Excerpt from From Dictatorship to
Democracy by Gene Sharp
6
The Need for Strategic Planning
POLITICAL DEFIANCE CAMPAIGNS against dictatorships may begin in a
variety of ways. In the past these struggles have almost always been unplanned
and essentially accidental. Specific grievances that have triggered past
initial actions have varied widely, but often included new brutalities, the
arrest or killing of a highly regarded person, a new repressive policy or
order, food shortages, disrespect toward religious beliefs, or an anniversary
of an important related event.
Sometimes, a particular act by the dictatorship
has so enraged the populace that they have launched into action without having
any idea how the rising might end. At other times a courageous individual or a
small group may have taken action which aroused support. A specific grievance
may be recognized by others as similar to wrongs they had experienced and they,
too, may thus join the struggle. Sometimes, a specific call for resistance from
a small group or individual may meet an unexpectedly large response.
While spontaneity has some positive qualities, it has often had
disadvantages. Frequently, the democratic resisters have not anticipated the
brutalities of the dictatorship, so that they suffered gravely and the
resistance has collapsed. At times the lack of planning by democrats has left
crucial decisions to chance, with disastrous results. Even when the oppressive
system was brought down, lack of planning on how to handle the transition to a
democratic system has contributed to the emergence of a new dictatorship.
Realistic planning
In the future, unplanned popular action will undoubtedly play
significant roles in risings against dictatorships. However, it is now possible
to calculate the most effective ways to bring down a dictatorship, to assess
when the political situation and popular mood are ripe, and to choose how to
initiate a campaign. Very careful thought based on a realistic assessment
of the situation and the capabilities of the populace is required in order to
select effective ways to achieve freedom under such circumstances.
If one wishes to accomplish something, it is wise to plan how to do it.
The more important the goal, or the graver the consequences of failure, the
more important planning becomes. Strategic planning increases the likelihood
that all available resources will be mobilized and employed most effectively.
This is especially true for a democratic movement – which has limited material
resources and whose supporters will be in danger – that is trying to bring down
a powerful dictatorship. In contrast, the dictatorship usually will have access
to vast material resources, organizational strength, and ability to perpetrate
brutalities.
“To plan a strategy” here means to calculate a course of action that
will make it more likely to get from the present to the desired future
situation. In terms of this discussion, it means from a dictatorship to a
future democratic system. A plan to achieve that objective will usually consist
of a phased series of campaigns and other organized activities designed to
strengthen the oppressed population and society and to weaken the dictatorship.
Note here that the objective is not simply to destroy the current dictatorship
but to emplace a democratic system. A grand strategy that limits its objective
to merely destroying the incumbent dictatorship runs a great risk of producing
another tyrant.
Hurdles to planning
Some exponents of freedom in various parts of the world do not bring
their full capacities to bear on the problem of how to achieve liberation. Only
rarely do these advocates fully recognize the extreme importance of careful
strategic planning before they act. Consequently, this is almost never done.
Why is it that the people who have the vision of bringing political
freedom to their people should so rarely prepare a comprehensive strategic plan
to achieve that goal? Unfortunately, often most people in democratic opposition
groups do not understand the need for strategic planning or are not accustomed
or trained to think strategically. This is a difficult task. Constantly harassed
by the dictatorship, and overwhelmed by immediate responsibilities, resistance
leaders often do not have the safety or time to develop strategic thinking
skills.
Instead, it is a common pattern simply to react to the initiatives of
the dictatorship. The opposition is then always on the defensive, seeking to
maintain limited liberties or bastions of freedom, at best slowing the advance
of the dictatorial controls or causing certain problems for the regime’s new
policies.
Some individuals and groups, of course, may not see the need for broad
long-term planning of a liberation movement. Instead, they may naïvely think
that if they simply espouse their goal strongly, firmly, and long enough, it
will somehow come to pass. Others assume that if they simply live and witness
according to their principles and ideals in face of difficulties, they are
doing all they can to implement them. The espousal of humane goals and loyalty
to ideals are admirable, but are grossly inadequate to end a dictatorship and
to achieve freedom.
Other opponents of dictatorship may naïvely think that if only they use
enough violence, freedom will come. But, as noted earlier, violence is no
guarantor of success. Instead of liberation, it can lead to defeat, massive
tragedy, or both. In most situations the dictatorship is best equipped for
violent struggle and the military realities rarely, if ever, favor the
democrats.
There are also activists who base their actions on what they “feel” they
should do. These approaches are, however, not only egocentric but also offer no
guidance for developing a grand strategy of liberation.
Action based on a “bright idea” that someone has had is also limited.
What is needed instead is action based on careful calculation of the “next
steps” required to topple the dictatorship. Without strategic analysis,
resistance leaders will often not know what that “next step” should be, for
they have not thought carefully about the successive specific steps required to
achieve victory. Creativity and bright ideas are very important, but they need
to be utilized in order to advance the strategic situation of the democratic
forces.
Acutely aware of the multitude of actions that could be taken against
the dictatorship and unable to determine where to begin, some people counsel
“Do everything simultaneously.” That might be helpful but, of course, is
impossible, especially for relatively weak movements. Furthermore, such an
approach provides no guidance on where to begin, on where to concentrate
efforts, and how to use often limited resources.
Other persons and groups may see the need for some planning, but are
only able to think about it on a short-term or tactical basis. They may not see
that longer-term planning is necessary or possible. They may at times be unable
to think and analyze in strategic terms, allowing themselves to be repeatedly
distracted by relatively small issues, often responding to the opponents’
actions rather than seizing the initiative for the democratic resistance.
Devoting so much energy to short-term activities, these leaders often fail to
explore several alternative courses of action which could guide the overall
efforts so that the goal is constantly approached.
It is also just possible that some democratic movements do not plan a
comprehensive strategy to bring down the dictatorship, concentrating instead
only on immediate issues, for another reason. Inside themselves, they do not
really believe that the dictatorship can be ended by their own efforts.
Therefore, planning how to do so is considered to be a romantic waste of time
or an exercise in futility. People struggling for freedom against established
brutal dictatorships are often confronted by such immense military and police
power that it appears the dictators can accomplish whatever they will. Lacking
real hope, these people will, nevertheless, defy the dictatorship for reasons
of integrity and perhaps history. Though they will never admit it, perhaps
never consciously recognize it, their actions appear to themselves as hopeless.
Hence, for them, long-term comprehensive strategic planning has no merit.
The result of such failures to plan strategically is often drastic:
one’s strength is dissipated, one’s actions are ineffective, energy is wasted
on minor issues, advantages are not utilized, and sacrifices are for naught. If
democrats do not plan strategically they are likely to fail to achieve their
objectives. A poorly planned, odd mixture of activities will not move a major
resistance effort forward. Instead, it will more likely allow the dictatorship
to increase its controls and power.
Unfortunately, because comprehensive strategic plans for liberation are
rarely, if ever, developed, dictatorships appear much more durable than they in
fact are. They survive for years or decades longer than need be the case.
Four important terms in strategic planning
In order to help us to think strategically, clarity about the meanings
of four basic terms is important.
Grand strategy is the conception that serves to
coordinate and direct the use of all appropriate and available resources
(economic, human, moral, political, organizational, etc.) of a group seeking to
attain its objectives in a conflict.
Grand strategy, by focusing primary attention on the group’s objectives
and resources in the conflict, determines the most appropriate technique of
action (such as conventional military warfare or nonviolent struggle) to be
employed in the conflict. In planning a grand strategy resistance leaders must
evaluate and plan which pressures and influences are to be brought to bear upon
the opponents. Further, grand strategy will include decisions on the appropriate
conditions and timing under which initial and subsequent resistance campaigns
will be launched.
Grand strategy sets the basic framework for the selection of more
limited strategies for waging the struggle. Grand strategy also determines the
allocation of general tasks to particular groups and the distribution of
resources to them for use in the struggle.
