![\"\"](\"https:\/\/55nda.com\/blogs\/anil-khosla\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Hoffman4-300x244.webp\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Pic Courtesy: internet<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Introduction<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 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\u00a0high-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.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 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.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Definition<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Integrated deterrence would include the ability to exercise (as well as withstand) diplomatic reprimands, trade policies, and economic sanctions besides military options.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n This phrase is the foundation of the recently published National Defence Strategy of the USA, which combines diplomacy, alliances, and new technology<\/u> with conventional hard power to the deterrence capability<\/em><\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n US Approach<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Colin Kahl, the Under Secretary of Defence for Policy,\u00a0defined\u00a0integrated deterrence which is integrated across:-<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n According to the US Deputy Under Secretary of Defence for Policy, Sasha Baker,\u00a0an integrated deterrence framework consists of \u201cworking across warfighting domains, theatres, and the spectrum of conflict, in collaboration with all instruments of national power, as well as with allies and partners.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Chinese Approach<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 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.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n For China, powerful military capabilities of several types \u2014 including nuclear capabilities, conventional capabilities, space capabilities, and cyber warfare forces \u2014 are all essential components of a credible strategic deterrent. In addition, non-military aspects of national power \u2014diplomatic, economic, scientific, and technological strength \u2014 also contribute to strategic deterrence alongside military capabilities.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Characteristics<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Integrated deterrence can be achieved only if diplomatic and economic intentions\/actions are backed by military deterrence capability.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 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.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Strategic coercion needs to be looked at holistically by all the agencies (the whole of government approach).<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 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.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The success of integrated deterrence depends on the entire package including some of the following aspects:<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n 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.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Way Forward<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Develop and put in place the framework to develop good strategies for integrated deterrence.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Form a multi-department agency, with the skill required to prepare an integrated deterrence plan with the speed that each event would demand.<\/u><\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n The mechanism needs to be supported by situation-monitoring agencies.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n A proactive approach would yield better results.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Each situation would need to be discussed and deliberated on the template of war gaming and table-top exercises.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Bottom Line<\/u><\/span><\/p>\n There is an urgent need to re-look at the way we deal with future threats and challenges.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Suggestions and value additions are most welcome<\/u><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n For regular updates, please register here<\/span><\/p>\n\n
\n