Lessons Learned: Avoiding the Trading of False Tactical Victory at the Expense of Strategic Defeat

 

The learning of lessons (LL)  is a challenging process for any institution. That is especially true for those inherently hierarchical organizations which have to accept that a real examination of success and failure will inevitably accrue both of those outcomes to its leadership.  We can use careful language and weight observations but in the end the success or failure of operations is invariably a consequence of the Command, Management and Leadership of those entrusted with positions of authority. 

However difficult it is to conduct these processes that difficulty pales in comparison to its importance. A “Relentless Pursuit of Excellence” (to borrow a value from my alma mater) requires an unflinching self-appraisal.  This can only be achieved if predilections, which are really ground-in biases, are recognized from the outset.  Failure to do so allows for confirmation bias and willful ignorance. Neither perspective is value added.

So when it comes to the current events in Ottawa, those surrounding the “Truckers’ Freedom Convoy,” it’s probably important that I admit my self-recognized biases. First and last, I’m a bit of a Rule of Law guy. By that I mean I think that democratic based Civil Society is best served by broad acceptance and adherence to the basic laws of the country as determined by elected officials.  Secondly, I accept that those laws will not be met with broad consensus in all corners but that those who disagree have the opportunity to vote those law makers out. Should they be sufficiently successful in arguing for an alternative view new law makers will be elected and laws will be changed.  Lastly, I very strongly believe that lawlessness is a slippery slope and conscious decisions to “not” hold law breakers to account set dangerous precedents that are merely amplified as time progress and consequentially laws become de facto if not de jure more difficult to enforce. I have visited, deployed to, worked in (not quite countless but a sufficiently large number of) countries that are essentially lawless. There is nothing about these countries I admire. They are not free, the population has few if any real rights. Without exception Canada has been and remains the “Free-est” country I have ever experienced.  Do I agree, with let alone like, the too often feckless political figures that operate on populism and opportunity: not in the least. But, I do love the fact that we Canadians elected them, and generally we elect them based on a reasonably clear understanding of what they will do and not do. (And yes I admit there are always more promises than actions but in a general sense given that we also know that to be true we can’t subsequently claim surprise)

It might be worth noting that although I have no access to classified material my close connections to the Security and Intelligence communities on both sides of the border leave me absolutely ZERO DOUBT about how those few “truckers” that are present have been coopted for more nefarious ends by truly corrupt and immoral actors. I suspect the vast majority of actual truckers are just frustrated, mad and upset. But the fact that they have been “used” by others does not now excuse their lawlessness. If I “know” this,  imagine what those with classified material see and know.

But, and I hope this argument proves my point. Whether you agree or disagree with my own biases the possibility that tactical victory can lead to strategic failure remains ever present.  That is the dynamic in which we currently operate. The window to fix this is short and finite.

Let me add an additional bias / opinion: The management of the “Freedom Convoy” by officials at all levels has been nothing short than complete and utter failure. Attribute blame where you will but I would suggest that failure at the beginning to be a stronger, more present, more active presence provided a tactical victory to the criminal occupation and a tactical failure to city officials. I do not buy, for a moment, that we should have defined victory as merely the absence of “no riots, no injuries, no deaths” I can think of no instance where appeasement of a bully resulted in a win. No proper analysis of the situation in advance, during or immediately following the first weekend could have possibly suggested that this was the standard.

 Imagine

Boss: “We are going to do nothing to disrupt the unlawful activity”

Question: “But won’t this make it more difficult to resolve later on when they get fixed in place ?”

Boss  “Yes, but we can claim we won today”

Question  “Even if it ultimately encourages further criminal actions ? ”

Boss “Yes but we can claim we won today”

The standard should have been, should be and should remain: Have the actions of those in positions in Authority contributed to the long-term stability and security of Canada and its citizens with the least possible price to pay in the immediate short term.

What I mean by this is that by allowing the protestors to congregate and essentially bully and intimidate the OPS into inaction they have established a precedent that is dangerous to everyone, everywhere.  

Both sides get to learn lessons. The protestor’s single greatest lesson learned is that if they are able to mass a sufficiently sized crowd that makes threatening statements, sprinkled with extremists of all types then they will be allowed to continue unabated. Observation of previous protests suggests that not amassing such a mob makes them vulnerable.  Like many I do wonder if the same such tolerance would have been extended to Canadian Muslims or BIPOCs.

So what we have experienced is a tactical failure to prevent or subsequently manage the event, cloaked as tactical success under a misinformed definition of “victory” at the cost of strategic failure.  Ottawa, and indeed Canada writ large has demonstrated that it is vulnerable to a repeat performance. By trading a pyrrhic victory, we avoided (admittedly) hard decisions and actions but have lost considerably in the larger and longer context. Bullies and Cowards exploit weakness. I have seen this around the world, in all its ugly shapes and forms. The requirement for elected officials to capitulate to “demands”, the defending of breaking of the law (but insisting that others adhere to laws they favour) and of course valuing only their freedom but not recognizing the rights of others. (I wonder how many thousands of minimum wage workers in the Rideau Mall, in the midst of a pandemic pushed are into a state of poverty that will take months from which to recover ??).  We have also demonstrated that Hate Mongers are free to walk around and spew their vile nonsense. We have provided a stage and the media has obliged by showcasing them in a perverse attempt to be balanced and fair.

But all is not lost. Fortunately, other Canadian cities and their executive authorities were watching closely and acted appropriately. That is another lesson: Learn from the mistakes of others.  Ottawa can still extract itself from this debacle and change the “take away.” Immediate action before, during and after next weekend.  This starts with politicians passing emergency legislation to empower Law Enforcement Agencies. It continues with law enforcement agencies understanding that tough slogging today makes future events safer and easier for them. I do not pretend these decisions are easy, but that is why we select senior commanders ie to do senior commander like things. Commanders are always going to be unpopular. Striving for popularity merely results in a double failure as invariably you can’t make everyone happy and yet subordinate your responsibilities in an attempt to do so. That’s another lesson. Making people ‘happy” only for today invariably makes them unhappy in the longer term. Everyone can “manage” when there are policy or budget discussions, what is needed now is leadership and command decisions.

It all starts with an understanding of what is the objective and that isn’t a temporary PR victory that can easily be won avoiding taking any action. It is by holding people to account for their criminal acts. I love that Canadians can protest. Their rights to do so vigorously, loudly and as often as they wish must not just be protected but must be championed. I also admit to thinking that many, certainly not all and likely a minority, of the complainants are showing more fragility than I admire. But ultimately and always I land on the side of adherence to the Rule of Law. Enjoying the freedom to protest comes with the obligation of being law abiding.

We still have time to do better, to avoid the strategic failure that would result in a multiple repeats and worsening scenarios of what we experience now.   Learning is hard, but necessary. Time to do some hard things.