Conversations on Strategy Podcast

The likelihood China will attack Taiwan in the next decade is high and will continue to be so, unless Taipei and Washington take urgent steps to restore deterrence across the Taiwan Strait. This monograph introduces the concept of interlocking deterrents, explains why deterrents lose their potency with the passage of time, and provides concrete recommendations for how Taiwan, the United States, and other regional powers can develop multiple, interlocking deterrents that will ensure Taiwanese security in the short and longer terms. By joining deterrence theory with an empirical analysis of Taiwanese, Chinese, and US policies, the monograph provides US military and policy practitioners new insights into ways to deter the People’s Republic of China from invading Taiwan without relying exclusively on the threat of great-power war. In this episode, Dr. Jared M. McKinney, Dr. Peter Harris, Col. Rich D. Butler, and Josh Arostegui discuss Deterrence Gap: Avoiding War in the Taiwan Strait and the possible trajectories for China and Taiwan over the coming decades. Keywords: China, Taiwan, deterrence, One China, Chinese Communist Party, Silicon Shield, deterrence theory E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article.

The likelihood China will attack Taiwan in the next decade is high and will continue to be so, unless Taipei and Washington take urgent steps to restore deterrence across the Taiwan Strait. This monograph introduces the concept of interlocking deterrents, explains why deterrents lose their potency with the passage of time, and provides concrete recommendations for how Taiwan, the United States, and other regional powers can develop multiple, interlocking deterrents that will ensure Taiwanese security in the short and longer terms. By joining deterrence theory with an empirical analysis of Taiwanese, Chinese, and US policies, the monograph provides US military and policy practitioners new insights into ways to deter the People’s Republic of China from invading Taiwan without relying exclusively on the threat of great-power war. In this episode, Dr. Jared M. McKinney, Dr. Peter Harris, Col. Rich D. Butler, and Josh Arostegui discuss Deterrence Gap: Avoiding War in the Taiwan Straight and the possible trajectories for China and Taiwan over the coming decades. Keywords: China, Taiwan, deterrence, One China, Chinese Communist Party, Silicon Shield, deterrence theory E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article.

In this episode, Dr. Luke P. Bellocchi, Major Jamie Critelli, and Captain Gustavo Ferreira address strategic concerns the United States should consider when evaluating the current Asia-Pacific environment, including Taiwan’s potential food insecurity should China invade or blockade Taiwan, China’s supply of rare-earth elements and how a conflict with China might affect the US technology and defense sectors, and ramifications for the global economy if a Chinese blockade around Taiwan is successful. E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article. Keywords: China, Taiwan, food insecurity, rare-earth elements, global economy

Jody Prescott and Brenda Oppermann discuss conflict-related sexual violence and the role of leadership vis-à-vis sexual and gender-based violence. While progress has been made in recent years, including United Nations resolutions in 1983 and 2000 and the US Women, Peace, and Security Act in 2017 [with its most recent iteration published in 2023], there is still much to do to address conflict-related sexual violence worldwide. Keywords: conflict-related sexual violence; Women, Peace, and Security Act; human rights; leadership; United Nations E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article.

How are the Middle East and South America connected, and what does it mean for the United States and other countries in the Western Hemisphere? From geopolitics to economic repercussions, diplomatic relations, security concerns, global energy markets, humanitarian efforts, and more, R. Evan Ellis discusses the far-reaching impact of events in the Middle East. Keywords: Israel, Gaza, South America, Brazil, energy E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article.

In this episode, Colonel Paul Lushenko, PhD, discusses drones and their use in Gaza and Ukraine. Lushenko is a faculty instructor, and director of special operations in the Department of Military Strategy, Planning, and Operations at the US Army War College. His most recent book, The Legitimacy of Drone Warfare: Evaluating Public Perceptions, was published by Routledge in January 2024. Email usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article. Keywords: drones, artificial intelligence, Israel, Gaza, Ukraine, Russia

Integrating artificially intelligent technologies for military purposes poses a special challenge. In previous arms races, such as the race to atomic bomb technology during World War II, expertise resided within the Department of Defense. But in the artificial intelligence (AI) arms race, expertise dwells mostly within industry and academia. Effective employment of AI technology cannot be relegated to a few specialists. Not everyone needs to know how to fly a plane to have an effective air force, but nearly all members of the military at every level will have to develop some level of AI and data literacy if the US military is to realize the full potential of AI technologies. Keywords: artificial intelligence, artificial wisdom, ChatGPT, large language model E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on the monograph or the podcast.

