2026/06/24 by P. Frankel · 1 voice
Business, Management and Accounting · Social Sciences · #Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture #Competitive and Knowledge Intelligence #Intelligence, Security, War Strategy
paper · doi:10.1080/02684527.2026.2688516
openalex publication_date 2026/06/24 · openalex created_date 2026/06/25 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/25
Existing frameworks explain intelligence failure as a breakdown of collection, cognitive bias or organizational dysfunction. However, they do not explain why valid intelligence is dismissed as ‘irrational’ or ‘implausible’ when facing culturally asymmetric adversaries. Recovering Robert B. Bathurst’s neglected work, this article maps the structural dissonance between ‘low-context’ Western and ‘high-context’ strategic logic, analysing Pearl Harbor, Yom Kippur, 9/11, and October 7th, to demonstrate how adversaries have exploited predictable blind spots rooted in divergent assumptions about rationality, risk, and violence. The article introduces the Asymmetric Logic Framework as a diagnostic tool to reduce predictable incomprehension before the next surprise.