This study addresses key questions posed in the SMA EUCOM project by using thematic analysis of speeches from leaders of state and non-state polities in Eastern Europe, Russia, and the Caucasus. The importance of an issue is measured by the density (mentions/words in speech) with which it is mentioned and the use of associated emotive language.

Since the end of the Cold War and with the advent of the new century, new geopolitical realities have emerged that have made classical wars with national military forces pitted against each other far less likely. What we are witnessing are new categories of conflict that cannot be considered full1scale wars in the classical sense but cannot be described as “peace” either. Small1scale conflicts are complemented with intense engagement in the Information and other Spheres. These will almost certainly have great implications in the legal domains as well new forms of alliances. Multiple factors have come into play for these trends to emerge. This is a story of change versus continuity, and the conference focused on what has changed since the collapse of the USSR. As such, there are structural and intellectual challenges that prevent the United States Government (USG) from adapting and thriving is this new environment.

From July through November 2015, NSI employed its Virtual Think Tank (ViTTa) methodology to systematically interview 26 subject matter experts in support of a Strategic Multilayer Assessment effort to research and identify drivers of conflict and cooperation in Eurasia in the next 5-25 years. Representatives from the United States European Command (EUCOM) provided 37 questions to guide the interview effort (see Appendix A). This report summarizes SME knowledge and insights on these questions—grouped into nine chapters.

This non-paper, prepared at the Swedish Defence University (SEDU), investigates the dynamics of deterrence in cooperation with the U.S.1 It is crafted for the SMA audience, providing preliminary insights into collaborative efforts within ID and emphasizing the value of partner contributions.

Quite recently, nuclear strategy scholars Kier Lieber and Daryl Press posited that arms’ tables have turned, citing the asymmetry of limited nuclear powers as a reboot of the United States (US)-North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) tactical nuclear playbook during the Cold War. Their key message—that “The United States must take seriously the nuclear capabilities and resolve of its foes”—isn’t lost on us: we previously called for the need to begin serious counter-weapons of mass destruction (WMD) planning for adversarial use of nuclear weapons below the threshold of Armageddon.

This publication was released as part of the SMA project “21st Century Strategic Deterrence Frameworks.” (SDF) For more information regarding this project, please click here.

The Strategic Foresight Analysis 2023 (SFA23) provides a shared understanding of the Evolving Security Environment to 2043, thus establishing the context for Allied futures thinking. Based on this context, the Future Operating Environment 2024 (FOE24) will address the military problem sets for Allied Warfare Development. FOE24 will also serve as a baseline for further conceptual and strategic thinking. The renewed foresight cycle, consisting of SFA23, FOE24 and deployable foresight analytics capacities, will facilitate collective futures thinking within the Alliance, as well as augment individual Ally’s foresight capabilities.

This publication was released as part of the SMA project “21st Century Strategic Deterrence Frameworks.” (SDF) For more information regarding this project, please click here.

The ongoing war in Ukraine is testing Russia’s armed forces in ways they have not experienced in decades.

For Western allies to properly deter unwanted Russian actions, there must be a shared allied perception of Russian threats and behaviors.

Speaker: Dr. Max Hoell (Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory).

Russian aggression below the threshold of warfare in Europe has increased exponentially since its invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

A key element of Ukrainian resistance to the Russian invasion has been its ability to counter Russian disinformation. In their recent report for RAND, Dr. Helmus and Dr. Holynska discuss Ukraine’s approach to combating disinformation and the lessons that the United States and NATO can draw from this effort.

Minerals are crucial components of advanced weapons systems, playing a pivotal role in military capability and power projection. They are increasingly integrated into new attack platforms, including Virginia-class attack submarines and long-range missiles.

Modern threats from developed nations like China are beginning to exceed US capabilities, partly because the US military was predominantly focused on regional adversaries such as Iraq during Desert Storm. Mr. Ochmanek categorized the US approach to military power projection during this period as expeditionary and sequential.

NATO Allied Command Transformation (ACT) recently released its Strategic Foresight Analysis 2023 report. This analysis, developed through a collaborative effort involving 10 workshops and engagement with 800 experts from allied and partner nations, represents a comprehensive reevaluation of the strategic landscape.

Russia’s long-term information operations (IO) and influence campaigns have altered how US and Western decision makers perceive the risk level of Russia using a nuclear weapon. Russian IO are designed to influence the decision makers through several levers, including through their constituents. These IO use multi-domain approaches such as Russia’s own domestic media. Mr. Giles pointed out that most Russian media is broadcast in many countries, giving it a wide reach and large non-Russian audience. An example of this targeted use of media is Russian news showing the trajectory needed for Russian missiles to strike specific European cities—even though the Russian missile system required to launch the missiles is believed to be offline. The Kremlin uses long-term IO to convince its adversaries that it is willing to use a nuclear missile if contested.

SMA hosted a speaker session, presented by Dr. David Dorondo (Western Carolina University), Dr. Arnold Dupuy (NATO Science and Technology Organization’s Systems Analysis and Studies (SAS)-163 and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)), Dr. Ion Iftimie (Central European University, Vienna, Austria), Dr. Daniel Nussbaum (NATO Science and Technology Organization’s Systems Analysis and Studies (SAS)-163 and Naval Postgraduate School), and Mr. Paul Michael Wihbey (Georgetown University and Institute on the Geopolitics of Energy), as a part of its SMA STRATCOM Academic Alliance Speaker Series.