The New Calculus of Deterrence: Why Military Dominance Isn’t Enough
The assumption that overwhelming military strength automatically guarantees peace is rapidly becoming obsolete. A recent revisiting of the 2023 “Inflection Point” report by David Ochmanek and Andrew Hoehn underscores a critical shift: adversaries are increasingly willing to challenge the United States, even in areas where it retains a clear technological edge. This isn’t a failure of capability, but a failure of deterrence – and it demands a fundamental rethinking of America’s global force posture.
The Erosion of Traditional Deterrence
For decades, the U.S. military strategy rested on the principle of “dominance.” The idea was simple: maintain such a significant advantage in military capabilities that potential adversaries would be deterred from aggression. However, the rise of peer and near-peer competitors – particularly China and Russia – coupled with their growing military cooperation, is challenging this paradigm. These nations are investing heavily in asymmetric capabilities designed to exploit perceived U.S. vulnerabilities, making a direct confrontation less likely, but increasing the risk of calculated risks and gray-zone conflicts.
The “Inflection Point” report highlighted the need for innovative deterrence strategies that don’t rely solely on possessing the most advanced weaponry. This is particularly relevant as adversaries focus on areas where they can achieve localized advantages, such as anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) systems and cyber warfare. Simply put, being the strongest doesn’t guarantee avoiding a fight if potential adversaries believe they can inflict unacceptable costs or achieve limited objectives without triggering a full-scale response.
Beyond Dominance: The Rise of ‘Competitive Deterrence’
The concept of **competitive deterrence** – a strategy of convincing potential adversaries that the costs of aggression outweigh any potential gains – is gaining traction. This isn’t about abandoning military strength, but about reshaping how that strength is applied. It requires a more nuanced approach that integrates military, economic, and diplomatic tools.
Key Elements of Competitive Deterrence
- Enhanced Situational Awareness: Investing in advanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities to better understand adversary intentions and capabilities.
- Resilient Infrastructure: Protecting critical infrastructure – both physical and digital – from attack. This includes hardening networks and developing robust cyber defenses.
- Forward Presence with a Purpose: Maintaining a credible forward presence, not simply for the sake of presence, but to signal resolve and demonstrate the ability to respond quickly to crises. This requires strategically positioning forces and conducting realistic training exercises.
- Allied Interoperability: Strengthening alliances and improving interoperability with partner nations. A united front presents a more formidable deterrent than any single nation acting alone.
- Economic Statecraft: Utilizing economic tools – such as sanctions and trade agreements – to influence adversary behavior.
Crucially, competitive deterrence demands a shift in mindset. It requires accepting that the U.S. will not always have a decisive advantage in every domain and focusing on denying adversaries their objectives rather than achieving total victory. This is a more realistic and sustainable approach to deterrence in the 21st century.
The Impact of Emerging Technologies
The rapid development of emerging technologies – such as artificial intelligence (AI), hypersonic weapons, and autonomous systems – is further complicating the deterrence landscape. These technologies have the potential to disrupt existing power balances and create new vulnerabilities. For example, AI-powered cyberattacks could cripple critical infrastructure, while hypersonic weapons could overwhelm existing defense systems.
The U.S. military must prioritize the development and deployment of these technologies, but also be mindful of the risks they pose. It’s essential to establish clear norms and rules of engagement for the use of these technologies to prevent escalation and unintended consequences. The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has published extensive research on the implications of emerging technologies for national security. Learn more about their work here.
Adapting the Force Posture for a New Era
Successfully implementing a strategy of competitive deterrence requires a significant adaptation of the U.S. force posture abroad. This includes shifting resources away from legacy systems and towards emerging technologies, investing in ISR capabilities, and strengthening alliances. It also requires a more agile and adaptable force structure that can respond quickly to changing circumstances.
The future of U.S. military power isn’t about maintaining absolute dominance, but about creating a credible and resilient deterrent that can effectively dissuade adversaries from aggression. This requires a fundamental rethinking of how the U.S. approaches national security – one that prioritizes innovation, adaptability, and a deep understanding of the evolving geopolitical landscape. What steps do you believe are most critical for the U.S. to maintain a credible deterrent in the face of growing global competition? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
