise of remediation?] [They should believe because the alternative(s) are very unattractive.] Beware the Seductive Coincidence: just because an airplane crashes or a power outage occurs on 01/01/00, do not jump to the conclusion that it is the harbinger of Y2K (rapture, apocalypses, etc). We need to develop (and exercise in advance) evaluation processes that support quick and accurate differentiation between normal catastrophes and Y2K-driven events. [This is closely related to the earlier comment on CNN. Press will be speculating on Y2K as cause of everything, even the next set of octuplets. Aggressive effort will be needed to counter such speculation.] It may be difficult to quantify "panicmongering" for the purposes of punishment. Also, it may be difficult to determine what type of punishment is appropriate. The normal way to combat this threat would seem to be by isolating any misinformation. [Right. "Panic mongering" in itself is not illegal (remember the Constitution).] How do you "arrest economic opportunists?" Ration supplies in a free market economy . . . there are no laws/enforcement systems. The bully pulpit has some utility but once the lack of authority/capability is exposed, you've sacrificed all/most of your credibility. Watch out for trigger effects or threshold effects that get large numbers moving as a crowd. Even "citizen groups" can get hijacked by gangs with agendas. Need serious thinking about early warning on these. The natural tendency of leaders in difficult situations is to blame someone else, and in cases of scarcity, to plunder someone else--true of gangs, political leaders, opposition leaders, etc. Re: Power losses and letting them persist: Management of electric power by utilities includes a hierarchy of "interruptible loads" and planned cutting-off of less-critical load areas. This is the way to manage power in any area. It may also include isolating from the "grid" if there are surges and electrical reluctance spikes. It is important to report these management actions with info on when they will be corrected and also rotate losses of power if they are necessary. Economic opportunists needs further clarification. There will obviously be opportunists who benefit from Y2K but nothing can or should be done about that. On there other hand, there are those who will take advantage of Y2K to commit illegal acts such as money laundering, transferring money from banks, etc. It is those activities that must be quickly curtailed and system integrity restored. I wonder what US law (much less constitutional provision) permits the arrest of "economic opportunists?" Speaking as a guy who is in the process of buying a house in Fairfax County, VA, I could name some candidates. Truth is, I think we'll have to chalk up those effects to "entrepreneurial capitalism." Re: "Don't island": The electric system islands/shuts down/fails-to-safe in order to prevent damage to system and equipment. Maintaining the connection may result in damage to equipment and delay restoration. The armed services have a history of retaining a "flexible reserve" in case of unforeseen events. We may want to caution CINCs about fixing all problems immediately as they arise if it could delude their ability to respond to a follow-up--and more important--issue. Quickly and credibly responding to rumors will require new sets of relationships/data collection that have to be developed beforehand. Given the interruption of foreign oil supplies and the reliance of US on imports for some 50% of our oil, the drying up of the pipeline/shipments will impact both price and availability of oil and to a lesser extent natural gas over a 20-to-120 day period--as things now look. Need a through assessment on the impact and affects on mission areas and economics. What you really want is low wattage celebrations to reduce the load on the grid. Maybe, you were saving the high-voltage for punishing the panicmongers? Need to obtain involvement of international and national news sources to help reduce rumors that occur. [Great idea, but they're among the worst rumormongers.] What authorities do the CINCs have to punish foreign rumormongers? [Not the CINC's responsibility. See White House leadership and dialogue.] Focus and revise National Security Strategy for Y2K [Develop a CINCs Mission Essential Task List?] Economic opportunists can be defeated by flooding the market, i.e., the price of oil speculatively doubles and the US releases the Strategic Petroleum Reserve which drives the price down. But it is prudent to husband your supplies until you know the depth and duration of the crisis. [The oil pipeline should not dry. The US will outbid most other suppliers for the available supplies--the more probable lack of supply will be those who cant pay.]

