Spencer Meredith
The potential People’s Republic of China (PRC) takeover of Taiwan includes a full spectrum of military and non-military options. Yet the capabilities to do so are secondary to the will of China’s Communist leaders to accomplish it. Given the tyranny of distance that limits U.S. and partner access and resupply, the timing of crises inside the first island chain remains decidedly in Beijing’s sphere of influence. To counter China’s preponderance of initiative and momentum emanating from the mainland, the United States and its partners have been expanding resources and operational applications to slow, if not deny, a hostile takeover. The goal is to influence adversary decision-making before needing to defeat adversary forces through combat.
Foremost have been service-specific approaches supporting the theater commander, ranging from shipbuilding and expanded air and maritime freedom-of-navigation operations[1] to offensive space and cyber capabilities.[2] Irregular warfare activities are also increasing to build and sustain resistance in the area[3] and to expose and exploit adversary vulnerabilities.[4] All told, Joint Force efforts to increase multi-domain capabilities have the potential to counter the growing threat from China. However, applying that capability within the adversary’s decision space requires more than manpower and materiel; it requires intellectual overmatch to defeat the adversary’s strategy. The Joint Force can draw on a wealth of lessons learned from the Cold War and twenty years of counterterrorism (CT) and counterinsurgency (COIN)—to say nothing of the growing evidence from the large-scale “battle lab” in Ukraine. Yet little research has examined the potential for crisis response (CR), as an irregular-warfare specialization, to support strategic-deterrence efforts.
No comments:
Post a Comment