Strategy & Policy

Rethinking Sovereignty in the Context of Cyberspace: The Cyber Sovereignty Workshop Series Cynthia E. Ayers "Recent successful "hacks," allegedly carried out by professionals acting on behalf of, or in concert with nation-states have heightened concerns about cyber warfare and sovereignty in the context of cyberspace. To maintain the integrity of U.S. and allied sovereign borders, it is imperative that security measures and defenses are coordinated and choreographed at the policy, strategy, and operational levels in the cyber domain, as well as in the physical world..."

Dr. Jose de Arimateia da Cruz Article by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press According to the Organization of American States (OAS) in its report on “Latin American and Caribbean Cyber Security Trends” released in June 2014, Latin America and the Caribbean have the fastest growing Internet population in the world with 147 million users in 2013 and growing each year. While having more users and more network connections are great advancements for traditional developing nations, they also represent a potential threat. Audrey Kurth Cronin points out that “insurgents and terrorist groups have effectively used the Internet to support their operations for at least a decade. The tools of the global information age have helped them with administrative tasks, coordination of operations, recruitment of potential members, and communications among adherents.” While much of the discussion regarding potential enemy attacks on U.S. cyber critical infrastructure mainly focuses on China, Russia, and Iran, the Americas have been largely ignored in the literature. Why are the Americas important? Why should we be discussing its place within the U.S. national security strategic goals?

Strategic Insights: The Post-Conflict and the Transformation of Colombia’s Armed Forces Dr R Evan Ellis Article by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press

The Pivot to Asia: Can it Serve as the Foundation for American Grand Strategy in the 21st Century Dr Douglas Stuart Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press "Establishing priorities is the indispensable core of strategy formulation. The Obama Administration’s decision to accord top priority to the Indo-Asia-Pacific (IAP) region made good strategic sense both in terms of the opportunities presented by the region’s unprecedented economic growth and the risks associated with the rapidly changing security environment in the IAP."

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 LTC Charles R Burnett, COL William J Cain Jr, LTC Christopher D Compton, Mr Nathan P Freier, LTC Sean M Hankard, Prof Robert S Hume, LTC Gary R Kramlich II, COL J Matthew Lissner, LTC Tobin A Magsig, COL Daniel E Mouton, Mr Michael S Muztafago, COL James M Schultze, Prof John F Troxell, LTC Dennis G Wille Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press "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 that are in many cases 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 advantages, and manipulate risk perceptions in their favor."

The USAWC Strategy Model in Moldova: Developing the Master's Course (Level II PME) for Military and Civilian Professionals COL Florian Circiumaru, Colonel Mark V Montesclaros Issue Paper by the US Army War College, Center for Strategic Leadership "Beginning in 2009, a multinational team of NATO professional military education (PME) experts began providing assistance to the Republic of Moldova’s Armed Forces at the Moldovan Military Institute (later Academy [MMA]) in Chisinau. The team’s broad purpose was to help the Moldovan military adjust from a Soviet-style military educational system to one that more closely mirrored NATO and Western standards. While constitutionally a neutral country, Moldova is a Partnership for Peace (PfP) Consortium member and participant in the Defense Education Enhancement Program (DEEP). As part of the DEEP process, the NATO team, co-led by Colonel (Ret.) John F. Troxell of the USAWC’s Strategic Research Department, was initially charged with two major efforts."

Strategy and Grand Strategy: What Students and Practitioners Need to Know Dr Tami Davis Biddle Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press "In this monograph, Dr. Tami Davis Biddle examines why it is so difficult to devise, implement, and sustain sound strategies and grand strategies. Her analysis begins with an examination of the meaning of the term “strategy” and a history of the ways that political actors have sought to employ strategies and grand strategies to achieve their desired political aims. She examines the reasons why the logic undergirding strategy is often lacking and why challenges of implementation (including bureaucratic politics, unforeseen events, civil-military tensions, and domestic pressures) complicate and undermine desired outcomes. This clear-headed critique, built on a broad base of literature (historical and modern; academic and policy-oriented), will serve as a valuable guide to students and policymakers alike as they seek to navigate their way through the unavoidable challenges—and inevitable twists and turns—inherent in the development and implementation of strategy."

Strategic Insights: Economic Power: Time to Double Down John F. Troxell Article by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press "A recent editorial in The New York Times asked the question, “Who threatens America most?” It proceeded to compare recent pronouncements by incoming senior military leaders, the President, the FBI director, and finally the Director of National Intelligence. The major candidates included the usual nation states (Russia, North Korea, and China), a few nonstate terrorist organizations (ISIS and al-Qaeda), and a couple of unattributed capabilities (weapons of mass destruction and cyberattacks). The editorial concluded with the lament: 'If officials cannot agree on what the most pressing threats are, how can they develop the right strategies and properly allocate resources?' "

The Limits of Offshore Balancing Dr Hal Brands Monograph by the US Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College Press "Should the United States undertake a fundamental strategic retrenchment? Should it roll back, and perhaps do away with, the system of overseas security commitments and military deployments that have anchored its international posture since World War II? Many academic and strategic studies observers have answered “yes” to these questions in recent years. They assert that America’s long-standing, postwar grand strategy has become both dispensable and self-defeating—dispensable because that grand strategy is no longer needed to sustain an advantageous global environment, and self-defeating because it wastes finite means while eliciting adverse behavior from allies and adversaries alike. The proper response to this situation, they believe, is to adopt a minimalist approach referred to as “offshore balancing.” Briefly stated, offshore balancing envisions a dramatic reduction in America’s overseas military deployments and alliance commitments, and a shift toward greater restraint and modesty in U.S. policy writ large. It is premised on the idea that this type of retrenchment will actually produce better security outcomes at a better price— that when it comes to grand strategy, less will actually be more."