At Our Own Peril: DoD Risk Assessment in a Post-Primacy World

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) faces persistent fundamental change in its strategic and operating environments. This report suggests this reality is the product of the United States entering or being in the midst of a new, more competitive, post-U.S. primacy environment. Post-primacy conditions promise far-reaching impacts on U.S. national security and defense strategy. Consequently, there is an urgent requirement for DoD to examine and adapt how it develops strategy and describes, identifies, assesses, and communicates corporate-level risk. This report takes on the latter risk challenge. It argues for a new post-primacy risk concept and its four governing principles of diversity, dynamism, persistent dialogue, and adaptation. The authors suggest that this approach is critical to maintaining U.S. military advantage into the future. Absent change in current risk convention, the report suggests DoD exposes current and future military performance to potential failure or gross under-performance.https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1410/thumbnail.jp

Outplayed: Regaining Strategic Initiative in the Gray Zone, A Report Sponsored by the Army Capabilities Integration Center in Coordination with Joint Staff J-39/Strategic Multi-Layer Assessment Branch

U.S. competitors pursuing meaningful revision or rejection of the current U.S.-led status quo are employing a host of hybrid methods to advance and secure interests contrary to those of the United States. These challengers employ unique combinations of influence, intimidation, coercion, and aggression to incrementally crowd out effective resistance, establish local or regional advantage, and manipulate risk perceptions in their favor. So far, the United States has not come up with a coherent countervailing approach. It is in this “gray zone”—the awkward and uncomfortable space between traditional conceptions of war and peace—where the United States and its defense enterprise face systemic challenges to U.S. position and authority. Gray zone competition and conflict present fundamental challenges to U.S. and partner security and, consequently, should be important pacers for U.S. defense strategy.https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1924/thumbnail.jp

Strategic Competition and Resistance in the 21st Century: Irregular, Catastrophic, Traditional, and Hybrid Challenges in Context

The 2005 National Defense Strategy introduced the now prolific concept of the four challenges--traditional, irregular, catastrophic, and disruptive. Reference to the challenges is now an essential feature of defense deliberations. Yet in spite of the concept’s central place in the defense debates in and out of government, there have been persistent gaps in how the individual challenges are defined and how they should be applied in defense and security policymaking. Written by one of two working-level strategists responsible for the 2005 defense strategy’s conceptual development, this monograph addresses that deficit. It provides the reader with the foundational substance underwriting the three most active challenges--irregular, catastrophic, and traditional--while introducing the concept of the “hybrid norm.”https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/1679/thumbnail.jp

Confronting an Irregular and Catastrophic Future

Each month a member of the SSI faculty writes an editorial for our monthly newsletter. This is the Op-Ed for the October 2004 newsletter

The Strategy Deficit

Each month a member of the SSI faculty writes an editorial for our monthly newsletter. This is the Op-Ed for the April 2008 newsletter

The High Cost of Primacy

Each month a member of the SSI faculty writes an editorial for our monthly newsletter. This is the Op-Ed for the October 2005 newsletter

In Defense of Rational Risk Assessment

Each month a member of the SSI faculty writes an editorial for our monthly newsletter. This is the Op-Ed for the February 2007 newsletter