The 16th annual Kingston Consortium on International Security conference, “International Competition in the High North,” took place on October 11–13, 2022, in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. The conference examined the Arctic region in the context of ongoing climate change and against the backdrop of war in Ukraine. Over the past several years, the United States has acknowledged the growing importance of the Arctic as a strategic region, and the Department of Defense and each of the US military services have published Arctic policies or strategies. In addition, the Department of Defense has created a new regional studies center, the Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies in Alaska. Canada and the other Arctic Council nations have also acknowledged the growing importance of the Arctic region, revised strategic frameworks, and changed institutional approaches to ensure Arctic security challenges arising from great-power competition and other threats, like those to the environment, are addressed. This volume captures these ideas for the United States and its allies so all can benefit from this experience. E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article. Keywords: Arctic, Arctic Council, China, climate change, indigenous peoples, Russia

Taiwan has become increasingly important to the United States and its allies as the Russia-Ukraine War has united democracies against authoritarian expansionism and has developed an international democracy-authoritarianism dynamic in global affairs. Part one of this article clearly outlined the geopolitical, economic, and soft-power reasons why Taiwan is strategically important. Part two reviewed the development of US and allied policy statements on Taiwan and provides policymakers and military strategists with incremental but realistic recommendations for understanding the current dynamic of the region and fashioning responses to deter further authoritarian aggression. E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article. Keywords: Taiwan, China, Russia, Ukraine, National Security Strategy, Biden Read the transcript: https://media.defense.gov/2024/Jan/23/2003379988/-1/-1/0/20240122COS-PODCAST-TRANSCRIPT-BELLOCCHI_BUTLER_AROSTGUI.PDF

The likelihood China will attack Taiwan in the next decade is high and will continue to be so, unless Taipei and Washington take urgent steps to restore deterrence across the Taiwan Strait. This podcast introduces the concept of interlocking deterrents, explains why deterrents lose their potency with the passage of time, and provides concrete recommendations for how Taiwan, the United States, and other regional powers can develop multiple, interlocking deterrents that will ensure Taiwanese security in the short and longer terms. By joining deterrence theory with an empirical analysis of Taiwanese, Chinese, and US policies, the podcast provides US military and policy practitioners new insights into ways to deter the People’s Republic of China from invading Taiwan without relying exclusively on the threat of great-power war. E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article. Keywords: Taiwan, China, deterrence, cross-strait relations, Indo-Pacific, East Asia, US foreign policy, international security Download the transcript: https://media.defense.gov/2024/Jan/16/2003376954/-1/-1/0/COS-PODCAST-TRANSCRIPT-MCKINNEY_HARRIS.PDF

Dr. Conrad C. Crane and Dr. Brian McAllister Linn address the Army’s recruiting crisis—especially for combat arms. Talent management was identified as an issue for the Army in 1907 in a General Staff report and continues to be a challenge. The results of the President’s Commission on an All-Volunteer Force in 1970 may have complicated matters further. Read Dr. Crane’s article: https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2023/01/28/does_the_all-volunteer_force_have_an_expiration_date_878344.html Read Dr. Linn’s article: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol53/iss3/3/ E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on this podcast or the genesis article. Keywords: US Army history, personnel policy, talent management, Army People Strategy, all-volunteer force

This podcast analyzes the cutting-edge understandings of deterrence with empirical evidence of Chinese strategic thinking and culture to build such a strategy and explores the counter-arguments from Part 1 of this series. Read the original article: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol51/iss4/4/ Keywords: China, Taiwan, CCP, PRC, Broken Nest, USA Episode Transcript: Stephanie Crider (Host) (Prerecorded Conversations on Strategy intro) Decisive Point introduces Conversations on Strategy, a US Army War College Press production featuring distinguished authors and contributors who explore timely issues in national security affairs. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are those of the podcast’s guest and are not necessarily those of the Department of the Army, the US Army War College, or any other agency of the US government. The guests in speaking order on this episode are: (Guest 1 Dr. Roger Cliff) (Cliff) Conversations on Strategy welcomes Dr. Roger Cliff. Dr. Cliff is a research professor of Indo-Pacific Affairs in the Strategic Studies Institute at the US Army War College. His research focuses on China’s military strategy and capabilities and their implications for US strategy and policy. He’s previously worked for the Center for Naval Analyses, the Atlantic Council, the Project 2049 Institute, the RAND Corporation, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. (Host) The Parameters 2021-22 Winter Issue included an article titled, “Broken Nest: Deterring China from Invading Taiwan.” Authors Dr. Jared M. McKinney and Dr. Peter Harris laid out an unconventional approach to the China-Taiwan conundrum. Shortly after the article was published, Parameters heard from Eric Chan, who disagreed with them on many fronts. We’ve invited you here today, Roger, to provide some additional insight on the topic. Let’s jump right in and talk about “Broken Nest: Deterring China from Invading Taiwan. What is the essence of Jared McKinney and Peter Harris’s article “Broken Nest: Deterring China from Invading Taiwan?” (Cliff) So this article is an attempt to find an innovative solution to the Taiwan problem that has bedeviled the United States since 1950. In this particular case, the author’s goal is not to find a long-term, permanent solution of the problem, but simply to find a way to deter China from using force against Taiwan in the near term. Specifically, a way that doesn’t entail risking a military conflict between two nuclear-armed superpowers. Their proposed solution is a strategy of deterrence by punishment, whereby even a successful conquest of Taiwan would result in unacceptable economic, political, and strategic costs for Beijing. The premise of the article is that China’s military is now capable enough that it could conquer Taiwan, even if the United States intervened in Taiwan’s defense. The result, they argue, is that the long-standing US deterrence-by-denial strategy for deterring a Chinese use of force against Taiwan—in other words, by threating Beijing with the risk that a use of force against Taiwan would fail—is no longer credible. Unlike most strategies of deterrence by punishment, the strategy that McKinney and Harris proposed does not primarily rely on military attacks on China. Instead, the punishment comes in the form of imposing other costs on China for a successful use of force against Taiwan. This has several elements. One is the United States selling to Taiwan weapon systems that will be most cost-effective and defending against a Chinese invasion. This would make a successful invasion of Taiwan more difficult and, therefore, more costly for China. Related to this, they also recommend that Taiwan’s leaders prepare the island to fight a protracted insurgency, even after Taiwan’s conventional military forces have been defeated. The most important element of their strategy, however, consists of the United States and Taiwan laying plans for what they call “a targeted, scorched-earth strategy” that...

Drawing from archival materials at the US Army Heritage and Education Center and the United States Military Academy at West Point, numerous published primary sources, and a range of secondary sources, this monograph offers an overview of the China Relief Expedition from June 1900 to the moment of liberation in August. Its considerations range from the geopolitical to the strategic and down to the tactical levels of war. US forces partnered alongside the combined naval and land forces of multiple nations, thus constituting the first contingency, expeditionary, and multinational coalition in American military history. In the face of numerous obstacles conditioned by enemy forces, the environment, and internal to the informal coalition itself, American forces succeeded in liberating their besieged legation. While the character of war has evolved since 1900, students of war should see through disparities that appear to separate the China Relief Expedition from the historical present. Read the monograph: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/961/ E-mail usarmy.carlisle.awc.mbx.parameters@army.mil to give feedback on the monograph or the podcast. Keywords: Boxer Uprising, China Relief Expedition, Taku Forts, Empress Dowager Cixi, Qing dynasty

The Annual Estimate of the Strategic Security Environment serves as a guide for academics and practitioners in the defense community on the current challenges and opportunities in the strategic environment. This year’s publication outlines key strategic issues across the four broad themes of Regional Challenges and Opportunities, Domestic Challenges, Institutional Challenges, and Domains Impacting US Strategic Advantage. These themes represent a wide range of topics affecting national security and provide a global assessment of the strategic environment to help focus the defense community on research and publication. Strategic competition with the People’s Republic of China and the implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine remain dominant challenges to US national security interests across the globe. However, the evolving security environment also presents new and unconventional threats, such as cyberattacks, terrorism, transnational crime, and the implications of rapid technological advancements in fields such as artificial intelligence. At the same time, the US faces domestic and institutional challenges in the form of recruiting and retention shortfalls in the all-volunteer force, the prospect of contested logistics in large-scale combat operations, and the health of the US Defense Industrial Base. Furthermore, rapidly evolving security landscapes in the Arctic region and the space domain pose unique potential challenges to the Army’s strategic advantage. Read the 2023 Annual Estimate of the Strategic Security Environment: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/962/ Keywords: Asia, Indo-Pacific, Europe, Middle East, North Africa

The October 2023 attacks on Israel by Hamas are only the latest in a series of global crises with implications for the regional order in the Middle East. These changes and the diverging interests of actors in the region have implications for US strategy and provide an opportunity to rethink key US relationships there. Read the original article here: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol50/iss4/10/ Download the full episode transcript here: https://media.defense.gov/2023/Nov/21/2003345028/-1/-1/0/COS-26-TRANSCRIPT-BOLAN-HARPER-HILLISON.PDF Keywords: Israel, Hamas, Middle East, Iran, Turkey

This podcast offers a preview of the latest Parameters demi-issue and full issue. Read the issue here: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol53/iss3/7/

In this podcast, US Army Col. Jon Klug and retired Australian Major General Mick Ryan discuss Ryan’s most recent book, White Sun War: The Campaign for Taiwan, and its potential implications for future warfare. In the summer of 1986, Tom Clancy’s novel Red Storm Rising debuted at number one on the New York Times bestseller list as it brought to life World War III, although a nonnuclear version. Similarly, Retired Australian Major General Mick Ryan’s new novel White Sun War offers a realistic and gripping “historical” account of a war for Taiwan set in 2028. Where Clancy had the Warsaw Pact and NATO, Ryan pits communist China against a coalition of Taiwan, the United States, Australia, Japan, and others. A longtime strategic commentator with 35 years of real-world experience, Ryan’s vision of a war in the near future is firmly grounded. He deftly uses fiction to explore the potential challenges of warfare and leadership in 2028.

Based on the monograph Trusting AI: Integrating Artificial Intelligence into the Army’s Professional Expert Knowledge and the Parameters article “Minotaurs, Not Centaurs: The Future of Manned-Unmanned Teaming,” this episode focuses on the ethics of trusting AI. Who is responsible when something goes wrong? When is it okay for AI to make command decisions? How can humans and machines work together to form more effective teams? These questions and more are explored in this podcast. Read the articles: Trusting AI: Integrating Artificial Intelligence into the Army’s Professional Expert Knowledge: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/959/ Parameters article “Minotaurs, Not Centaurs: The Future of Manned-Unmanned Teaming”: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol53/iss1/14 Keywords: artificial intelligence (AI), manned-unmanned teaming, ethical AI, civil-military relations, autonomous weapons systems Read the transcript: C. Anthony Pfaff and Adam Henschke – The Ethics of Trusting AI

Integrating artificially intelligent technologies for military purposes poses a special challenge. In previous arms races, such as the race to atomic bomb technology during World War II, expertise resided within the Department of Defense. But in the artificial intelligence (AI) arms race, expertise dwells mostly within industry and academia. Also, unlike the development of the bomb, effective employment of AI technology cannot be relegated to a few specialists; almost everyone will have to develop some level of AI and data literacy. Complicating matters is AI-driven systems can be a “black box” in that humans may not be able to explain some output, much less be held accountable for its consequences. This inability to explain coupled with the cession to a machine of some functions normally performed by humans risks the relinquishment of some jurisdiction and, consequently, autonomy to those outside the profession. Ceding jurisdiction could impact the American people’s trust in their military and, thus, its professional standing. To avoid these outcomes, creating and maintaining trust requires integrating knowledge of AI and data science into the military’s professional expertise. This knowledge covers both AI technology and how its use impacts command responsibility; talent management; governance; and the military’s relationship with the US government, the private sector, and society. Read the monograph: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/monographs/959/ Keywords: artificial intelligence (AI), data science, lethal targeting, professional expert knowledge, talent management, ethical AI, civil-military relations Episode transcript: Trusting AI: Integrating Artificial Intelligence into the Army’s Professional Expert Knowledge Stephanie Crider (Host) You’re listening to Conversations on Strategy. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Department of the Army, the US Army War College, or any other agency of the US government. Joining me today are Doctor C. Anthony Pfaff and Colonel Christopher J. Lowrance, coauthors of Trusting AI: Integrating Artificial Intelligence into the Army’s Professional Expert Knowledge with Brie Washburn and Brett Carey. Pfaff, a retired US Army colonel, is the research professor for strategy, the military profession, and ethics at the US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute and a senior nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council. Colonel Christopher J. Lowrance is the chief autonomous systems engineer at the US Army Artificial Intelligence Integration Center. Your monograph notes that AI literacy is critical to future military readiness. Give us your working definition of AI literacy, please. Dr. C. Anthony Pfaff AI literacy is more aimed at our human operators (and that means commanders and staffs, as well as, you know, the operators themselves) able to employ these systems in a way that not only we can optimize the advantage these systems promise but also be accountable for their output. That requires knowing things about how data is properly curated. It will include knowing things about how algorithms work, but, of course, not everyone can become an AI engineer. So, we have to kind of figure out at whatever level, given whatever tasks you have, what do you need to know for these kinds of operations to be intelligent? Col. Christopher J. Lowrance I think a big part of it is going to be also educating the workforce. And that goes all the way from senior leaders down to the users of the systems. And so, a critical part of it is understanding how best AI-enabled systems can fit in, their appropriate roles that they can play, and how best they can team or augment soldiers as they complete their task. And so, with that, that’s going to take senior leader education coupled with different levels of technical expertise within the force, especially when it comes to employing and maintaining these types of systems, as well as down to...

Who is in charge when it comes to AI? People or machines? In this episode, Paul Scharre, author of the books Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and the Future of War and the award-winning Four Battlegrounds: Power in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, and Robert Sparrow, coauthor with Adam Henschke of “Minotaurs, Not Centaurs: The Future of Manned-Unmanned Teaming” that was featured in the Spring 2023 issue of Parameters, discuss AI and its future military implications. Read the article: https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol53/iss1/14/ Keywords: artificial intelligence (AI), data science, lethal targeting, professional expert knowledge, talent management, ethical AI, civil-military relations Episode transcript: AI: Centaurs Versus Minotaurs: Who Is in Charge? Stephanie Crider (Host) The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Department of the Army, the US Army War College, or any other agency of the US government. You’re listening to Conversations on Strategy. I’m talking with Paul Scharre and Professor Rob Sparrow today. Scharre is the author of Army of None: Autonomous Weapons in the Future of War, and Four Battlegrounds: Power in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. He’s the vice president and director of studies at the Center for a New American Security. Sparrow is co-author with Adam Henschke of “Minotaurs, Not Centaurs: The Future of Manned-Unmanned Teaming,” which was featured in the Spring 2023 issue of Parameters. Sparrow is a professor in the philosophy program at Monash University, Australia, where he works on ethical issues raised by new technologies. Welcome to Conversations on Strategy. Thanks for being here today. Paul Scharre Absolutely. Thank you. Host Paul, you talk about centaur warfighting in your work. Rob and Adam re-envisioned that model in their article. What exactly is centaur warfighting? Scharre Well, thanks for asking, and I’m very excited to join this conversation with you and with Rob on this topic. The idea really is that as we see increased capabilities in artificial intelligence and autonomous systems that rather than thinking about machines operating on their own that we should be thinking about humans and machines as part of a joint cognitive system working together. And the metaphor here is the idea of a centaur, the mythical creature of a 1/2 human 1/2 horse, with the human on top—the head and the torso of a human and then the body of a horse. You know, there’s, like, a helpful metaphor to think about combining humans and machines working to solve problems using the best of both human and machine intelligence. That’s the goal. Host Rob, you see AI being used differently. What’s your perspective on this topic? Robert Sparrow So, I think it’s absolutely right to be talking about human-machine or manned-unmanned teaming. I do think that we will see teams of artificial intelligence as robots and human beings working and fighting together in the future. I’m less confident that the human being will always be in charge. And I think the image of the ccentaur is kind of reassuring to people working in the military because it says, “Look, you’ll get to do the things that you love and think are most important. You’ll get to be in charge, and you’ll get the robots to do the grunt work.” And, actually, when we look at how human beings and machines collaborate in civilian life, we actually often find it’s the other way around. (It) turns out that machines are quite good at planning and calculating and cognitive skills. They’re very weak at interactions with the physical world. Nowadays, if you, say, ask ChatGPT to write you a set of orders to deploy troops it can probably do a passable job at that just by cannibalizing existing texts online. But if you want a machine to go over there and empty that wastepaper basket, the robot simply can’t do it. So, I think the future of manned-unmanned teaming might actually be computers, with...