The purpose of this compendium of white papers is to explore various perspectives on the state of the art in our understanding of collaboration, including insights on the key factors that influence the who, what, when, where, and how of this topic. Collaboration traditionally refers to multiple people or organizations working towards common goals, but there are many other perspectives and definitions. The objective of this compendium is to identify and discuss the issues:

We begin by defining reintegration and distinguishing it from other concepts with which it is sometimes conflated. Reintegration is often discussed in the context of disengagement, demobilization, deradicalization, the related literature, which leads to ambiguity regarding their conceptual boundaries (Crowell, 2017; Horgan, 2008; Monahan, 2012; Marsden, 2015). For the purposes of this discussion, we define reintegration as a process by which ex-combatants or associates assume functional roles in society.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.

Combatants’ willingness to fight and sacrifice their lives, family, or personal property has altered the expected outcome of military conflicts throughout history. An opponent’s unexpected will to fight has affected the US in many of its regional conflicts, such as Vietnam and Korea. Recent conflicts in Iraq and Ukraine have further demonstrated that leaders in the US and other countries have a poor understanding of what constitutes a combatant’s will to fight and its effects on the battlefield. Most research to understand populations utilize mass survey data collection, which lacks the scientific rigor that analytical study of this topic requires. The research by Artis International uses online tools and social media, brain scans, and in-person interviews to understand what affects individuals’ will to fight. The studies focus on right-wing nationalists in Spain, jihadist fighters, and Ukrainian soldiers defending their homeland.

SMA hosted a speaker session presented by Dr. Yaneer Bar-Yam (New England Complex Systems Institute [NECSI]) as a part of its SMA General Speaker Series. Dr. Bar-Yam first stated that decisions matter. Rapid response planning and determining how to execute a plan quickly is best understood from a military perspective, according to Dr. Bar-Yam. He then focused on the comparison commonly made between the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and the common flu. He stated that this comparison paints the wrong picture; the common flu has a fatality rate of about 0.1%, and the number of individuals hospitalized is very small. COVID-19, however, has a 20% hospitalization rate, a 2-4% fatality rate at minimum, and 10% of those infected require ventilators. Dr. Bar-Yam then explained that mild cases of COVID-19 aren’t particularly mild. Moreover, it often takes several days—sometimes weeks—for a case to become severe and require hospitalization. Dr. Bar-Yam claimed that the outbreak in the US is likely to be more similar to that of Italy than that of China and South Korea. He stated that our hospital system will become overloaded, just as Italy’s has. Hospitals will quickly reach capacity as new severe cases arrive daily, military equipment will be required to supplement hospital’s equipment, and hospital staff will become overloaded. Consequently, the US may begin to see a fatality rate more comparable to Italy’s 8% if no immediate action is taken.

SMA hosted a speaker session presented by Dr. Erik Gartzke (University of California, San Diego) as a part of its SMA DHS CAOE Speaker Series. Dr. Gartzke’s presentation focused on emerging technologies and how they will shape the battlefield in the 21st century. He began by stating that, as technology changes more rapidly, it becomes increasingly important to distinguish which technologies military planners should focus their attention on. He stressed that military planners must keep in mind that motives and behaviors in human society do not change as quickly as the tools that it has; therefore, military planners must focus on how these tools will affect and/or change existing motives and behaviors. Dr. Gartzke then focused his presentation on remotely piloted vehicles and similar AI machine technologies, which are making it possible to remove humans from direct involvement in combat. He explained that, to the degree that substituting machines for people lowers the costs of fighting and occupation, conflict will become more frequent and less definitive. Dr. Gartzke also argued that the combination of industrial and military automation threatens democracy and hardens autocracy, as workers and soldiers will no longer be essential for national productivity or defense. Moreover, populations can be more easily held in check by AI-sponsored surveillance and interrogation, in addition to robotic police. Dr. Gartzke then explained that war is a highly intensive, intellectual process, and despite the help of machines, some thinking is required. Therefore, the substitution of capital for labor is imperfect; not all humans can be removed from the battlefield due to this need for cognition. Dr. Gartzke also discussed the impact of battlefield automation on the frequency of warfare. He stated that the “common conjecture effect” relates to the origins of war—if everyone knows how the contest is going to go, there is no contest. It is when people disagree about who is going to prevail, or by how much, when you have a real contest. Furthermore, the biggest effect of automation may be to produce a rise in gray zone conflicts. To conclude, Dr. Gartzke explained that automation will not make war “costless” and discussed how being good in modern military affairs goes hand in hand with being bad at occupation.

SMA hosted a speaker session presented by Dr. Mark Moffett (National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian / Harvard University / National Geographic) as a part of its SMA General Speaker Series. Dr. Moffett’s presentation focused on his book, entitled The Human Swarm: How Our Societies Arise, Thrive, and Fall. He began by stating that for humans and a number of animals, membership in a society is involuntary and expected. He then explained that societies are often defined as being a cooperative group, which he found odd. He stated that cooperation is an important focal point when examining societies; however, disfunction within societies is just as important to examine. Thus, according to Dr. Moffett, an examination of societies should focus more on what it means to be a group rather than cooperation.

SMA hosted a speaker session presented by Ms. Sage Miller (US Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) G-2 Mad Scientist Laboratory) as a part of its SMA General Speaker Series. During her brief, Ms. Miller presented an overview of the military and security implications of climate change. She began by identifying three categories of implications: 1) new zones of competition, 2) effects on the Joint Force, and 3) new drivers of conflict. She then highlighted a new area of strategic competition—the Arctic. She identified the main competitors in the region—Russia and China—and outlined their primary activities and interests, as well as the potential consequences of melting ice caps in the region. Furthermore, Ms. Miller spoke about the growing competition occurring over global fishing grounds.

SMA hosted a speaker session presented by Dr. Kristen Hamilton (University of Maryland) as a part of its SMA General Speaker Series. Dr. Hamilton presented her team’s research, which was focused on harnessing the beneficial effects of acute stress response inhibition.

In the era of social distancing and COVID-19, NSI’s Chief Analytic Officer, Dr. Allison Astorino Courtois, details 6 quick insights and lessons from managing NSI’s innovative, virtual workplace for over 13 years.