United Press International,
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) — Even as the world teetered on the brink of nuclear war, there was some comfort in the Cold War: the possession of nuclear weapons on both sides deterred attack.
But mutually assured destruction no longer applies, and as the Pentagon contemplates its new class of enemies — rogue states and terrorist networks — it is looking for new ways of thinking about deterrence.
'We think deterrence is still viable,' said Ryan Henry, the deputy undersecretary of defense for policy at the Fletcher Conference on National Security and Policy in Washington, D.C. 'But we need help thinking this through, developing a better school of thought….We need to reinvigorate intellectual debate about deterrence and dissuasion.'
Henry said the Pentagon will employ the notion of 'tailored deterrence' in the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review, an embrace of the idea that one method of preventing an enemy attack no longer fits all situations.
Near-peer competitors — like perhaps China or North Korea — can be dealt with through traditional military deterrence, including the threat of nuclear weapons. Rogue powers — like the former government of Saddam Hussein — may require a different response, because it is unlikely they would believe the United States would resort to nuclear weapons to blunt a regional power that is not necessarily a direct threat. Most challenging of all are terrorist networks, Henry said.
Transnational terrorists like al-Qaida are untethered to geography. The organizations themselves are fractured into operational cells that can`t be held to account by the threat of annihilation. And headquarters elements are similarly free; there is no territory one can retaliate against with confidence it would influence their actions. The central conceit of deterrence is that the punishment for an attack would dramatically outweigh its gains.
To Read Full Article Click Here