Strategy is the conception of how best to achieve
particular objectives in a conflict, operating within the scope of the chosen
grand strategy. Strategy is concerned with whether, when, and how to fight, as
well as how to achieve maximum effectiveness in struggling for certain ends. A
strategy has been compared to the artist’s concept, while a strategic plan is
the architect’s blueprint.12
Strategy may also include efforts to develop a strategic situation that
is so advantageous that the opponents are able to foresee that open conflict is
likely to bring their certain defeat, and therefore capitulate without an open
struggle. Or, if not, the improved strategic situation will make success of the
challengers certain in struggle. Strategy also involves how to act to make good
use of successes when gained.
Applied to the course of the struggle itself, the strategic plan is the
basic idea of how a campaign shall develop, and how its separate components
shall be fitted together to contribute most advantageously to achieve its
objectives. It involves the skillful deployment of particular action groups in
smaller operations. Planning for a wise strategy must take into consideration
the requirements for success in the operation of the chosen technique of struggle.
Different techniques will have different requirements. Of course, just
fulfilling “requirements” is not sufficient to ensure success. Additional
factors may also be needed.
In devising strategies, the democrats must clearly define their
objectives and determine how to measure the effectiveness of efforts to achieve
them. This definition and analysis permits the strategist to identify the
precise requirements for securing each selected objective. This need for
clarity and definition applies equally to tactical planning.
Tactics and methods of action are used to implement the strategy. Tactics
relate to the skillful use of one’s able
to foresee that open conflict is likely to bring their certain defeat, and
therefore capitulate without an open struggle. Or, if not, the improved
strategic situation will make success of the challengers certain in struggle.
Strategy also involves how to act to make good use of successes when gained.
Applied to the course of the struggle itself, the strategic plan is the
basic idea of how a campaign shall develop, and how its separate components
shall be fitted together to contribute most advantageously to achieve its
objectives. It involves the skillful deployment of particular action groups in
smaller operations. Planning for a wise strategy must take into consideration
the requirements for success in the operation of the chosen technique of
struggle. Different techniques will have different requirements. Of course,
just fulfilling “requirements” is not sufficient to ensure success. Additional
factors may also be needed.
In devising strategies, the democrats must clearly define their
objectives and determine how to measure the effectiveness of efforts to achieve
them. This definition and analysis permits the strategist to identify the
precise requirements for securing each selected objective. This need for
clarity and definition applies equally to tactical planning.
Tactics and methods of action are used to implement the strategy. Tactics
relate to the skillful use of one’s forces to the best advantage in a limited
situation. A tactic is a limited action, employed to achieve a restricted
objective. The choice of tactics is governed by the conception of how best in a
restricted phase of a conflict to utilize the available means of fighting to
implement the strategy. To be most effective, tactics and methods must be
chosen and applied with constant attention to the achievement of strategic
objectives. Tactical gains that do not reinforce the attainment of strategic
objectives may in the end turn out to be wasted energy.
A tactic is thus concerned with a limited course of action that fits
within the broad strategy, just as a strategy fits within the grand strategy.
Tactics are always concerned with fighting, whereas strategy includes wider
considerations. A particular tactic can only be understood as part of the
overall strategy of a battle or a campaign. Tactics are applied for shorter
periods of time than strategies, or in smaller areas (geographical,
institutional, etc.), or by a more limited number of people, or for more
limited objectives. In nonviolent action the distinction between a tactical
objective and a strategic objective may be partly indicated by whether the
chosen objective of the action is minor or major.
Offensive tactical engagements are selected to support attainment of
strategic objectives. Tactical engagements are the tools of the strategist in
creating conditions favorable for delivering decisive attacks against an
opponent. It is most important, therefore, that those given responsibility for
planning and executing tactical operations be skilled in assessing the
situation, and selecting the most appropriate methods for it. Those expected to
participate must be trained in the use of the chosen technique and the specific
methods.
Method refers to the specific weapons or means
of action. Within the technique of nonviolent struggle, these include the
dozens of particular forms of action (such as the many kinds of strikes,
boycotts, political noncooperation, and the like) cited in Chapter Five. (See
also Appendix.)
The development of a responsible and effective strategic plan for a
nonviolent struggle depends upon the careful formulation and selection of the
grand strategy, strategies, tactics, and methods.
The main lesson of this discussion is that a calculated use of one’s
intellect is required in careful strategic planning for liberation from a
dictatorship. Failure to plan intelligently can contribute to disasters, while
the effective use of one’s intellectual capacities can chart a strategic course
that will judiciously utilize one’s available resources to move the society
toward the goal of liberty and democracy.
7
Planning Strategy
IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE chances for success, resistance leaders will
need to formulate a comprehensive plan of action capable of strengthening the
suffering people, weakening and then destroying the dictatorship, and building
a durable democracy. To achieve such a plan of action, a careful assessment of
the situation and of the options for effective action is needed. Out of such a
careful analysis both a grand strategy and the specific campaign strategies for
achieving freedom can be developed. Though related, the development of grand
strategy and campaign strategies are two separate processes. Only after the
grand strategy has been developed can the specific campaign strategies be fully
developed. Campaign strategies will need to be designed to achieve and
reinforce the grand strategic objectives.
The development of resistance strategy requires attention to many
questions and tasks. Here we shall identify some of the important factors that
need to be considered, both at the grand strategic level and the level of
campaign strategy. All strategic planning, however, requires that the resistance
planners have a profound understanding of the entire conflict situation,
including attention to physical, historical, governmental, military, cultural,
social, political, psychological, economic, and international factors.
Strategies can only be developed in the context of the particular struggle and
its background.
Of primary importance, democratic leaders and strategic planners will
want to assess the objectives and importance of the cause. Are the objectives
worth a major struggle, and why? It is critical to determine the real objective
of the struggle. We have argued here that overthrow of the dictatorship or
removal of the present dictators is not enough. The objective in these
conflicts needs to be the establishment of a free society with a democratic
system of government. Clarity on this point will influence the development of a
grand strategy and of the ensuing specific strategies.
Particularly, strategists will need to answer many fundamental
questions, such as these:
•What are the main obstacles to achieving freedom?
•What factors will facilitate achieving freedom?
•What are the main strengths of the dictatorship?
•What are the various weaknesses of the dictatorship?
•To what degree are the sources of power for the dictatorship
vulnerable?
•What are the strengths of the democratic forces and the general
population?
•What are the weaknesses of the democratic forces and how can they be
corrected?
•What is the status of third parties, not immediately involved in the
conflict, who already assist or might assist either the dictatorship or the
democratic movement, and if so in what ways?
Choice of means
At the grand strategic level, planners will need to choose the main
means of struggle to be employed in the coming conflict. The merits and
limitations of several alternative techniques of struggle will need to be
evaluated, such as conventional military warfare, guerrilla warfare, political
defiance, and others.
In making this choice the strategists will need to consider such
questions as the following: Is the chosen type of struggle within the
capacities of the democrats? Does the chosen technique utilize strengths of the
dominated population? Does this technique target the weaknesses of the
dictatorship, or does it strike at its strongest points? Do the means help the
democrats become more self-reliant, or do they require dependency on third parties
or external suppliers? What is the record of the use of the chosen means in
bringing down dictatorships? Do they increase or limit the casualties and destruction
that may be incurred in the coming conflict? Assuming success in ending the
dictatorship, what effect would the selected means have on the type of
government that would arise from the struggle? The types of action determined
to be counterproductive will need to be excluded in the developed grand strategy.
In previous chapters we have argued that political defiance offers
significant comparative advantages to other techniques of struggle. Strategists
will need to examine their particular conflict situation and determine whether
political defiance provides affirmative answers to the above questions.
Planning for democracy
It should be remembered that against a dictatorship the objective of the
grand strategy is not simply to bring down the dictators but to install a
democratic system and make the rise of a new dictatorship impossible. To
accomplish these objectives, the chosen means of struggle will need to
contribute to a change in the distribution of effective power in the society.
Under the dictatorship the population and civil institutions of the society
have been too weak, and the government too strong. Without a change in this
imbalance, a new set of rulers can, if they wish, be just as dictatorial as the
old ones. A “palace revolution” or a coup d’état therefore is not welcome.
