Pic Courtesy: internet
Introduction
Deterring an adversary from taking a particular course of action is not just a matter of stationing forces on the front line or maintaining nuclear weapons. Rather, deterrence is a form of high-stakes political communication. Deterrence is therefore psychological as much as anything else. It requires clearly signaling political will and intent to act decisively if an adversary crosses a red line.
Warfare is no longer restricted to Military operations. It involves all the tools of statecraft, i.e. diplomacy, information, military, and economics. Therefore it entails a whole of government approach to deal with it. An effective deterrence strategy utilizes all aspects of national power, not just the military.
Definition
Integrated deterrence would include the ability to exercise (as well as withstand) diplomatic reprimands, trade policies, and economic sanctions besides military options.
This phrase is the foundation of the recently published National Defence Strategy of the USA, which combines diplomacy, alliances, and new technology with conventional hard power to the deterrence capability.
US Approach
Colin Kahl, the Under Secretary of Defence for Policy, defined integrated deterrence which is integrated across:-
- Domains, including conventional, nuclear, cyber, space, and information.
- Areas of competition and potential conflict.
- The spectrum of conflict from high-intensity warfare to grey zones.
According to the US Deputy Under Secretary of Defence for Policy, Sasha Baker, an integrated deterrence framework consists of “working across warfighting domains, theatres, and the spectrum of conflict, in collaboration with all instruments of national power, as well as with allies and partners.”
Chinese Approach
Chinese military publications indicate that China has a broad concept of strategic deterrence, one in which a multidimensional set of military and non-military capabilities combine to constitute the “integrated strategic deterrence” posture required to protect Chinese interests.
For China, powerful military capabilities of several types — including nuclear capabilities, conventional capabilities, space capabilities, and cyber warfare forces — are all essential components of a credible strategic deterrent. In addition, non-military aspects of national power —diplomatic, economic, scientific, and technological strength — also contribute to strategic deterrence alongside military capabilities.
Characteristics
Integrated deterrence can be achieved only if diplomatic and economic intentions/actions are backed by military deterrence capability.
Threatening non-military actions such as diplomatic reprimands and economic sanctions by themselves are insufficient to restrain a determined adversary. However, even the threat of military force by itself is insufficient to restrain a determined actor.
Strategic coercion needs to be looked at holistically by all the agencies (the whole of government approach).
Generally, trade and economic actions and some diplomatic actions work in the long term, whereas military coercion is comparatively more immediate. Military deterrence is more likely to succeed in situations where the demands and threats are clear and specific.
The success of integrated deterrence depends on the entire package including some of the following aspects:
- Selection, timing, and application of the tools of influence.
- Composition of the punitive package.
- The extent of the punitive actions.
- Immediate or incremental application.
- Way of communication of the package.
In the past, there have been many instances in which integrated deterrence was not used properly, with either its components working against each other or it not being conveyed clearly.
Way Forward
Develop and put in place the framework to develop good strategies for integrated deterrence.
Form a multi-department agency, with the skill required to prepare an integrated deterrence plan with the speed that each event would demand.
The mechanism needs to be supported by situation-monitoring agencies.
A proactive approach would yield better results.
Each situation would need to be discussed and deliberated on the template of war gaming and table-top exercises.
Bottom Line
There is an urgent need to re-look at the way we deal with future threats and challenges.
Suggestions and value additions are most welcome
For regular updates, please register here
References and credits
To all the online sites and channels.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/integrated-deterrence-not-so-bad
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1366.html
Disclaimer:
Information and data included in the blog are for educational & non-commercial purposes only and have been carefully adapted, excerpted, or edited from sources deemed reliable and accurate. All copyrighted material belongs to respective owners and is provided only for purposes of wider dissemination.
Very educative and thoroughly researched.
Thanks sir