Background
Transformation is a concept that was not quickly or easily incorporated into the language of "Pentagonese" or into the defense lexicon. Recently President Bush, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, and the entire Pentagon establishment adopted a transformation program for the Department of Defense. There was a call by the Administration for new ways of thinking, but today transformation theory is being applied narrowly to only military weapon systems, not to the decision makers themselves and to military personnel at all levels of command. Nevertheless, the stage is set for deeper, more wide-spread transformation in the Department of Defense and throughout the entire United States. This is a necessary next step for the Bush Administration to ever have a significant impact on terminating the evils of terrorism and war, according to Edward Winchester, a former Air Force Captain and operations research officer for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Policies for transformation in government have been formulated. Resources are already available to take the next steps.
Over two decades ago the U.S. Office of the Secretary of Defense commissioned a pioneering study of the way the Pentagon does its business. The study was perhaps the first in the history of the Department of Defense to formulate a theory of transformation for application to military and financial systems of the Department of Defense. The Comptroller of the Department of Defense appointed a member of his staff, Edward Winchester, to a U.S. Presidential Interchange Program, which took him to New Zealand where he completed a ground-breaking research study at Victoria University of Wellington on the subject of transformation and unified field theory. That study opened previously unexplored areas of decision theory that can be applied to conflict situations and terrorism today. Before being seconded to work for the New Zealand Government Captain Winchester was principal action officer at the Pentagon for leading a joint military task force that produced guidelines for doing cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit studies throughout the Department of Defense. The New Zealand study, which came later was a search for new ways to promote “cost –consciousness,” with an emphasis on the meaning of “consciousness.” It was critical of the way decisions had been made about government spending programs and dealt with causes for fraud, waste and abuse. The objective for the study was to search for more new ways of thinking and influencing behavior, and for techniques that could be used to make more enlightened choices and tradeoffs in government programs.
Winchester lectured and worked at Victoria University, while working at the highest levels within the New Zealand government. That experience provided a rare and unique opportunity to introduce certain members of Parliament to findings, which shook the New Zealand Government, and later mystified even officials at the Pentagon. "What I learned through my investigations from 1973 to 1976 prompted members of the New Zealand Parliament" to open doors for me to present my report on transformation to large audiences in major cities throughout the North and South Islands of New Zealand," Winchester said. His initial studies in that country provided an academic basis for even further investigations of transformation theory when he returned to the United States and to his former position at the Pentagon in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Upon returning to the Pentagon he found creative ways to test his ideas and to stir thinking about transformation for the entire military establishment.
"Transformation," explains Winchester, "has effects on mind/body systems support individuals in making more enlightened decisions because they are better equipped to see and foresee the costs and benefits associated with their choices. In this way people tend to be shielded from pitfalls and protected in dangerous situations. This phenomena was demonstrated in a prison with hundreds of convicts and corrections officers, and at the Pentagon transformation efforts turned to "Changing Perspectives on Global Security," when superiors allowed Winchester to discuss transformation theory and practice with representatives from the former Soviet Union. Those interactions with Soviets seem to have contributed to some extent to historical breakthroughs between old adversaries and to instituting a “Military-to-Military Exchange Program” between the United States and the Soviet Union.
United States Military Objective for Iraq
War planners begin every military operation by trying to ask the right questions about objectives. Winchester said that when he first arrived at the Pentagon to assume new duties as a military operations research officer he was impressed by the importance of correctly defining military objectives before trying to solve any problem. Otherwise valuable money and time, even lives can be lost. In the war with Iraq, Al Queda, and terrorists President George W. Bush stated clearly and unequivocally the military objective for the United States. When terrorists destroyed the twin towers in New York, the Commander-in-Chief said the objective is "war on evil." This is the main focus for U.S. and allied military forces.
The irony is that enemies of the United States are also determined to eliminate "evil." That is, the evil which they see in the United States of America! The U.S. government and its allies were not the only instigators of “war on evil,” but enemies of the United States have the same objective. Since the beginning of this war U.S. military strategy has been directed exclusively at eliminating Taliban, Al Queda, and other sources of terrorism identified as perpetrators of evil. In his annual State of the Union Message President Bush warned that in the next stage of operations he intends to broaden the scope of the war to include an "evil axis" of nations threatening peace and stability in the civilized world.