C. What Advice May Be Missing [additional comments on inputs appear within brackets]

It is very difficult to stretch any of this into the international domain. As the amount of issues increase, there needs to be some way to categorize the problem to ensure the proper response and the level of resources to place against it. There needs to be some way to rapidly share "lessons learned" for the good of all players. You mention not letting rumormongers drive actions, and punishing them. What's missing is the official/government information campaign. Need to aggressively shape public perceptions, get out the story that compliments the plan and leads to the outcome you want. What current policies do we alter or suspend, when, and why? Where is the calming voice, guidance from the White House? What will this mean for the 2000 election? Will the press just play their Y2K stories to sell newsprint or air time, or will they be there to help? Will the Navy offer to use ship/base power generators to help out host nations? [In 1964 after a hurricane, a Navy destroyer was the sole source of power for Belize, until Navy electricians fixed the local power plant.] Individual commanders and unit leaders need to have a clear set of priorities in place for dealing with disruptions. Communications may fail or become intermittent and these individuals may become isolated. Believe that water and fuel distribution, and sanitary disposal will be as important as electricity and traffic. Wiill the ports be open around the world? Do we attempt to manage the shift from Public to Private transcript? The emergence of the new rule set from business, etc? [I think so. Otherwise it's done by players driven by the paranoid imperative--conquer or be conquered. Not a pretty outcome.] Is there a role for the Navy and the Air Force in carrying US manufactured goods to overseas markets if commercial ports fail? [No way! Total capacity only a tiny fraction of what would be needed. How would we choose which goods get shipped? Amount of contributions to the DNC?] What is the role of us military bases overseas if they can function but the locals are in dire straits? Ensure that the Y2K play-by-play includes some good news/non-news, as well as the bad news. Have a group that is not at all involved in current efforts to respond to the crisis keep track of what's going on during phases III and IV, and preparing for the return of the influence of elites. Do not assume we should intervene in international political problem unless requested. Does US CINC respond to China's request to evacuate Chinese being scapegoated in Indonesia? We need to know at what point to extricate family members out of countries that are not successfully handing Y2K disruptions. The acquisition process may be a problem. If we need to react quickly with contracts or equipment purchases, we may have problems. To the degree that Y2K points to the technological underpinning of the globalized economy, the approach to the problems provide an opportunity to the United States to develop new collaborative mechanisms and new "rule sets." To achieve this, the United States cannot simply impose a new framework but must accept a process and set of rules which will constrain US actions as well as those of other states. [And, just as the US footed the bill for building a new world after WW II, via the Marshall Plan and all our other Cold War efforts, we may also have to carry a large burden of rebuilding after a Y2K crisis. That's easy to say, but would be hard to sell to Congress and the American people. Would have to be a crusade, as in the early post-WW II years.] Much of the discussion of international issues has a very internationalist flavor. That simply is not the mood of the American people and the Congress. If there are serious problems abroad, we will have no choice but to engage in triage: prioritizing countries on the basis of their importance to the US, the severity of their problems, and the impact our assistance can have on their problems. Firewalls: We cannot guarantee that there will be no Y2K-driven failures in information systems. But we can examine the critical systems to locate (and create if needed) firewalls, breaks in the system that stop propagation of cascading failure. To do this requires considerable knowledge of the architecture of the information networks. For the CINCs, all this means that they had best get on now with learning what there is to be known about information systems and architectures in countries in which we might intervene. And the CINCs should be planning firewalls in those systems, firewalls which they can implemented both from outside and from inside the country. If one of the events is biologic terrorism, a potentially overstressed health care system will become overwhelmed. Do we let countries conduct their own escort operations for oil tankers (Japan, India, UK etc), meaning a lot of armed combatants escorting convoys to the fortress?

Go Back to Main March Workshop GroupSystems Report

Go Back to Y2K Project's Documents List

-- NSA Outreach Office (icu@Tipper's_Office.com), June 05, 1999.

U.S. Naval War College Year 2000 International Security Dimension Project

GroupSystems Inputs for 4 March 1999 DoD Consequence Management/CINC Strategies Workshop

IV. Y2K Onset/Unfolding Phases: Feedback on Possible CINC Missions

INSTRUCTIONS: The slide below presents a draft list of possible CINC missions for this pair of Y2K event phases. Please offer your feedback along the following three lines:

Tell us which missions you think are most likely to occur (known knowns) Tell us what side effects may occur if such missions are undertaken (known unknowns) Tell us what additional missions you think may have to be performed (unknown unknowns).

Slide: Possible CINC Missions During Onset/Unfolding Phases

A. Missions Most Likely to Occur [additional comments on inputs appear within brackets]

First order of business for phases III-IV: assess the damage to the DOD's ability to act based on the impact of Y2K. Expected order of likelihood: (1) Medical Support, (2) Civil Affairs, (3) Disaster Relief, (4) Terrorism. Most likely to occur is in the civil affairs area--helping with electric power and commercial transportation and communications. However, I believe there will be only limited resources that can be spared to offer to other countries in these areas because they will be needed in the US to respond to local outages. It is not clear what DOD/CINCS are going to do to reestablish power grids/civil affairs--e.g., electric power, where the technical expertise is in the private sector. CINCs can move and set up generic sets which will help in small area electric supply, but not power big grids. Keep in mind the first priority of the Department is its operational readiness. All requests for foreign disaster assistance must be weighed against their impact on readiness. These missions seem improbable given the DepSecDef's Y2K prioritization directive. They are also missions that would have to be carried out in consort with the host county's authorities and institutions. That would require extensive planning in 1999, which DOD would have to authorize. At the moment this all seems very unrealistic. [This administration seems to want to help every one every where. I believe we could be put in that situation.] [DepSecDef's memo will die the second the President articulates contrary priorities.] I believe that the first three missions are all applicable--US will be called upon to execute them both on behalf of US citizens and institutions. The fourth is applicable only in respect to host nation support and should be provided by them vice us, with perhaps some assistance. Should we line up other countries and regional leaders, perhaps based on former colonial relationships, to help carry the load? I see Civil Affairs and Disaster Relief as the chief missions for the CINCs ("fly-away" teams, etc., as noted, to support power grid reconstitution, telecoms, sanitation, etc.). But before all of this is the issue of NEOs and survivability of the CINCs assets, making sure he is able to even operate in theater to the extent that he is dependent on services outside of his immediate control. The CINC will be able to execute Disaster Relief type of missions, etc., only after this initial aspect is achieved. Public Affairs: CINCS could be called on to supply AWACS for air traffic control. Similarly Navy could be called on for VTS. [Carrying local ATC supervisors? English is technically the ICAO language standard with respect to ATC, but a local expert would be helpful. Problem: security concerns with exposure to AWACS capabilities.] Anything that CNN and the other networks have on TV in this country will be the humanitarian/political priority. These will always tend to be fear/victim-based and therefore will focus on high-tech accidents. Hazmat, NBC, WMD, weather-related, accidental, and terrorist-based will be the priorities. Suggest the determination of possible hazmat/NBC sites (e.g., Soviet-style nuke power plants, chemical plants such as Bhopal or any chlorine storage, LNG terminals, etc.) in relatively populated areas. These will be the possible expected response or assistance locations if there is a problem. Sidebar discussion led to the subject of CINC/provincial dialogue. While noting the nearness and appearance of policy making, an abbreviated version of this Y2K crisis management workshop approach could be initiated at the governor/mayor/(chieftain?) level. The opener would be along the lines of: CINC: "What are you going to do about my servicemen/U.S. citizens getting drunk and being arrested on New Year's Eve? Here is what I'm thinking of if I suspect subversive action by non-U.S. Citizenry." The main idea would be the opening of dialogue to exchange expectations on both sides and reduce non-informed unilateral actions, with regard to all four missions. Remember, all this costs money. Must be able to convince Congress to pay for it. That won't be easy with this Congress. Establish a firm policy that the USG will not fix countries in trouble; we protect the US national interest, not engage in social work. Any mission that smacks of "military-engaged-in-domestic-civil-activities" will have to be carefully vetted in terms of media and popular support.

B. What Side Effects May Occur with Missions [additional comments on inputs appear within brackets]

Not sure if we have the resources to effectively provide assistance in reestablishing foreign power grids. [Maybe this is a DOE mission, not DOD. Maybe DOE should contract with US power companies to provide tiger teams that DOD could deliver overseas to help restore power grids.] Mass inoculations presuppose a stockpile of these injections. Do we base disaster relief/humanitarian missions on US national interests or human suffering? Better decide early and be prepared to justify to CNN audience. Side Effects: The iron law of unanticipated consequences will out; no good deed will go unpunished. Possibility that on 1 January things look good in the US so we send expertise to assist another country and then some time later problems begin at home. What is the impact that resources are no longer in country and what is the impact if we then pull them out to bring them home?

C. What Additional Missions May Be Necessary?

Need to add maintenance or re-establishment of civil order including: (1) suppression of rioting and criminal behavior, (2) guarding, protecting, and rebuilding critical infrastructure, and (3) assisting with movement of commerce and information.

Go Back to Main March Workshop GroupSystems Report

Go Back to Y2K Project's Documents List

-- NSA Outreach Office (icu@Larry_Flint"s_office.com), June 05, 1999.

Year 2000 International Security Dimension Project Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett, Project Director

U.S. Naval War College Center for Naval Warfare Studies Decision Support Department

If you or anyone you know has difficulty reaching this web site in the ".mil" domain, please access our duplicate web site located at http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/y2ksite.htm

Most Recent Project Summary (Updated 6/1/99)

May Y2K Economic Security Workshop Read-Ahead May Y2K Economic Security Workshop GroupSystems Inputs (edited)

March Y2K Consequence Management Workshop Read-Ahead Package March Y2K Consequence Management Workshop GroupSystems Inputs (edited)

January Y2K Scenario-Dynamics Workshop Read-Ahead Package January Y2K Scenario-Dynamics Workshop GroupSystems Inputs (edited)

December Y2K Scenario-Building Workshop Read-Ahead Package December Y2K Scenario-Building Workshop GroupSystems Inputs (edited)

How to contact Professor Barnett

phone: 401.841.4053

email: barnettt@nwc.navy.mil

mail: Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett Code 39-Sims Hall U.S. Naval War College 686 Cushing Road Newport RI 02841

Updated 1 June 1999

-- NSA Oureach Office (icu@Henry_K's_office.com), June 05, 1999.

Link me

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/y2ksite.htm

U.S. Naval War College Center for Naval Warfare Studies Decision Support Department

If you or anyone you know has difficulty reaching this web site in the ".mil" domain, please access our duplicate web site located at http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/y2ksite.htm

-- there she blows (easy@does.it), June 05, 1999.

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), June 06, 1999

Answers

Dave,

Thanks for posting this. I had not printed out the original when it was available and I missed it. Now I'll use your post. Appreciate it.

-- Gordon (gpconnolly@aol.com), June 06, 1999.


Last night the Geocities URL was not available. But at the moment it's wide open (12:13 AM EST 7 June).

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/y2ksite .htm

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), June 07, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