Impact Of Global Security Trends On National Military Strategy

The most recents detections of how cyber warfare is inevitably coming was the accusations of Russia hacking the the Democratic National Committee and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email’s releasing damaging evidence against them which ultimately lead to Donald Trump being named the President of The United States (Diamond, 2016). The effects of cyber warfare have leaked over in to televise series, forming shows such as CSI cyber, and the gaming world, Call Of Duty Infinite Warfare. Neglect regarding cyber security can: undermine the reputation of both the government and elected officials; force unacceptable expenditures associated with the cost of cleaning up after security breaches; cripple governments' abilities to respond to a wide variety of homeland security emergency situations or recover from natural or man-made threats; and disable elected officials' ability to govern (Lohrmann, 2010). Classified information such as overseas operators and attacks, missile locations, response plans and weaknesses, and much more cripples America’s ability to defend itself from enemies both foreign and domestic. To combat cyber terrorism is the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, or CISA. In an article titled “Why Cybersecurity Information Sharing Is A Positive Step for Online Security” it is discussed that under CISA, the Department of Homeland security will have more responsibility for domestic cybersecurity. CISA’s fundamental purpose is to better enable cybersecurity information to be shared between the private and public sectors (2016). The sharing of threat information between public and private sectors can give the the United States a head start by allowing them to share information rapidly and more often to combat enemy threats while still providing safety for privacy and civil

With Trump’s election this year, his rhetoric of “Making America Great Again” and therefore revitalizing our military will soon become a reality. Trump has formally requested a reappropriation of funds; around $54 Billion, towards the US military. Part of Trump’s campaign promises had to do with making the military more robust; ensuring America’s title of militarily strongest in the world. In order to achieve this goal. Trump’s federal government has the option of many different aspects of the military to focus on. Of these, funding weapons of mass destruction, cyber security, and further military research and development prove themselves as most relevant in the contemporary military.

The security environment that is shaping the Joint Force 2025 (JF25) is incredibly complex and rapidly evolving. Challengers to security and stability include two aggressive competing powers (China and Russia), two nuclear capable regional hegemons (North Korea and Iran), and a persistent threat of terrorism to the homeland. The global commons are contested and access to the space and cyber domains are no longer guaranteed. Fiscal constraints limit the available means for the Joint Force (JF) to meet these challenges and therefore increases risk to accomplishing the national military objectives.

Since the beginning of our nation and the development and expansion of the services that defend it, we have faced a myriad of complex issues: shrinking force structures, global security concerns, and fiscal constraints to name a few. From George Washington’s Continental Army, which evolved into the current Joint Force operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are faced with increasing complexity of the operating environment. This heightened complexity and ever shrinking available assets to satisfy these requirements, are the very reason that all commanders at all levels need to find innovative ways to increase operational efficiency in addition to lowering fiscal and asset demands. This new operating environment has also driven the Army Reserve to transform from a traditional strategic force to an operational force.

In a speech at George Washington University in November of 2015, the United States Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter also addressed challenges facing the United States, stating that the security of the US depends on a force better than it is today. This force not only includes the military services, but also extends to the civilian workforce of the combat support agencies, upon which this paper focuses. The vision of the future force is one that can quickly adapt and achieve success in a sophisticated, highly-technical and rapidly changing environment; maximize the benefits of commercial technology development; and address global military competition to defend the nation and make the world a better place.

The National Military Strategy of the United States articulates several specific challenges to U.S. National Security interests that will confront JF-2025. Russian aggression toward its neighbors and defiance of international standards of behavior threatens stability in Europe. Iranian nuclear ambitions and support of terror imperils Israel and the Middle East. A bellicose and nuclear North Korea is a threat to America’s allies, Japan and the Republic of Korea. The emerging power of China offers both opportunities in the form of greater economic cooperation, but also challenges as they expand their military capabilities, menace Taiwan and make provocative claims in the South China Sea. Finally, violent extremist organizations (VEOs) such as ISIS and al-Qaida continue to degrade regional stability and threaten U.S. interests.

The Army has endured extreme conflicts with nations over the last 15 years with the concept to fight to win. Overtime, the Army shifted its strategic stance, in order to prevent future conflict, from “fight to win” to “shape and prevent” with RAF. RAF prevents future conflicts by providing CCMD with the precise units to shape host nations around the global through collaborating and training.

Moreover, we are entering an era where the American people finally support this reality. However, the population also has limited patience for significant military casualties, and large number of “boots on the ground”. The solution to this problem rests on the close interaction between SOF, CF, and IA to prevent tripping wires of escalation. While this type of military action will require an increased level of cooperation between SOF and CF, it will also reduce risk to US forces. More importantly, this strategy will allow the US to achieve limited, political objectives, without losing popular support. Whereas, during the Korean and Vietnam wars, US limited war strategies focused on preventing an escalation to general conventional war, this new era of warfare will seek to achieve objectives in the sub-limited range of military operations. This strategy will ensure the US can persistently engage our adversaries with multiple instrument of power while allowing SOF to mature its capability to encounter global

Today’s security environment is volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA). The challenges presented by globalization, emerging powers as well as the continuing threat of terrorism indicate the future security environment will continue to gain complexity. Adding to this complexity is the challenge of increasingly constrained fiscal resources. To protect U.S. National Security interests in this complex and constrained environment, Joint Force 2025 (JF-2025) requires four core capabilities, it must be agile, adaptable, survivable and integrated. This essay discusses the key strategic direction for JF-2025, the capabilities required of the Joint Force, each member services and the inherent associated risks.

The JIE considers that the future security environment will continue to feature a range of adversaries attempting to shape political behavior by conducting damaging or disruptive cyber-attacks. This is a consequence of the globalization and cannot be stopped, however timely contention is needed. The Joint Force must minimize the consequences of threatened or successful cyberattacks against the United States, its allies, and partners by conducting Military Support to Cyber

The United States will not be able to effectively rebalance the Joint Force in 2025 unless sequestration is reversed. The current U.S. strategic direction has prompted a shift of military resources to the Asia-Pacific. Globalization, cyber-attacks and advances in technology will further challenge the Joint Forces in the next ten years. It is imperative that the U.S. Joint Forces be adequately funded in order to identify and develop critical technology, establish policies and maintain adequate force structure to rebalance the Joint Force in 2025.

The general capabilities of joint force 2025 I believe necessary to rebalance the force based on the current strategic direction, and global security environment is the global surveillance and strike (GSS) network, increased naval and air investments and increased investment in cyber technology. The GSS system would allow the U.S. military to strike quickly and remain engaged for increased periods of time while additional forces are moved to the area of concern. Naval and air investments are critical. The Navy and Air Force allows us to project power to areas of the world far from our base of operations. Air power also enables us to provide support for ground forces and deterrence and denial of enemy forces. Cyber investments are critical because cyber technology will increasingly be the engine that runs our future military and allows us to attack adversary’s cyber networks and infrastructure.

For thousands of years warfare remained relatively unchanged. While the tactics and weapons have changed as new methods of combat evolved, men and women or their weapons still had to meet at the same time and place in order to attack, defend, surrender or conquer. However, the advent of the of the internet has created a new realm of combat in which armies can remotely conduct surveillance, reconnaissance, espionage, and attacks from an ambiguous and space-less digital environment. Both state and non-state actors have already embraced this new realm and utilized both legal and illegal means to further facilitate their interests. What complicates cyber security further is as states attempt to protect themselves from cyber-warfare, private

Cyber warfare attacks can disable official websites and networks, disrupt or disable essential services, steal or alter classified data, and cripple financial systems -- among many other possibilities (definition of cyberwarfare) “.The Tech Target definition includes no reference of nation states. That is because cyber warfare has such a low barrier to entry, a teenager can effectively shut down or damage thousands or millions of dollars of digital infrastructure, something that a real world counterpart would take years to plan, would take weeks, and the only tools needed are a mouse, keyboard, and some type of motivation. Cyber warfare is constantly evolving, constantly becoming more of a threat and is, in fact, being employed right now as this sentence is being read.

The damage of a full-fledged cyber attack would be devastating, the destruction would be unparalleled to any other tragedy that has occurred America. Since technology is responsible for providing America with vital entities and resources, an unadulterated cyber attack would nearly fail the American economy; this is what is known as critical systems failure. Weapons of mass destruction and cyber attacks present imminent threats of critical systems failure. Although currently Americas’ critical infrastructures are coordinated by controlled systems, majority of these systems are indeed connected to the American cyberspace. This exposes one of America’s most vulnerable spot amidst cyber security. Another major vulnerable spot within the nations IT security would be the geographical physical location for each of Americas primary infrastructures, as well as their productivity. Due to the proximal locations, the major infrastructures could very well be infiltrated by one efficient CNA.