Posted: 09/04/2017

From Merle Parmak, University of Huddersfield, Lecturer in Psychology Digging deeper into resilience The concept of resilience is chronically lopsided in military organisations. In the best case, the military is able to address resilience at the level of individual (talking about selection and training) or unit (talking about leadership and cohesion) leaving the aspect of 'will' untouched. Recruitment environment is progressively multinational to most armed forces worldwide. The changing nature of an 'enemy' may face soldiers with complex moral dilemmas bringing along unpredictable reactions. I have been thinking about links between national resilience amongst recruits and international security. National resilience is very general concept, much less developed than individual or community resilience which compromise its utility. However, acknowledging links between recruitment policy and moral behaviours as well as moral conflicts may bring us closer to see the relevance of higher forms of resilience, lets call it 'moral resilience', in military practice. Response (From Robert David Steele Vivas) This may be the coolest deepest topic I have seen in all of the NATO forums. I grew up with Norman Dixon's The Psychology of Military Incompetence and graduated through House of War and Sorrows of Empire. I ghost wrote the article for the Commandant of the Marine Corps on global intelligence challenges in the 1990's that called for peaceful preventive measures. I think this topic deserves its own workshop, face to face, in Norfolk or Europe. There are in my view three threads: 01 Can you have an effective military drawn from a stupid obese nation? 02 How do you educate officers and troops for 360 degree asymmetric warfare where it really does matter that one avoid collateral dmanage? 03 How do you design intelligence and train, equip, and organize forces to operate in a world where the strategic level of government is a mix of stupid and treasonous, and we refuse to collaborate with multinational partners who have totally different perspectives on our directions? Francois du Cluzel suggested: I do concur with you all, especially when it comes to organize a specific workshop on that topic that hasn't been much explored by NATO yet; we talked about this idea no later than yesterday with Serge! I suggest we continue this discussion with NATO experts on the dedicated forum at: