52 ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER / OCTOBER 2004 Draft MG James M. Dubik, Director of the Experimentation Directorate (J-9), Joint Forces Command, be- gan the conference by articulating the immense changes affecting the Army profession, changes that the conference was convened to consider. Dubik stated, “Two major historical shifts have been occur- ring in the past decade: first, the end of the Cold War and the shift to the yet-to-be-determined new strategic arrangement; second, the emergence of the Information Age and the social, cultural, political, economic, fiscal, corporate, reli- gious, and military shifts required to adjust to this new age. These two historical shifts will continue to have profound, practical effects on our profession.” Dubik likened these changes to two huge tsunamis hitting the pro- fession at the same time. “When everything settles,” he went on to say, “our professional landscape will be different from what it is now. But, no doubt, when the waters of change recede, not everything will have changed—the nature of war will remain the same.” He clarified this statement with examples such as the root causes for war; the fear, fog, friction, sacrifi ce, comradeship, courage, leadership, and adapt- ability necessary in the conduct of war; and the use of war as a political instrument. What will change, he stated, “is that our understanding of war and the conduct of war will be different. And therein lies the dif- ficulty: as a profession, we have to think through what should change and what should remain the same. Bureaucracies don’t do well at this; professions do.” MG Dubik was describing how the Army, as a producing organiza- tion, had “long-developed organiza- tional habits of mind and behavior” to accommodate the exigencies of the bi-polar security arrangements of the Cold War. “The tactical, doc- trinal, and strategic systems we use,” he said, “are how we interpret our portion of reality—war and its conduct. These systems help the profession identify what to believe and what to doubt; what is true and what is false. And these systems help our bureaucracy carry out the actions resulting from our beliefs and truths. These are the true ‘sa- cred cows’ of our profession…But as a former commandant here, retired GEN David Bramlett ’64 told me, ‘Sacred cows make good shoes.’ ” Dubik left his audience sharply focused on the immense issue he had described, and to which the remainder of the conference was dedicated. How will such enormous change which requires nothing less than “a Defense Transformation during war” affect the Army as a profession? As Dubik alluded in his opening speech, adapting to that change should not to be an “either/ or” process. Choosing one extreme or the other (war or non-war) to solve current problems this new strategic arrangement presents is a type of thinking held over from the Cold War; an Industrial Age, bi-modal frame of reference. In the globalized Information Age in which the Army operates today, it “must be able to win any war against any kind of enemy, under any condition.” More than one approach or perhaps a little of all possible approaches will be required for success. This proposition underscores a component missing at the strategic level of the Army. The question, “Who is responsible to study the by Dr. Don M. Snider ’62 & CPT Leonard L. Lira PHOTOS BY DOIM Phase II ■ Senior Leader Conference XLI The Future of the Army Profession On the evening of 3 Jun 2004, Superintendent LTG William Lennox ’71 commenced the 41st Senior Confer- ence to which he had invited university researchers, civilian policymakers, and senior Army professionals to focus critically once again on the Army as a profession.