Political defiance contributes to a more equitable distribution of
effective power through the mobilization of the society against the
dictatorship, as was discussed in Chapter Five. This process occurs in several
ways. The development of a nonviolent struggle capacity means that the
dictatorship’s capacity for violent repression no longer as easily produces
intimidation and submission among the population. The population will have at
its disposal powerful means to counter and at times block the exertion of the
dictators’ power. Further, the mobilization of popular power through political
defiance will strengthen the independent institutions of the society. The
experience of once exercising effective power is not quickly forgotten. The
knowledge and skill gained in struggle will make the population less likely to
be easily dominated by would-be dictators. This shift in power relationships
would ultimately make establishment of a durable democratic society much more
likely.
External assistance
As part of the preparation of a grand strategy it is necessary to assess
what will be the relative roles of internal resistance and external pressures
for disintegrating the dictatorship. In this analysis we have argued that the
main force of the struggle must be borne from inside the country itself. To the
degree that international assistance comes at all, it will be stimulated by the
internal struggle.
As a modest supplement, efforts can be made to mobilize world public
opinion against the dictatorship, on humanitarian, moral, and religious
grounds. Efforts can be taken to obtain diplomatic, political, and economic
sanctions by governments and international organizations against the
dictatorship. These may take the forms of economic and military weapons embargoes,
reduction in levels of diplomatic recognition or the breaking of diplomatic
ties, banning of economic assistance and prohibition of investments in the
dictatorial country, expulsion of the dictatorial government from various
international organizations and from United Nations bodies. Further,
international assistance, such as the provision of financial and communications
support, can also be provided directly to the democratic forces.
Formulating a grand strategy
Following an assessment of the situation, the choice of means, and a
determination of the role of external assistance, planners of the grand
strategy will need to sketch in broad strokes how the conflict might best be
conducted. This broad plan would stretch from the present to the future
liberation and the institution of a democratic system. In formulating a grand
strategy these planners will need to ask themselves a variety of questions. The following questions pose (in a
more specific way than earlier) the types of considerations required in
devising a grand strategy for a political defiance struggle:
How might the long-term struggle best begin? How can the oppressed
population muster sufficient self-confidence and strength to act to challenge
the dictatorship, even initially in a limited way? How could the population’s
capacity to apply noncooperation and defiance be increased with time and
experience? What might be the objectives of a series of limited campaigns to
regain democratic control over the society and limit the dictatorship?
Are there independent institutions that have survived the dictatorship
which might be used in the struggle to establish freedom? What institutions of
the society can be regained from the dictators’ control, or what institutions
need to be newly created by the democrats to meet their needs and establish
spheres of democracy even while the dictatorship continues?
How can organizational strength in the resistance be developed? How can
participants be trained? What resources (finances, equipment, etc.) will be
required throughout the struggle? What types of symbolism can be most effective
in mobilizing the population?
By what kinds of action and in what stages could the sources of power of
the dictators be incrementally weakened and severed? How can the resisting
population simultaneously persist in its defiance and also maintain the
necessary nonviolent discipline? How can the society continue to meet its basic
needs during the course of the struggle? How can social order be maintained in
the midst of the conflict? As victory approaches, how can the democratic
resistance continue to build the institutional base of the post-dictatorship
society to make the transition as smooth as possible?
It must be remembered that no single blueprint exists or can be created
to plan strategy for every liberation movement against dictatorships. Each
struggle to bring down a dictatorship and establish a democratic system will be
somewhat different. No two situations will be exactly alike. Each dictatorship
will have some individual characteristics, and the capacities of the
freedom-seeking population will vary. Planners of grand strategy for a
political defiance struggle will require a profound understanding not only of
their specific conflict situation, but of their chosen means of struggle as
well.13
When the grand strategy of the struggle has been carefully planned there
are sound reasons for making it widely known. The large numbers of people
required to participate may be more willing and able to act if they understand
the general conception, as well as specific instructions. This knowledge could
potentially have a very positive effect on their morale, their willingness to
participate, and to act appropriately. The general outlines of the grand
strategy would become known to the dictators in any case and knowledge of its
features potentially could lead them to be less brutal in their repression,
knowing that it could rebound politically against themselves. Awareness of the
special characteristics of the grand strategy could potentially also contribute
to dissension and defections from the dictators’ own camp.
