In recent years, the nature of conflict has changed. Through asymmetric warfare radical groups and weak state actors are using unexpected means to deal stunning blows to more powerful opponents in the West. From terrorism to information warfare, the Wests air power, sea power and land power are open to attack from clever, but much weaker, enemies. In this clear and engaging introduction, Rod Thornton unpacks the meaning and significance of asymmetric warfare, in both civilian and military realms, and examines why it has become such an important subject for study. He seeks to provide answers to key questions, such as how weaker opponents apply asymmetric techniques against the Western world, and shows how the Wests military superiority can be seriously undermined by asymmetric threats. The book concludes by looking at the ways in which the US, the state most vulnerable to asymmetric attack, is attempting to cope with some new battlefield realities. This is an indispensable guide to one of the key topics in security studies today.
Possible asymmetrical warfare scenarios include launching chemical, biological, or suicide attacks; taking indiscriminate actions against critical infrastructure; using hostages or human shields; deliberately destroying the environment; and targeting noncombatants.".
There is a wide spectrum of potential threats to the U.S. homeland that do not involve overt attacks by states using long-range missiles or conventional military forces. Such threats include covert attacks by state actors, state use of proxies, independent terrorist and extremist attacks by foreign groups or individuals, and independent terrorist and extremist attacks by residents of the United States. These threats are currently limited in scope and frequency, but are emerging as potentially significant issues for future U.S. security. In this comprehensive work, Cordesman argues that new threats require new thinking, and offers a range of recommendations, from expanding the understanding of what constitutes a threat and bolstering Homeland defense measures, to bettering resource allocation and improving intelligence gathering and analysis. No pattern of actual attacks on U.S. territory has yet emerged that provides a clear basis for predicting how serious any given form of attack might be in the future, what means of attack might be used, or how lethal new forms of attack might be. As a result, there is a major ongoing debate over the seriousness of the threat and how the U.S. government should react. This work is an invaluable contribution to that debate.
Exploring themes critical to understanding the current world order, this book lays bare the reality of the new Russia that emerged under Vladimir Putin. Russia holds the world's largest natural gas reserves, the second largest coal and uranium reserves, and the eighth largest oil reserves. Europe is dependent on Russia for 25 percent of its oil and gas. Russia is also positioning itself to play a similar role with respect to China. The key to this strategy is a network of new oil and natural gas pipelines that Russia is in the process of constructing, which will by-pass the problematic Ukraine, Georgia, Poland and the Baltic States in the West, and lock-in the enormous potential of China in the East. Further, as the Western economies including the USA begin themselves to recover, their growing energy dependence will come back into the forefront, and therefore the need to ensure that Russia does not fail in its opening up of new energy resources in the Arctic and Eastern Siberia. Russia is no longer a superpower, in the Cold War sense of the word, because its military is significantly weaker, and as such is incapable of conducting a regional let alone global war against either the United States or NATO. It is precisely because of its military weakness that Putin has been forced to adopt an asymmetric approach. Thus, the pipeline spigot and the proliferation of missiles and aircraft have become Russia's weapons of choice, along with an ever growing reliance on its strategic nuclear forces to provide it with the necessary deterrent to foreign aggression. In addition, Putin and Medvedev have no interest in an arms race with the United States, it is too costly and detracts from their priority, which is economic reform. From Putin's perspective, America is in the process of imposing "absolute security" or as Joint Vision 2020 put it: "full spectrum dominance" over the world. As the sole remaining superpower, the United States enjoys a massive strategic imbalance in its favor, which it has used first to contain, but now with the intent to control the world. How? NATO expansion lays the groundwork for a U.S. global missile defense system to contain perceived adversaries, such as Russia, which in turn secures the dominance of America through its Prompt Global Strike (PGS) capability – the ability to strike anywhere on the planet with impunity within 90 minutes of the order being given by The President. Thus, PGS will be to the 21st Century, what British Gun Boat Diplomacy was to the 19th Century. In such a context, Russia is forced to respond asymmetrically.
Assessment of the threat environment is a critical element in the formulation of any state's strategy and defense doctrine. It also should be an inherently critical process that seeks to free policymakers from incorrect, antiquated, or misconceived perceptions about the threat. Consequently, the nature of the threat(s) the United States or any other government faces is the subject of a never-ending debate. For several years U.S. policymakers, officials, and writers on defense have employed the terms "asymmetric" or "asymmetry" to characterize everything from the nature of the threats we face to the nature of war and beyond. This monograph challenges the utility of using those terms to characterize the threats we face, one element of the broader debate over the nature of war, U.S. strategy, and the threats confronting us. As a work of critique, it aims to make an important contribution to the threat debate.
In warzones, ordinary commercially-available drones are used for extraordinary reconnaissance and information gathering. They can also be used for bombings - a drone carrying an explosive charge is potentially a powerful weapon. At the same time asymmetric warfare has become the norm - with large states increasingly fighting marginal terrorist groups in the Middle East and elsewhere. Here, Nicholas Grossman shows how we are entering the age of the drone terrorist - groups such as Hezbollah are already using them in the Middle East. Grossman will analyse the ways in which the United States, Israel and other advanced militaries use aerial drones and ground-based robots to fight non-state actors (e.g. ISIS, al Qaeda, the Iraqi and Afghan insurgencies, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc.) and how these groups, as well as individual terrorists, are utilizing less advanced commercially-available drones to fight powerful state opponents. Robotics has huge implications for the future of security, terrorism and international relations and this will be essential reading on the subject of terrorism and drone warfare.
In war, there are always differences between the opponents. At times these are insignificant, passing disparities with no bearing on the outcome. At other times, the differences between opponents are important, placing one in a position of advantage, the other at a disadvantage. This is a very simple observation, but from it flows one of the pressing issues faced by the United States today: strategic asymmetry. Strategic asymmetry is the use of some sort of difference to gain an advantage over an adversary. It is an idea as old as warfare itself, appearing under a number of guises. Among strategic theorists, Sun Tzu placed great stock in psychological and informational asymmetry, writing that: All warfare is based on deception. When confronted with an enemy one should offer the enemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike him. When he concentrates, prepare against him; where he is strong. avoid him.
Joint Vision 2020 is the conceptual template for how we will channel the vitality of our people and leverage technological opportunities to achieve new levels of effectiveness in joint warfighting.
For several years U.S. policymakers, officials, and writers on defense have employed the terms "asymmetric" or "asymmetry" to characterize everything from the nature of the threats we face to the nature of war and beyond. The author challenges the utility of using those terms to characterize the threats we face, one element of the broader debate over the nature of war, U.S. strategy, and the threats confronting us. As a work of critique, it aims to make an important contribution to the threat debate. A correct assessment of the nature of the threat environment is essential to any sound defense doctrine for the U.S. Army and the military as a whole. That correct assessment can only be reached through a process of critique and debate.
