The 2018 National Defense Strategy: Continuity and Competition Kelly A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Strategic Studies Quarterly Quarterly Strategic Studies SUMMER 2018 Volume 12, No. 2 The 2018 National Defense Strategy: Continuity and Competition Kelly A. Grieco The Trump Nuclear Posture Review: Three Issues, Nine Implications Stephen J. Cimbala FEATURE ARTICLE SUMMER 2018 SUMMER Attribution and Operational Art: Implications for Competing in Time Lt Col Garry S. Floyd Jr., USAF Beyond the Tweets: President Trump’s Continuity in Military Operations Peter Dombrowski Simon Reich A New Security Framework for Geoengineering Elizabeth L. Chalecki Lisa L. Ferrari Space Arms Control: A Hybrid Approach Brian G. Chow 00a-Outside Cover 2018-02-new.indd 1 5/2/2018 11:18:16 AM Strategic Studies Mission Statement Quarterly Strategic Studies Quarterly (SSQ ) is the strategic journal of the United SSQ States Air Force, fostering intellectual enrichment for national and inter- Chief of Staff, US Air Force national security professionals. SSQ provides a forum for critically Gen David L. Goldfein, USAF examining, informing, and debating national and international security matters. Contributions to SSQ will explore strategic issues of current and Commander, Air Education and Training Command continuing interest to the US Air Force, the larger defense community, Lt Gen Steven L. Kwast, USAF and our international partners. Commander and President, Air University Lt Gen Anthony J. Cotton, USAF Disclaimer Commander, LeMay Center for Doctrine Development and Education The views and opinions expressed or implied in SSQ are those of the authors and should not be construed as carrying the official sanction of Maj Gen Michael D. Rothstein, USAF the US Air Force, the Department of Defense, Air Education and Training Director, Air University Press Command, Air University, or other agencies or departments of the US Dr. Ernest Allan Rockwell government. Editorial Staff Comments and Contact Col W. Michael Guillot, USAF, Retired, Editor Send your comments, suggestions, or address change to: Donna Budjenska, Content Editor [email protected]. Nedra O. Looney, Prepress Production Coordinator Join the debate and like us on Facebook.com/AirUnivPress. Daniel M. Armstrong, Illustrator Kevin V. Frey, Webmaster Follow us on Twitter.com/AirUnivPress. Advisors Article Submission Gen Michael P. C. Carns, USAF, Retired The SSQ considers scholarly articles between 5,000 and 15,000 words from James W. Forsyth Jr., PhD US and international authors. Please send your submission in Microsoft Christina Goulter, PhD Word format via e-mail to: [email protected] Robert P. Haffa, PhD Jay P. Kesan, PhD Strategic Studies Quarterly (SSQ) Charlotte Ku, PhD 600 Chennault Circle, Building 1405, Room 143 Benjamin S. Lambeth, PhD Maxwell AFB, AL 36112–6026 Martin C. Libicki, PhD Tel (334) 953–7311 Allan R. Millett, PhD Strategic Studies Quarterly online: http://www.airuniversity.af.mil/ssq/ Contributing Editors Free Electronic Subscription Stephen D. Chiabotti, PhD, School of Advanced Air and Space Studies Mark J. Conversino, PhD, School of Advanced Air and Space Studies Strategic Studies Quarterly (SSQ) (ISSN 1936-1815) is published quarterly by Air Kelly A. Grieco, PhD, Air Command and Staff College University Press, Maxwell AFB, AL. Articles in SSQ may be reproduced free of Michael R. Kraig, PhD, Air Command and Staff College charge. Notify editor and include a standard source credit line on each reprint. Dawn C. Murphy, PhD, Air War College David D. Palkki, PhD, Air War College Nicholas M. Sambaluk, PhD, Air Command and Staff College 00b-Inside Cover 2018- 02 20180427.indd 1 5/2/2018 11:15:02 AM Strategic Studies Quarterly An Air Force–Sponsored Strategic Forum on National and International Security SUMMER 2018 VOLUME 12, NO. 2 Policy Forum The 2018 National Defense Strategy: Continuity and Competition .......................................................... 3 Kelly A. Grieco The Trump Nuclear Posture Review: Three Issues, Nine Implications .................................................................... 9 Stephen J. Cimbala Feature Article Attribution and Operational Art: Implications for Competing in Time .................................................................. 17 Lt Col Garry S. Floyd Jr., USAF Perspectives Beyond the Tweets: President Trump’s Continuity in Military Operations ................................................................. 56 Peter Dombrowski Simon Reich A New Security Framework for Geoengineering .......................... 82 Elizabeth L. Chalecki Lisa L. Ferrari Space Arms Control: A Hybrid Approach ................................... 107 Brian G. Chow Book Reviews The Logic of American Nuclear Strategy: Why Strategic Superiority Matters ................................................................. 133 By: Matthew Kroenig Reviewed by: Todd C. Robinson Strategic Cyber Deterrence: The Active Cyber Defense Option ........... 134 By: Scott Jasper Reviewed by: Stephen Bucci US Foreign Policy and Defense Strategy: The Evolution of an Incidental Superpower ............................................................... 136 By: Derek S. Reveron, Nikolas K. Gvosdev, and Mackubin Thomas Owen Reviewed by: LTC Kurt P. VanderSteen, USA, Retired Getting Nuclear Weapons Right: Managing Danger and Avoiding Disaster ..................................................................... 137 By: Stephen J. Cimbala Reviewed by: Mel Deaile The President’s Book of Secrets: The Untold Story of Intelligence Briefings to America’s Presidents from Kennedy to Obama ................ 139 By: David Priess Reviewed by: Damon Coletta Future War: Preparing for the New Global Battlefield ..................... 141 By: Robert H. Latiff Reviewed by: Capt Sean E. Thompson, USAF Courting Science: Securing the Foundation of a Second American Century ..................................................................... 143 By: Damon V. Coletta Reviewed by: Lt Col Joe Bassi, PhD, USAF, Retired The 2018 National Defense Strategy: Continuity and Competition After nearly two decades of fighting Islamic terrorists and insurgents, including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States Department of Defense is refocusing on great power competition. The unclassified sum- mary of the new National Defense Strategy (NDS)1 is unequivocal: “Inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in U.S. national security.” By focusing on near-peer threats and declaring a new era of great power competition, the NDS sounds a sober warning: “Today, every domain is contested—air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace.” It lists China and Russia as the central challenges to US prosperity and security and mentions rogue regimes such as North Korea and Iran as destabilizing states, though it is for China alone that the NDS reserves its strongest language. Given growing Chinese capabilities and political ambitions, Beijing seeks “Indo-Pacific regional hegemony in the near-term and displacement of the United States to achieve global preeminence in the future.” To meet such a challenging strategic environment, the NDS calls for a “more lethal, resilient, and rapidly innovating Joint Force, combined with a robust constellation of allies and partners” to “sustain Ameri- can influence and ensure favorable balances of power.” The three pillars of the strategy are to restore readiness and build a more lethal force, strengthen traditional alliances and build new partnerships, and reform the business practices and efficiency of the Pentagon. This NDS pro- poses to drastically reorient US defense priorities to prepare for great power competition and conflict. But to the extent the NDS offers a strategy at all, it fits squarely within the post–Cold War strategic tradi- tion of military preeminence and forward-based presence. Each of the lines of effort—improvements to military readiness and modernization, strengthening alliances and partnerships, and reforms to the department—represents more continuity than change in the Trump administration’s defense policies. First, this NDS doubles down on US military investments, striking familiar themes about technological inno- vation, force modernization, and defense capacity. With calls to “restore readiness and modernize our military,” the strategy seeks to develop and leverage new technologies, such as “advanced computing, ‘big data’ Strategic Studies Quarterly ♦ Summer 2018 3 Kelly A. Grieco analytics, artificial intelligence, autonomy, robotics, directed energy, hypersonics, and biotechnology” to gain a decisive competitive advan- tage over potential adversaries. The idea of leveraging technological innovations is nothing new; it dates back to at least the post–Vietnam War period—and beyond. Indeed, the readiness improvements and technologies singled out as necessary to “ensure we will be able to fight and win the wars of the future” are the kinds of capabilities previously proposed as part the Third Offset Strategy, put forward by former Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work. Second, when it comes to alliances and partnerships, this NDS remains firmly committed to a forward military posture and to the alliances and partnerships the current administration inherited. As a candidate, Donald Trump regularly criticized US allies for not contributing a fair share to the burden of collective defense and questioned the relevance of NATO, describing it as obsolete. These complaints were not unfair, as our European allies have cut their defense budgets to the bone since the end of the Cold War. In this new defense