Once a grand strategic plan for bringing down the dictatorship and
establishing a democratic system has been adopted, it is important for the
pro-democracy groups to persist in applying it. Only in very rare circumstances
should the struggle depart from the initial grand strategy. When there is
abundant evidence that the chosen grand strategy was misconceived, or that the
circumstances of the struggle have fundamentally changed, planners may need to
alter the grand strategy. Even then, this should be done only after a basic
reassessment has been made and a new more adequate grand strategic plan has
been developed and adopted.
Planning campaign strategies
However wise and promising the developed grand strategy to end the
dictatorship and to institute democracy may be, a grand strategy does not
implement itself. Particular strategies will need to be developed to guide the
major campaigns aimed at undermining the dictators’ power. These strategies, in
turn, will incorporate and guide a range of tactical engagements that will aim
to strike decisive blows against the dictators’ regime. The tactics and the
specific methods of action must be chosen carefully so that they contribute to
achieving the goals of each particular strategy. The discussion here focuses
exclusively on the level of strategy.
Strategists planning the major campaigns will, like those who planned
the grand strategy, require a thorough understanding of the nature and modes of
operation of their chosen technique of struggle.
Just as military officers must
understand force structures, tactics, logistics, munitions, the effects of
geography, and the like in order to plot military strategy, political defiance
planners must understand the nature and strategic principles of nonviolent
struggle. Even then, however, knowledge of nonviolent struggle, attention to
recommendations in this essay, and answers to the questions posed here will not
themselves produce strategies. The formulation of strategies for the struggle
still requires an informed creativity.
In planning the strategies for the specific selective resistance
campaigns and for the longer term development of the liberation struggle, the
political defiance strategists will need to consider various issues and
problems. The following are among these:
•Determination of the specific objectives of the campaign and their
contributions to implementing the grand strategy.
•Consideration of the specific methods, or political weapons, that can
best be used to implement the chosen strategies. Within each overall plan for a
particular strategic campaign it will be necessary to determine what smaller,
tactical plans and which specific methods of action should be used to impose
pressures and restrictions against the dictatorship’s sources of power. It
should be remembered that the achievement of major objectives will come as a
result of carefully chosen and implemented specific smaller steps.
•Determination whether, or how, economic issues should be related to the
overall essentially political struggle. If economic issues are to be prominent
in the struggle, care will be needed that the economic grievances can actually
be remedied after the dictatorship is ended. Otherwise, disillusionment and
disaffection may set in if quick solutions are not provided during the
transition period to a democratic society. Such disillusionment could
facilitate the rise of dictatorial forces promising an end to economic woes.
•Determination in advance of what kind of leadership structure and
communications system will work best for initiating the resistance struggle.
What means of decision-making and communication will be possible during the
course of the struggle to give continuing guidance to the resisters and the
general population?
•Communication of the resistance news to the general population, to the
dictators’ forces, and the international press. Claims and reporting should
always be strictly factual. Exaggerations and unfounded claims will undermine
the credibility of the resistance.
•Plans for self-reliant constructive social, educational, economic, and
political activities to meet the needs of one’s own people during the coming
conflict. Such projects can be conducted by persons not directly involved in
the resistance activities.
•Determination of what kind of external assistance is desirable in
support of the specific campaign or the general liberation struggle. How can
external help be best mobilized and used without making the internal struggle
dependent on uncertain external factors? Attention will need to be given to
which external groups are most likely, and most appropriate, to assist, such as
non-governmental organizations (social movements, religious or political
groups, labor unions, etc.), governments, and/or the United Nations and its
various bodies.
Furthermore, the resistance planners will need to take measures to
preserve order and to meet social needs by one’s own forces during mass
resistance against dictatorial controls. This will not only create alternative
independent democratic structures and meet genuine needs, but also will reduce
credibility for any claims that ruthless repression is required to halt
disorder and lawlessness.
