Thread by @SMonaghanCSIS

Delighted to publish this paper last week with the @HybridCoE, pretentiously titled: ‘Deterring hybrid threats: Towards a fifth wave of deterrence theory and practice’.
🧵below on the key points (w/pics!). hybridcoe.fi/publications/h…
#deterrence #hybridthreats #grayzone #strategy

(1/11) Big picture, the paper does 2 things:
1⃣ Looks again at deterrence theory & practice to restore the foundations eroded by hybrid threats.
2⃣ Looks to the future of hybrid threats & new horizons in deterrence – incl prospect of a post-modern, 'fifth wave' of deterrence.

(2/11) To details. 1st, obligatory definitional masochism. What are hybrid threats? IMO, combining modern tools of statecraft to seek gains while avoiding reprisal,⬇️threshold of armed attack. (I steer clear of definitional weeds…😬) For more see: ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Doc…

(3/11) "But hybrid threats aren’t new!" Correct – they exploit classical principles of strategy incl winning without fighting, the indirect approach, measures short of war and salami-tactics. BUT, I suggest, point is they are RELEVENT to strategic challenges in the years ahead.

(4/11) On deterrence… The rise of hybrid threats can be traced to the successes & failures of deterrence, which has (often) succeeded in dissuading revisionist actors from armed aggression, while failing to prevent hostile state activity – in the form of hybrid threats.

(5/11) Hybrid threats undermine the foundations of deterrence – capability, credibility and communication – in specific ways (pg 17):

(6/11) I suggest restoring these foundations by refining & applying classical principles (e.g. absolute vs restrictive deterrence, general vs. immediate, direct vs extended, denial vs. punishment, deterrence vs compellence). Here's a framework which does some of that (pg 34):

(7/11) And here is a framework for thinking about different strategies for countering hybrid threats, including and beyond deterrence (pg 42):

(8/11) Another framework, this time for thinking beyond the ‘gray zone’ (where hybrid threats live) and seeing the bigger picture (pg 36):

(9/11) FWIW, I point to four new horizons for further development and research:
1⃣ The role of military force in deterring hybrid threats
2⃣ Going beyond deterrence
3⃣ The evolution of hybrid threats
4⃣ The future of deterrence

(10/11) On 4⃣, I outline the prospect of a post-modern, ‘fifth wave’ (per Jervis) of deterrence theory and practice. The basic idea is that future tools of deterrence will be wielded less by military/govt and more by whole of society, woven into the fabric of everyday life.

(11/11) Looking further into the future, I suggest the truly revolutionary implications of #AI may invite a sixth wave of deterrence theory and practice – when the essence of deterrence moves beyond manipulating human decisions to the inscrutable logic of intelligent machines.

P.S. FWIW, here’s my slide from the talk I gave to the @HybridCoE network () on some of these elements (focusing on extended deterrence and alliances), w/@vrusinaite & Piret Pernik of @ccdcoe):

P.P.S. Special thanks to: @vrusinaite, @BaggeSannamari, @stu_mackie & @Annakahi for their efforts; all who reviewed this paper @HybridCoE; & fellow participants in the 2019 MCDC countering hybrid warfare project – many of these ideas were born there (gov.uk/government/pub…)

Cc ppl who might be interested: @MMazarr @VladimirRauta @TimSweijs @lukas_bittner @cdr2012neu @S4A2Schreiner @shashj @LuisSimn @dsm_ld @SethGJones @EHarding_DC @jake_p_harr @rach_ellehuus @EuHybnet @giannge @RasmusHindren @elisabethbraw @blagden_david @aurelsari @UKACSC @SJFHQ_UK