David’s Slingshot                              

by John Suter                                  November 2024

David the shepherd boy must have practiced a lot with his slingshot.  Maybe a friend showed him how to use it to fight off wolves.  Maybe they had games to shoot targets.  In any case, he was really good with the weapon.  When he picked up a stone to fight Goliath, he knew he could take down the giant.  Accuracy over brute strength here was a key lesson. 

A similar situation exists in the proliferation of nuclear weapons today.  The weapons themselves have only grown larger, large enough so that one megaton bomb can wipe out an entire city.  Despite the fact that there have been at least two episodes since the Cuban Missile Crisis that came very close to triggering an all-out nuclear war, many nations believe they will be safer if they get the bomb. The confluence of these events should make us search for other solutions – starting now. 

The change in the story is that the new supersonic missiles (SSM) are highly accurate.  The new incoming Secretary of Defense notes that Russian supersonic missiles can take out all the US aircraft carriers in 20 minutes.  This is a huge change.   This is also an opportunity to re-think the need and usefulness for these Goliath nuclear bombs themselves.  It must be an inducement to find and make real change in how we approach national security.  

How do we change this situation?  Decisions on the use of Nuclear Weapons (NW) are being made not only by Decision Makers (DM) near the top of the government and military, but by advisors who, because of their ignorance or hubris, believe that a nuclear war could be won and we (they) could survive.   (The consequences of a nuclear war are spelled out clearly in several books, including “The Doomsday Machine” by Daniel Ellsberg who worked for the RAND corporation and the government).   People at or near the top need better information and better feedback that they will not get from their colleagues.

The changeover to a nuclear weapon-free world will take some thought, but it seems obvious that the SSM will have to be put into place first, primarily in countries that are near nuclear powers.  These can be both nuclear and non-nuclear, large and small countries.  Then they must communicate with Decision Makers and the Family, Friends, and Colleagues (DM-FFC) of existing of Nuclear Powers using hand-delivered letters every few months, letting them know that if any nuclear weapons are detonated in an offensive or defensive manner, that the DM-FFC will be “taken out”.  This requires cooperation and planning by small groups of state and/or non-state actors from three or more states near a nuclear state.  Target DMs must be specific and must be frequently reminded, both privately and publicly, of the consequences of their decision.  Ironically, this may provide cover for those DM’s who can now say “we have no choice”.  Alliances between nations can lead to traps, as we learned from WWI, but alliances of small nations to create feedback loops are more likely to stabilize the system. 

What will stop us from looking for such new security structures?  Fear.  This includes personal fear of looking weak or being different.   The folk tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes” is a tale about the fear of appearing stupid to others.  It reflects how leaders can be fooled by their advisors and continue to move forward, even when the truth is blurted out by a child.   But why did the people around the Emperor not give better feedback?  Fear and ignorance.  We live as social beings in groups, not simply as individuals.  We take cues for our behavior from those around us.  This is both a strength and a weakness.  It can create a fear that makes us want to become stupid – or at least appear so.   

The question of allegiance has taken a step down since the advent of dual citizenship for many leaders and advisors at high levels.  They can hardly demand that anyone else say a pledge of allegiance when they themselves cannot do it.  This may, however, reflect an evolution of the role of the nation-state.  It also raises questions of religion, philosophy and other functions of government.  Is the purpose of humankind to forever fight one another?  Or is this warring behavior a function of the discovery of new weapons in the Christmas stocking of leaders who have no vision but want to remain in the fraternity?  Most of this can be rectified with better communication and better feedback to leaders and to each other.  Robert McNamara’s “In Retrospect” was a search for the reasons for the misleading and misguided sources of advice and information that led us astray and into the war in Vietnam.  He never really found a way to counteract this problem. 

At any level there are many decisions that are not really explicit decisions at all.   There is no specific logical reason or information that causes the decision.  There is a fear of looking weak or different.   Members behave according to what they think is expected of them, either from their common Story or from a “thought leader” who may be re-living their own fears.  Soldiers act differently toward civilians when they are in pairs versus being alone. 

We must create processes and structures to Find, Filter, and Move Useful Information (FFMUI).  Leaders alone, even with their advisors, do not have time to do it.  Such a processes can be created by decision makers at the top without giving up power, but with the possibility of gaining useful information.  Such structures should enhance privacy of discussion, integrity of the information, and efficiency.  

Another situation that may benefit from a better process of information gathering and filtering is the Ukraine War with the obvious need for a future European Security Structure.  If current political leaders cannot imagine such a structure, there are others waiting in the wings to move forward.  People who have been elected but not yet officials cannot presume to negotiate with other governments but there are other people without office who could still meet and exchange ideas now to get the process started.  These meetings can start at any level with stories, seeds of ideas, and tools of communication.  This cannot be ordered but could be suggested by the new incoming administration.