Spreading the idea of noncooperation
For successful political defiance against a dictatorship, it is
essential that the population grasp the idea of noncooperation. As illustrated
by the “Monkey Master” story (see Chapter Three), the basic idea is simple: if
enough of the subordinates refuse to continue their cooperation long enough
despite repression, the oppressive system will be weakened and finally
collapse.
People living under the dictatorship may be already familiar with this
concept from a variety of sources. Even so, the democratic forces should
deliberately spread and popularize the idea of noncooperation. The “Monkey
Master” story, or a similar one, could be disseminated throughout the society.
Such a story could be easily understood. Once the general concept of
noncooperation is grasped, people will be able to understand the relevance of
future calls to practice noncooperation with the dictatorship. They will also
be able on their own to improvise a myriad of specific forms of noncooperation
in new situations.
Despite the difficulties and dangers in attempts to communicate ideas,
news, and resistance instructions while living under dictatorships, democrats
have frequently proved this to be possible. Even under Nazi and Communist rule
it was possible for resisters to communicate not only with other individuals
but even with large public audiences through the production of illegal
newspapers, leaflets, books, and in later years with audio and video cassettes.
With the advantage of prior strategic planning, general guidelines for
resistance can be prepared and disseminated. These can indicate the issues and
circumstances under which the population should protest and withhold
cooperation, and how this might be done. Then, even if communications from the
democratic leadership are severed, and specific instructions have not been
issued or received, the population will know how to act on certain important
issues. Such guidelines would also provide a test to identify counterfeit
“resistance instructions” issued by the political police designed to provoke
discrediting action.
Repression and countermeasures
Strategic planners will need to assess the likely responses and
repression, especially the dictatorship to the actions of the democratic
resistance. It will be necessary to determine how to withstand, counteract, or
avoid this possible increased repression without submission. Tactically, for
specific occasions, appropriate warnings to the population and the resisters
about expected repression would be in order, so that they will know the risks
of participation. If repression may be serious, preparations for medical
assistance for wounded resisters should be made.
Anticipating repression, the strategists will do well to consider in
advance the use of tactics and methods that will contribute to achieving the
specific goal of a campaign, or liberation, but that will make brutal
repression less likely or less possible. For example, street demonstrations and
parades against extreme dictatorships may be dramatic, but they may also risk
thousands of dead demonstrators. The high cost to the demonstrators may not,
however, actually apply more pressure on the dictatorship than would occur
through everyone staying home, a strike, or massive acts of noncooperation from
the civil servants.
If it has been proposed that provocative resistance action risking high
casualties will be required for a strategic purpose, then one should very
carefully consider the proposal’s costs and possible gains. Will the population
and the resisters be likely to behave in a disciplined and nonviolent manner
during the course of the struggle? Can they resist provocations to violence?
Planners must consider what measures may be taken to keep nonviolent discipline
and maintain the resistance despite brutalities. Will such measures as pledges,
policy statements, discipline leaflets, marshals for demonstrations, and
boycotts of proviolence persons and groups be possible and effective? Leaders
should always be alert for the presence of agents provocateurs whose mission
will be to incite the demonstrators to violence.
Adhering to the strategic plan
Once a sound strategic plan is in place, the democratic forces should
not be distracted by minor moves of the dictators that may tempt them to depart
from the grand strategy and the strategy for a particular campaign, causing
them to focus major activities on unimportant issues. Nor should the emotions
of the moment – perhaps in response to new brutalities by the dictatorship – be
allowed to divert the democratic resistance from its grand strategy or the
campaign strategy. The brutalities may have been perpetrated precisely in order
to provoke the democratic forces to abandon their well-laid plan and even to
commit violent acts in order that the dictators could more easily defeat them.
As long as the basic analysis is judged to be sound, the task of the
pro-democracy forces is to press forward stage by stage. Of course, changes in
tactics and intermediate objectives will occur and good leaders will always be
ready to exploit opportunities. These adjustments should not be confused with
objectives of the grand strategy or the objectives of the specific campaign.
Careful implementation of the chosen grand strategy and of strategies for
particular campaigns will greatly contribute to success.
