Deterrence and National Security in the Face of an Amorphous Threat

Abstract

The National Security threats that we face today and, in turn, the National Security . requirements, are more diverse and complex than they were during the Cold-War from 1945-1990. During that period, and bolstered by the experiences of World Wars I and II, US National Security policy was focused on the stabilization of post WW II country boundaries and containment of the Soviet block and China. The result was the bipolar world in which the nuclear and conventional forces of the United States, the Soviet Union, and their respective allies ensured a measure of political stability through a military stalemate of world wide proportions. The practical result was that large scale changes in national borders were unlikely, but internal conflict within countries, and local conflicts between neighboring countries could still occur, albeit with participation from one or both of the Superpower camps. US National Security Policy was designed primarily for stabilization of the bipolar world on the military front and for competition with the Soviet Union and China on economic and political fronts. The collapse of the Soviet Union changed the global picture. The bipolar world and its military stalemate appear to be gone for the moment and the threatmore » which was the foundation for US National Security policy has changed significantly. Some will argue that China has intentions of replacing the Soviet Union as a military superpower and thus recreate the bipolar world. Furthermore, Russia still has significant nuclear forces and has recently talked of lowering the nuclear threshold in an apparent attempt to make up for its weakened conventional forces. Clearly the threat of large scale nuclear war is much reduced, but not gone entirely. Having acknowledged the Chinese and Russian threats, what does the global picture look like today? The boundaries of most countries are secure but there are significant frictions, that have, or could lead, to armed conflict. Most of these are today's manifestations of long standing problems with no easy solution in sight. It can be argued that most local conflicts will be of no direct threat to US interests. However there are situations where local conflict can have significant international impact if left unchecked, For example localized conflict in the Middle East could affect oil supplies world wide, open conflict between China and Taiwan could draw in Japan and the United States, India and Pakistan have armed conflict over Kashmir threatening a nuclear exchange, and North Korea continues to be a concern with its long range missile and nuclear and CBW, development programs. There is also the problem of state sponsored or sanctioned terrorism against the US and its allies. As with Korea, a number of countries have been identified as having had, or still having active chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs along with strategic missile programs that would enable them to deliver warheads to the US mainland or similarly threaten US allies. Furthermore the problem of the clandestine delivery of a weapon of mass destruction designed to target US civilian population centers is very real. Such threats designed to deter US policy initiatives abroad, have been termed ''asymmetric'' warfare and appear to be an emerging capability in a number of countries.« less