Assuming then that the mutual objective of the United States, its allies, and of terrorists is to eliminate evil, a proper analysis of that military objective must begin by defining and identifying clearly and accurately the enemy. Winchester questions whether that was done before going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. He says that unfortunately neither those who support war with Iraq, nor peace activists opposed to war have clearly and accurately defined and identified an ultimate source or primary cause for "evil," or how to deal effectively with it. What is "evil?" Where does it originate? What is the nature of that which inspires fanatics and misguided individuals to commit evil acts, and for civilized nations to engage in violence and the atrocities of war? Are there really circumstances when a "just (evil) war" is acceptable to God, to a God-centered nation, and to people of different religions who may even be worshiping the same God? Are some people essentially evil, or is there something more mysterious and sinister that blinds their minds and hearts and their consciousness, so that they choose to behave in evil ways? Is there such a thing as "a necessary evil," e.g. war? Can terrorists be transformed rather than killed, and how can such a miraculous transformation be achieved?
The Mission: Transform Evil
America and the world desperately need a new way of thinking to even begin to be able to reframe the military objective of warring on evil. So far, no nation or government at any time in history has been able to deal effectively with the problem of "evil," wherever it exists. I believe this is the time in history when the United Nations and the President of the United States can fulfill a dream of the man who became the first President of the United States, General George Washington. His prayer was "to see this plague of mankind, war, banished from the face of the earth.” Another great leader, General Douglas MacArthur, pointed out that a change in human character is needed. He called for "recrudescence" or, interpreting his words, “recrudescence is what Ed Winchester refers to as a transformation of thinking and behavior. General MacArthur said:
Men since the beginning of time have sought peace . . . Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn have failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war . . .We have had our last chance. If we do not now devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door. The problem is basically theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement [transformation] of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh.
General MacArthur's conclusion was expressed differently by the ancient Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu, who wrote about The Art of War over 2,500 years ago.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Unfortunately parties to current conflicts do not seem to adequately recognize the real enemy, "evil". Apparently they do not know the enemy, nor themselves. In the final analysis President Bush's war on evil is everyone's war. This war can be won. It begins, says Ed Winchester, by introducing a new approach to transformation of evil; that results in people choosing spontaneously to change their thinking and behavior so as to arrive at a new understanding about their self and about their enemies.
United States Policies for Transformation
Speaking at the Citadel in Charleston, S.C. President Bush revealed plans to transform the armed forces to confront the threats of the 21st century. "We have to think differently," President Bush said. "The enemy who appeared on Sept.11 seeks to avoid our strengths and constantly searches for our weaknesses. So America is required once again to change the way our military thinks and fights." He said that the United States will meet threats posed by terrorists "by every means possible." Before Sept. 11 President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld urged transforming the military. "What's different today is this sense of urgency: the need to build this future force while fighting this present war," the President said.
Preparing for the future will require U.S. forces to think differently and develop the kinds of forces and capabilities that can adapt quickly to new challenges and to unexpected circumstances. New transformation goals for the U.S. Military were unveiled at a Pentagon briefing, February 1, 2002. While speaking at the National Defense University on January 30, 2002, Secretary Rumsfeld said:
Our challenge in this new century is a difficult one. It's really to prepare to defend our nation against the unknown, the uncertain and what we have to understand will be the unexpected. . . . This is precisely what transformation is about. Here we are in the year 2002, fighting the first war of the 21st century, and the horse cavalry was back . . . and being used in unimaginable ways. It showed that a revolution in military affairs is about more than building new high tech weapons . . . It's also about new ways of thinking, and new ways of fighting
"On September 11th America's contract with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) was torn up and a new contract is being written," according to DoD's senior transformation official Arthur K. Cebrowski, Director of DoD's Transformation Office and a retired Navy vice admiral. He emphasized the need for transformation for the U.S. military to make dramatic changes to keep its edge over anticipated future opponents. The United States and other nations in the developed world are quickly moving into the Information Age and away from the old-tech Industrial Age. We are indeed in a period of strategic opportunity for transformation," Cebrowski said, as he addressed military students at the National Defense University, Fort Lesly McNair, Washington, D.C. Mr. Cebrowski remarked that it is only natural and prudent to begin transforming and revamping today's military now.
DoD's top uniformed officer, Air Force General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the best way to improve U.S. war-fighting capability is to embrace transformation. To do that we need to change our way of thinking. He said transformation requires changes "in how we think and how we employ our capabilities to achieve more effective results in less time with fewer lives lost and with less cost."
No one knows what threats the future holds. So defense officials must prepare for the unexpected. Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz outlined the way ahead by identifying specific transformation goals for the future. At the top of the list of goals is to "Defend the U.S. homeland and other bases of operation and defeat nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and their means of delivery." He anticipated that the fiscal 2003 budget would invest $8 billion to support homeland defense and defense of U.S. forces abroad. Another $10.5 billion would be invested in counter-terrorism and anti-terrorism programs.
