Fleeing to the war zone
The self-deployment of veterans to Ukraine is a consequence of an absence of leadership.
David Grantham’s book Consequences: An Intelligence Officer’s War is published by Blue Ear Books and available for US$17.95 plus $3.95 U.S. shipping. You can order it via this link.
We are witnessing in Ukraine something that is altogether interesting, powerful, and potentially dangerous. The self-deployment of people may alter the landscape of warfare.
Former military from all over the world, medics, humanitarians, those wanting to stop human trafficking, all of them made haste for Ukraine, and now a complicated list of people with a litany of motivations, grievances, and convictions have all inserted themselves into a deadly situation. For right or wrong, it doesn’t matter now. It is a story of nuance, and one with consequences that we need to unpack immediately - because I believe this phenomenon will become routine.
I wrote my memoir Consequences because I learned in the intelligence field how important it is in war, policy, and relationships, to appreciate and understand nuance. By embracing that approach, we could arrive at some truths, no matter how complicated they might be. And perhaps those truths could help us understand the consequences for our future, even if we don’t completely understand the newness of what’s in front of us.
This leads me back to the movement of international self-deployment: Is it goodwill? An attempt to reclaim past glory as a military fighter? A desire to be a guardian to those victimized by what many feel is unprovoked aggression? Is it a sort of well-meaning mercenary impulse, moving in to replace hesitant governments? Sure. All of those things. And none of them.
Absolutely too, it is modern transportation, crypto currency, restive veterans of other wars, and challenges to state borders, all of which have facilitated greater ease of individual or group self-deployment.
In law enforcement, the field I work in now, the concept of self-deployment became a real issue when active shooters, unfortunately, became a norm of sorts. Well-intended off-duty police from non-responding agencies or retired officers would show up at scenes to help, and all they usually did was complicate the issue. You can imagine how an unidentified man in civilian clothes with guns would cause short-term havoc. Today, there is training specifically to expect, address, and quarantine self-deployers, so that the scene can remain secure.
That may become a problem in the war zone. It may not. But we are certainly learning right now the consequences of self-deployment in war.
But there is a bigger consequence that seems apparent: A mass movement to self-deploy to war zones speaks to a dwindling trust in modern governments to do the job. I think that lack of trust in modern governments stems from a recent history of them not appreciating nuance and not speaking truthfully.
This phenomenon of self-deployment seems to be largely motivated by a void in leadership. And, at least through American eyes, we may look back and say the turning point came with the Afghanistan withdrawal.
Like so many others, I was watching from home as the Afghanistan withdrawal collapsed into chaos. My shock turned to anger as word of slaughtered Marines hit my news feed. “We are experts on suicide bombers now,” I yelled to my veteran friend. “Why in the world were they feet from a massive crowd inside a concrete funnel? No stand-off distance, no nothing…” My voice trailed off.
An admission was then practically dragged out of America’s military brass when it became apparent that the U.S. retaliation for the suicide bomber was a missile strike against a carload of innocent Afghans. I was incredulous.
Not to be outdone, military brass then called the evacuation one of the most successful airlifts in American military history. I was stunned. They were right – assuming the goal was merely to move as many humans as possible from one location to another. But they were blatantly parsing through the obvious reality for a small, convenient truth. I had to admit then that such was the strategy for too long in Afghanistan.
Under this cloud of half-truths, former American military, NGOs, and others trickled and then poured into Afghanistan. Most, it would seem, were trying to save former colleagues, help defend against Taliban encroachment, or stop the pending collapse of the country. But there seemed to be a shared sense that the American government was not up to the task.
I’ve since heard of veterans confronting former commanders, asking why. “We all know what was going on. We knew what had to change. We knew how we had to adapt to win. Why did we double down for twenty years?” In other words, why didn’t someone speak the truth?
As in Afghanistan, some good things will happen in and around Ukraine from self-deployment. Mixed results will emerge from well-intended actions, to be sure. Opportunists will exploit it all for their own glory too. We will learn the consequences of self-deployment in real time in and around Ukraine, as we did in Afghanistan.
But I believe that the mere act of self-deployment is a consequence of an absence of leadership. It speaks to a perceived void in governance, a feeling of hollowness in leaders’ words. This reality may be changing the landscape of warfare. That is something to watch.
David Grantham’s book Consequences: An Intelligence Officer’s War is published by Blue Ear Books and available for US$17.95 plus $3.95 U.S. shipping. You can order it via this link.
This Substack newsletter from Blue Ear Books features occasional articles by authors of the books we publish. This newsletter is free, but consider supporting our work with a modest paid subscription.