SMA 21st Century Strategic Challenges

December 2021 No Comments

Author: Astorino-Courtois, A. (NSI)

Question of Focus

[Q1] Does deterrence theory change if the US faces two nuclear-armed, near-peer competitors? If so, how? What are the impacts to strategy? If not, what impacts to strategy still exist in that scenario? What are the implications for US strategic defense, escalation control options, and the deterrent value of the nuclear triad? In a game theoretic approach, how can the three-body problem be applied to this scenario?

Publication Preview

This NSI Reachback report is part of an effort requested by USSTRATCOM to the Strategic Multi-layer Assessment
Office, Joint Staff (J39). The essence of the question is how to develop an approach for assessing and developing
strategy in the current environment. As in all analytic endeavors, the critical first step is diagnosing the problem.
Because theory and research on the strategy and policy implications of facing two nuclear-armed, near-peer competitors is very thin, this report offers an initial framework for distinguishing types of deterrence. The intention is not to provide “the” answer but to incite serious discussion and theorizing.

By way of introduction, the first section touches briefly on three variations of deterrence theory to make the case that there is not just one. Section two focuses on problem framing. It discusses the impact on deterrence theory of broadening the (often hidden) bipolar, single adversary assumptions when it comes to deterrence strategy and analysis. It offers a network theory-based framework for differentiating deterrence settings involving two or more peer competitors. This is a particularly crucial exercise for strategists and planners because deterrence objectives and activities change along with the characteristics of the deterrence setting.

Section three lists a number of implications for deterrence strategy highlighted by subject matter expert (SME) interviewees. These are items that teams tasked with upcoming defense reviews should consider carefully. Because theory and empirical scholarship on deterrence of two or more peer competitors is still emerging, the list presents an important set of topics for further study and even the basis for a Three-Peer research agenda. Finally, an appendix contains some comments on value and limitations of game theory for assessing the current international environment and suggestions on other ways to assess three peer deterrence problems.