During the American Civil Rights movement, Baltimore was on the frontline with; 1) movement gaining access to political power by coercion, and 2) employment of nonviolence techniques. Military history dictates that an insurgency identifies and exploits it’s enemies vulnerabilities. David Galula commented on the American Civil Rights movement by saying ” A Negro movement trying to exploit the negro problem as the basis for a [violet] insurgency in the United States, would be doomed from the start “. Their leaders used nonviolent strategy and tactics that did not play into their adversaries hands. Sun Tzu reported, ” For to win 100 victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill “. The U.S. government indirectly supported the movement. What was the catalyst for the American Civil Rights movement was the Brown vs Board of Education – struck down the principle of ” seperate but equal ” (1954 – U.S. Supreme Court decision). An insurgency movement is classified as a threat to domestic security. Both movements will face two strategic decisions, 1) confronting the government, and 2) maneuver the government from a defacto neutrality to active support. Insurgencies and counterinsurgencies struggle for control of the population – most people are apolitical. Modern theories suggest that insurgency and counterinsurgency will gain control of the grand program of the campaign. General Stanley McChrystal (2009 strategic review) suggested that ” A successful counterinsurgency in an Afghanistan tactic attracts supporters, diminishes support for the adversary,and gains sympathy from bystanders in a position to apply pressure on that adversary “. A civil rights movement tactic was, 1) force an overeaction on the part of the segregationist, and 2) make certain the media was there to document the overeaction. Some time ago American forces in Iraq were confused because they were confronted by a complex insurgency utilizing different groups with similar ideologies and goals. Studying the American Civil Rights movement (classified as a complex insurgency) would have given them an insight into future programs. Confusing an insurgency movement as a monolithic program is wrong, actually it’s a loose confederation of groups; each displaying leadership and preferred tactics, each exhibiting a level a level of tension and rivalry towards the others. A successful counterinsurgency program would be successful if; 1) exploit the differences between these organizations ( al-Qaeda, Taliban, Hezbollah, Arab Spring, etc) instead of classifying them and attacking them altogether, 2) exploit internal rivalries, 3) review your enemies playbook ( past experience, etc.), 4) work to neutralize the terrorists chief weapon, 5) wear down the insurgents by the capacity to absorb the suffering, 6) exercise restraint by not overeacting to terrorist strategies to force overeactions, 7) crack down on other insurgents, 8) attack the weaker strongholds first, working up to the stronger ones, and 9) use all available networks – political, economic, social, and military – forcing the enemy’s decision makers to realize that their strategic goals are underachievable or too costly or both. Fourth generation warfare (4GW) utilizes societies networks to carry on the fight – not attempt to win by defeating their military forces (destroys the enemies political will). Carl Von Clausewitz (Prussian Military Theorist) summarized it as, ” A culminating point of victory “. During the American Civil rights movement; the Voting Rights Act of 1965 defined the main point of the insurgency; ” They achieved their goals in terms of civil rights, however they could not achieve the main objective : economic justice. Local, federal, state agencies need to get involved. Similarities abound in both countries to this day.