The DoD Comptroller, Mr. Dov Zakheim, said that even financial systems have to operate in a coherent, integrated fashion. So, he commissioned a project that promises to fundamentally transform the way the Department of Defense does business. During a Pentagon briefing he concluded that, "In general transformation has been viewed as new weapon systems or communications or even culture. "Those are all important and accurate and key elements of transformation. But there's another one, too, and that's transforming the way we do business in this place [the Pentagon]."
Priorities for Transformation:
The U.S. Homeland Security Department, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the United Nations Security Council
In the weeks preceding the war with Iraq, Ed Winchester came out of retirement to mobilize an “Army of Compassion” with goals and priorities for transformation in the war on evil. A plan for transformation was submitted to the White House for consideration by President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, and to top officials at the Pentagon, and to representatives of member nations of the United Nations Security Council including observer missions to the UN, such as the Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See (the Vatican) and the Islamic Conference to the UN. The plan sets forth the following priorities as first steps for achieving the mission of transforming evil.
1. Transformation of defensive forces from fighting war to waging peace requires rebalancing segments of the U.S. population and populations of foreign countries, wherever pockets of cognitive dissonance and low levels of eugenic radiance exist. Such rebalancing will depend on the co-operation and participation of the entire population of the United States in an experiment never before attempted on such a grand scale. This new thrust in warfare means a change in deterrence. Deterrence will involve new thinking about ways to dissuade terrorists and other adversaries from committing evil acts against citizens of the United States, and at the same time dissuade the United States from actions, which endanger other countries. As Secretary Rumsfeld said, the "DoD cannot afford to move back in the mindset of business as usual. The war on terrorism is a new war and 'cries out' for new thinking."
2. Changing military minds and opening hearts is not an easy task either. However, it can be done systematically, cost-effectively, and painlessly. The way for President Bush to move out of the impasse with Saddam Hussein, and the Governments of Iraq and Korea may seem at first to be an enigma to the average soldier and person on the street. But, the way to get beyond old intractable problems is to first reach a common ground. That common ground is a site of absolute silence inside each individual; the place where east meets west. In other words, each person needs to understand a riddle, "the way out of war is the way inside." The common ground is a place inside each Iraqi and each American. The way to get out of war is the way in; inside is where the miracle of changing minds and hearts occurs that makes transformation possible. First teach soldiers how to reach this common ground of being, then they are better equipped to “Be all they can be.” Moreover, the development of a unified field makes it easier for diplomats and military leaders to formulate and implement specific steps to achieve the mission of transformation from war to peaceful co-existence. (A PMC web site http://pentagonmeditationclub.org was created to provide basic information and instructions on transformation theory.)
3. A detailed operations or action plan is needed to rally armies of compassion and to put together a new kind of coalition that will undertake the task of implementing a technology for transformation. This should be an essential element of the strategy for “Operation Liberate Iraq.” It starts in Washington, D.C. and Baghdad, by enlisting spiritual/religious leaders in those centers of power; then, spreading the light of transformation elsewhere in the United States and to other nations.
4. President George W. Bush's agenda to "rally Armies of Compassion" has the potential for serving up a spiritual solution to the problem of evil which causes terrorism and war. This is the sure way to guarantee homeland security. For example, his White House Office of Faith-Based & Community Initiatives" (OFBCI) could call on experts to make a more comprehensive and thorough analysis and report on the nature of evil! They can answer questions posed here concerning evil in the world and anticipate the traps that faulty thinking and misguided policies and programs present for the security of the United States and the world. Expansion of military strategies by the United States and its allies to disarm enemies starts by partnering with professionals and experts who know something about inner jihad and spiritual warfare.
Here is the strategy and a dangerous trap of an enemy who would oppose transformation and a war on evil:
Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them that they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for a lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. (Hermann Goering, President of the Reichstag, Nazi Party, Luftwaffe Commander in Chief during World War II.)
It is true, unfortunately, that peacemaking has never been a mission of the U.S. Department of Defense. There is no U.S. Department of Peace. History teaches that peacemakers are sometimes crucified, murdered, and tortured. Perhaps one day as Americans continue to pray "God Bless America," evil will give way, as more and more people become peacemakers. The proposal to introduce a technology for transformation offers a spiritual approach for peacemaking and for ending war. This approach is based on past spiritual defense initiatives undertaken from the Pentagon. Transformation will prove to be the ultimate maneuver in war. This new way of thinking about defense, security, and shielding from acts of terrorism can serve to bring the war on evil to a speedy conclusion.
References:
Detailed information is available pertaining to the following topics: prototype SDI projects; "Technology for Transformation;" MacArthur's ultimate solution for winning the war on evil; prevailing "World Views" on the problem of evil;" definitions of cognitive dissonance and eugenic radiance, and the scientific basis for a new paradigm for transformation; and steps for reaching the common ground of inner silence.
Back to Home Page