Last week, we took a look at a report by the US Department of Defence on how they would react to a major cyber attack (with great force, apparently).
Today's Daily Quota is along similar lines, but instead puts forward a broader concept - the future of warfare will be based on silicon, iron and shadow.
This article in Foreign Policy journal provides a brief overview of what these wars entail - and the US readiness for them.
Wars of Silicon basically cover cyber-warfare, cyber-espionage and military technology. They encompass 'a deadly trifecta of cutting-edge technology, advanced military capabilities, and substantial financial resources'.
Adversaries range from top-tier opponents like China and Russia, to smaller NGOs such as terrorist and activist groups, even down to individual hackers who can reap havoc from their bedroom.
Wars of Iron refer to conventional warfare - big guns, big planes, big bombs. The US has invested very heavily in this aspect of warfare - its annual spending on military is triple that of the next three nations combined.
While the US is well-prepared for such an engagement, it remains an expensive option - vulnerable to obsoleteness and non-conventional tactics. However, their extensive experience with insurgency and guerrilla tactics can provide some comfort.
Unfortunately, in light of a fiscal crisis and inevitable budget cuts, this path may not be future-proof.
Wars of Shadow are low-level intelligence and special forces capabilities aimed primarily at espionage, reconnaissance and intelligence.
The US is, again, largely prepared for these conflicts given their history of irregular wars, extensive global intelligence network, and their heavy investment in CYBERCOM, the NSA and international intelligence partners.
However, their ace in the hole is the proliferation of their drone fleet. Drones are increasingly being used to exploit loopholes in international rules of engagement, as well as for domestic and international reconnaissance and tactical assassination.
The position of the US is best summarised in the following extract:
I think FP might be on the ball with this article.
READ IT HERE
Today's Daily Quota is along similar lines, but instead puts forward a broader concept - the future of warfare will be based on silicon, iron and shadow.
This article in Foreign Policy journal provides a brief overview of what these wars entail - and the US readiness for them.
Wars of Silicon basically cover cyber-warfare, cyber-espionage and military technology. They encompass 'a deadly trifecta of cutting-edge technology, advanced military capabilities, and substantial financial resources'.Adversaries range from top-tier opponents like China and Russia, to smaller NGOs such as terrorist and activist groups, even down to individual hackers who can reap havoc from their bedroom.
Wars of Iron refer to conventional warfare - big guns, big planes, big bombs. The US has invested very heavily in this aspect of warfare - its annual spending on military is triple that of the next three nations combined.
While the US is well-prepared for such an engagement, it remains an expensive option - vulnerable to obsoleteness and non-conventional tactics. However, their extensive experience with insurgency and guerrilla tactics can provide some comfort.
Unfortunately, in light of a fiscal crisis and inevitable budget cuts, this path may not be future-proof.
Wars of Shadow are low-level intelligence and special forces capabilities aimed primarily at espionage, reconnaissance and intelligence.
The US is, again, largely prepared for these conflicts given their history of irregular wars, extensive global intelligence network, and their heavy investment in CYBERCOM, the NSA and international intelligence partners.
However, their ace in the hole is the proliferation of their drone fleet. Drones are increasingly being used to exploit loopholes in international rules of engagement, as well as for domestic and international reconnaissance and tactical assassination.
The position of the US is best summarised in the following extract:
The United States must design a new readiness and investment strategy in order to effectively deal with all three. Yet today it continues to pour scarce resources chiefly into its sphere of long-held dominance -- Wars of Iron. This is a potentially disastrous mistake, but one that can be corrected if we act now.Very interesting indeed.
I think FP might be on the ball with this article.
READ IT HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment