The Kill Chain Book Notes

notes

history

My notes from the book The Kill Chain꞉ Defending America in the Future of High-Tech Warfare by Christian Brose.

Author

Christian Mills

Published

November 20, 2023

Introduction
Ch.1: What Happened to Yoda’s Revolution?
Ch.2: Little Green Men and Assassin’s Mace
Ch.3: A Tale of Two Cities
Ch.4: Information Revolution 2.0
Ch.5: Something Worse Than Change
Ch.6: A Different Kind of Arms Race
Ch.7: Human Command, Machine Control
Ch.8: A Military Internet of Things
Ch.9: Move, Shoot, Communicate
Ch.10: Defense Without Dominance
Ch.11: Bureaucracy Does Its Thing
Ch.12: How the Future Can Win
Conclusion

Book LInks:

Introduction

“The Kill Chain: Defending America in the Future of High-Tech Warfare” by Christian Brose outlines the urgent challenges facing the U.S. military in maintaining its technological and strategic advantage, particularly against China. Brose, a former advisor to Senator John McCain, emphasizes the necessity for the U.S. to adapt its military strategies, technologies, and operations to counter rapidly evolving threats and leverage new technological advancements.

The book details the systemic issues within the U.S. defense establishment that hinder adaptation and innovation, arguing for a comprehensive reimagining of American military power focused on dynamic, efficient kill chains rather than traditional platform-centric approaches.

Through personal anecdotes and professional insights, Brose advocates for a shift towards more autonomous, distributed, and technology-driven military capabilities to ensure America’s security and strategic dominance in the future.

Key Concepts

Kill Chain: The sequential process of understanding a threat, making a decision, and taking action, which is central to military operations. Brose argues for optimizing this process with new technologies and strategies.
Platform vs. Capability Focus: The book criticizes the U.S. military’s traditional focus on acquiring and maintaining platforms (e.g., ships, jets) rather than developing capabilities that ensure effective kill chains.
Technological and Strategic Gap with China: Brose highlights the rapid advancement of China’s military capabilities and its strategy to counter U.S. power, necessitating urgent changes in U.S. military planning and investment.
Urgency for Innovation and Adaptation: The need for the U.S. defense establishment to embrace new technologies (AI, robotics, cyber warfare) and operational concepts to maintain strategic advantage.

Recommendations

Embrace Technological Innovation: Prioritize the development and integration of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, and advanced networking capabilities into military operations.
Reform Defense Acquisition and Strategy: Overhaul the defense acquisition process to favor speed, flexibility, and innovation. Adopt strategies that prioritize the development of capabilities over platforms.
Enhance Information Sharing and Decision-Making: Improve command, control, and communications systems to expedite the kill chain process, making the U.S. military more agile and responsive.
Invest in Autonomous and Distributed Systems: Shift towards building a military force composed of smaller, more autonomous units capable of operating in denied environments, reducing reliance on large, expensive platforms.
Public Engagement and Policy Reform: Encourage public debate and understanding of defense challenges and solutions, fostering policy reforms that align military investments with emerging threats and technologies.

Additional Insights

The Role of Congress and Defense Policy: The book sheds light on the critical role of legislative oversight and funding in shaping U.S. defense capabilities, highlighting the importance of informed and engaged policymakers.
Importance of Allied and Partner Capabilities: Brose hints at the strategic value of enhancing interoperability and technological sharing with allies, suggesting a collective approach to countering mutual threats.

What Happened to Yoda’s Revolution?

Chapter 1 explores the strategic foresight and warnings of Andrew Marshall, also known as “Yoda,” regarding the revolution in military affairs (RMA) and how emerging technologies could transform warfare. Despite his efforts, the U.S. defense establishment largely failed to adapt to these insights, leading to potential vulnerabilities against adversaries like China who have pursued their versions of RMA.

Key Concepts

Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA): A paradigm shift in warfare driven by technological advancements, emphasizing the importance of information technologies and network-centric operations.
Office of Net Assessment: Led by Andrew Marshall, tasked with assessing the United States’ strategic position relative to its competitors, primarily focusing on the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) Capabilities: Strategies and technologies designed to prevent adversaries from entering or operating within a specific area, highlighted as a growing focus of Chinese military development.
Failure of U.S. Defense Adaptation: Despite significant investments in defense, the U.S. military focused on traditional warfare platforms rather than fully embracing the potential of new technologies and operational concepts suggested by the RMA.

Noteworthy Facts

Andrew Marshall served as the director of the Office of Net Assessment for 42 years, influencing several defense secretaries and shaping U.S. strategic defense thinking.
The Gulf War (1990-1991) misled the U.S. into overestimating its technological warfare capabilities, underestimating the need for an RMA.
The Future Warfare 20XX War Games, initiated by Marshall, predicted a future where adversaries like China could match or exceed U.S. technological capabilities in warfare.

Practical Implications

Need for Technological and Operational Adaptation: The U.S. military must prioritize developing and integrating new technologies and concepts to maintain strategic superiority.
Focus on Network-Centric Warfare: Emphasizing the development of interconnected and agile forces capable of rapid decision-making and action.
Addressing A2/AD Challenges: Adapting U.S. military strategy and capabilities to counter anti-access and area-denial strategies, particularly those developed by China.

Recommendations

Accelerate RMA Initiatives: The Department of Defense should increase funding and focus on programs that advance the principles of the revolution in military affairs.
Enhance Interoperability: Develop and procure systems that ensure seamless communication and coordination across different military platforms and services.
Future Warfare Planning: Continuously update and refine war games and strategic assessments to reflect emerging technologies and adversary tactics.

Critical Analysis

The chapter highlights a significant gap between the foresight provided by strategic assessments and the actual adaptation of the U.S. military and defense establishment. This gap has created strategic vulnerabilities.
The reliance on traditional warfare platforms and the slow pace of innovation have hindered the U.S. military’s ability to fully capitalize on the revolution in military affairs, potentially compromising future combat effectiveness against technologically advanced adversaries.
The narrative around Andrew Marshall’s efforts and the subsequent inaction or misdirection of the U.S. defense establishment underscores the challenges of bureaucratic inertia and the difficulty of shifting defense paradigms in response to technological advancements.

Little Green Men and Assassin’s Mace

Chapter 2 reviews the unexpected Russian military aggression in Ukraine in 2014, revealing a sophisticated warfare approach that included unmarked soldiers (“Little Green Men”) and advanced technology, which overwhelmed Ukrainian forces and took the U.S. by surprise. This incident, alongside China’s assertive actions in the South China Sea and its military modernization, signaled a major shift in global power dynamics, challenging U.S. military dominance and exposing vulnerabilities in its defense strategy.

Key Concepts

Assassin’s Mace: Chinese doctrine focusing on weapons and tactics designed to exploit specific vulnerabilities of a more powerful adversary.
Reconnaissance-Strike Complex: A Russian integrated approach combining surveillance, precision targeting, and quick strikes, showcased effectively in Ukraine and Syria.

Ideas

The Gerasimov Doctrine emphasizes non-military means (e.g., cyber warfare, misinformation) to achieve strategic goals, indicating a shift towards hybrid warfare.
Systems Destruction Warfare: China’s strategy aiming to incapacitate the enemy by targeting its critical infrastructure, essentially blinding and disabling its command and control capabilities.

Noteworthy Facts

Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 marked the first change of international borders in Europe through violence since World War II.
China’s military modernization, including the development of “Assassin’s Mace” weapons, aims to counter U.S. military capabilities effectively.
The U.S. military’s technological advantage is being eroded due to advancements in Russian and Chinese military capabilities.

Practical Implications

The U.S. needs to reconsider its military strategy and technology in light of emerging threats from adversaries with advanced and unconventional warfare capabilities.
Enhancing U.S. defense capabilities requires focusing on technological innovation and developing strategies to counter hybrid and cyber warfare tactics.

Recommendations

The U.S. should invest in advanced technologies (e.g., AI, cyber defense) to regain its strategic edge.
Strengthen alliances and international partnerships to counterbalance the growing influence of China and Russia.
Increase focus on hybrid warfare defense strategies, including cybersecurity and information warfare.

Critical Analysis

The U.S. underestimation of Russian and Chinese military advancements reveals a strategic oversight, emphasizing the need for a proactive and adaptive defense strategy.
The reliance on traditional warfare and defense mechanisms is inadequate to address the complexities of modern hybrid and cyber warfare.

Additional Insights

The strategic shift by China and Russia towards advanced military capabilities and hybrid warfare tactics requires a reevaluation of global security policies.
The incidents in Ukraine and the South China Sea serve as wake-up calls for the U.S. to reassess its military and defense strategies in the face of evolving global threats.

A Tale of Two Cities

Chapter 3 discusses the historical evolution and eventual divergence of the military-industrial complex and Silicon Valley, illustrating how America’s defense sector was once deeply integrated with technological innovation but grew apart over decades. It highlights Eisenhower’s strategies for technological advancement during the Cold War, the shift towards bureaucracy and risk aversion in defense acquisition, and the consequences of these changes for the U.S.’s ability to maintain its technological edge in warfare.

Key Concepts

Military-Industrial Complex: The symbiotic relationship between the U.S. defense sector and private industry, particularly in technology, which was vital for Cold War-era innovation.
Silicon Valley’s Origins: Initially fueled by defense contracts, leading to significant technological advancements.
Eisenhower’s Approach: Focused on integrating civilian technologists with military needs, emphasizing the development of future technology and strategic concentration on key projects and people.
Shift Towards Bureaucracy: Over time, a move from Eisenhower’s direct, results-oriented approach to a more bureaucratic, process-driven method that slowed innovation.
Consolidation of Defense Industry: The reduction of defense firms from 107 to five major players by the end of the 1990s, driven by decreased defense spending and increased regulation.
Divergence from Silicon Valley: As defense procurement became more cumbersome and less innovative, Silicon Valley shifted focus towards the burgeoning commercial technology market.

Practical Implications

Innovation Stifling: The bureaucratic expansion and risk aversion within the defense acquisition process have made it increasingly difficult to develop and deploy new military technologies swiftly.
Industry Consolidation Effects: Consolidation has potentially reduced the diversity of ideas and innovation within the defense sector, making it less competitive and adaptive.
Separation from Technological Frontiers: The defense sector’s growing disconnect from Silicon Valley and the broader tech industry has limited its access to cutting-edge innovations and talent.

Recommendations

Reform Acquisition Processes: Simplify and streamline defense procurement to encourage faster development and deployment of new technologies.
Encourage Defense-Commercial Collaboration: Foster partnerships between the defense sector and commercial tech industries to leverage civilian innovation for military applications.
Invest in Future Technologies: Prioritize and increase funding for research and development in emerging technologies with potential defense applications.
Cultivate Talent: Develop programs and incentives to attract and retain top engineering and technological talent within the defense sector.
Promote Industry Competition: Implement policies that prevent excessive consolidation and encourage competition and innovation within the defense industry.

Additional Insights

Cultural Shift Needed: Beyond procedural reforms, a cultural and mindset shift within the defense establishment is necessary to embrace innovation, risk-taking, and collaboration with the commercial tech sector.
Global Context: The urgency for these changes is amplified by the rapid technological advancements of potential adversaries, highlighting the need for the U.S. to regain its competitive edge in military technology.

Information Revolution 2.0

Chapter 4 discusses the information revolution’s impact on national defense, highlighting the gap between commercial technology advancements and the U.S. military’s adoption of these technologies. It emphasizes the role of companies like Nvidia in driving forward these technologies, particularly in the realms of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and edge computing. The narrative also touches on the challenges the Department of Defense faces in integrating these advancements into military systems due to outdated procurement processes and a growing divide between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon.

Key Concepts

Information Revolution 2.0: An ongoing phase of rapid technological advancement, primarily in data collection, processing, and networking.
Commercial Technology vs. Military Application: The disparity between the state-of-the-art technology developed by commercial entities and its adoption by the U.S. military.
Edge Computing: A method of data processing where information is analyzed at the point of collection, enabling faster and more efficient decision-making.
Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Technologies that allow machines to learn from data and perform tasks previously requiring human intelligence.
Quantum Computing: A future technology promising significantly faster data processing capabilities by utilizing the principles of quantum mechanics.

Noteworthy Facts

Nvidia, initially focusing on graphics processing units for gaming, has become a leader in AI and machine learning technology.
The U.S. military’s most advanced computer, found in the F-35, is vastly outperformed by commercial technologies like Nvidia’s Drive AGX Pegasus.
Silicon Valley companies have revolutionized space access and satellite technology, significantly reducing costs and improving capabilities.
Advanced manufacturing and biotechnology are enabling production and genetic engineering innovations at unprecedented rates.
Despite significant advancements in commercial technology, the U.S. Department of Defense struggles to integrate these technologies due to procurement challenges and ideological differences with Silicon Valley.

Practical Implications

Military Readiness: Bridging the technology gap is crucial for maintaining the U.S. military’s competitive edge on a global scale.
Defense Procurement Reform: There is a pressing need for reform in the military procurement process to facilitate the adoption of cutting-edge technologies.
Collaboration with Silicon Valley: Strengthening partnerships with commercial tech companies could accelerate technological integration into defense systems.
Investment in Future Technologies: Prioritizing investments in AI, machine learning, and quantum computing could yield significant advancements in military capabilities.

Recommendations

Enhance Public-Private Partnerships: Foster closer collaboration between the Department of Defense and tech companies to streamline the integration of advanced technologies into military applications.
Reform Procurement Processes: Overhaul procurement policies to allow for faster adoption of emerging technologies and to accommodate the pace of innovation in the private sector.
Invest in R&D: Increase funding for research and development in key areas such as AI, quantum computing, and biotechnology to maintain technological superiority.
Educate and Train Military Personnel: Develop programs to educate and train service members on the latest technologies to ensure readiness and adaptability to new systems.
Engage with Silicon Valley: Work to bridge ideological differences and build mutual understanding between the Department of Defense and Silicon Valley to encourage cooperation and support for national defense initiatives.

Additional Insights

The text highlights a broader cultural and ideological divide between the Department of Defense and Silicon Valley, impacting the military’s ability to capitalize on technological advancements.
The narrative suggests that the future effectiveness of the U.S. military is heavily dependent on its ability to incorporate technologies developed by the commercial sector, particularly those related to artificial intelligence, machine learning, and edge computing.
There is an implicit call for a shift in how the military views and prioritizes software development, with an emphasis on adopting Silicon Valley’s iterative, agile approaches to software engineering.

Something Worse Than Change

Chapter 5 discusses the challenges facing the U.S. military in adapting to modern warfare and technology, emphasizing the historical context of military innovation in peacetime, the issues of bureaucracy and cultural resistance to change, and the specific challenges posed by China’s rise as a technological and military power. It argues for the need for significant changes in how the U.S. military approaches innovation, strategy, and technology to maintain deterrence and competitive advantage.

Key Concepts

Great Power Competition: The U.S. now recognizes the reemergence of great power competition, particularly with China, as a central challenge to its military and technological superiority.
Military Innovation in Peacetime: Historical examples (U.S. Navy’s aircraft carriers pre-WWII, Assault Breaker Initiative during the Cold War) illustrate successful military innovation in the absence of war.
Bureaucracy and Resistance to Change: Military organizations traditionally resist change, leading to a slow adaptation of new technologies and strategies.
China’s Technological Ambitions: China’s focused effort on becoming a global leader in key technologies poses a unique challenge to U.S. military and economic dominance.

Ideas

Militaries struggle to innovate without the real-world feedback that war provides, yet history shows that peacetime innovation is possible with clear threats, extraordinary leadership, and specific operational problems guiding technology development.
The U.S. military’s over-investment in outdated systems and underestimation of emerging threats have eroded its competitive edge, particularly against China’s rapid technological and military advancements.

Noteworthy Facts

The Soviet Union, at its peak, never matched the economic or technological power of the U.S., unlike China, which is on track to surpass the U.S. in several domains.
China’s military, particularly its navy, has grown significantly, with projections showing it expanding to 550 ships and submarines, emphasizing its ambition to project power globally.

Practical Implications

The necessity for the U.S. military to adapt to the changing nature of warfare, where traditional dominance is challenged by emerging technologies and new forms of conflict.
The importance of integrating advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence and cyber capabilities, into military strategy and operations to maintain a competitive edge.

Supporting Evidence

Historical precedents of successful military innovation in peacetime provide a blueprint for how the U.S. can adapt to current challenges.
The significant investments and advancements made by China in military and technology sectors highlight the urgency for the U.S. to innovate.

Recommendations

The U.S. should prioritize real-world military experimentation and operational flexibility to foster innovation and adaptability.
Strengthen partnerships with civilian sectors and allies to accelerate technological advancement and integration into military operations.
Emphasize the development of strategies and capabilities that address the specific challenges posed by peer competitors like China, rather than focusing solely on technology acquisition.

Critical Analysis

The chapter critiques the U.S. defense establishment’s historical reluctance to innovate and adapt, attributing this to bureaucratic inertia, cultural resistance, and a lack of clear strategic direction.
It highlights the strategic missteps in underestimating the pace and impact of technological change, particularly the rise of China as a technological and military peer.

Additional Insights

The dynamic nature of modern warfare requires a departure from traditional military paradigms, emphasizing agility, technological superiority, and strategic foresight.
The geopolitical implications of China’s rise and its challenge to U.S. dominance underscore the need for a comprehensive reevaluation of U.S. military and defense strategy in the information age.

A Different Kind of Arms Race

Chapter 6 discusses the international debate and efforts to ban lethal autonomous weapons, highlighting the dual stance of China, which supports banning their use but not their development. It delves into China’s ambitions in military technology, especially in autonomous and intelligent systems, contrasting these efforts with global concerns about a new high-tech arms race involving AI, hypersonic weapons, quantum computing, and more.

The text also explores the implications of emerging technologies on military strategy and the unique aspects of the current competition, emphasizing the transformative potential of AI, biotechnology, and space capabilities. It addresses the ethical and practical challenges of integrating these technologies into military operations, the geopolitical dynamics at play, especially between the US and China, and the necessity of maintaining technological parity to prevent conflict.

Key Concepts

Lethal Autonomous Weapons: Machines that can select and engage targets without human intervention, potentially closing the kill chain independently.
High-Tech Arms Race: A global competition focusing on AI, hypersonic weapons, quantum computing, biotechnology, and space capabilities.
Strategic Competition: The US and China are central players in a race to develop and deploy advanced military technologies, influenced by broader geopolitical tensions.

Ideas

The debate over banning lethal autonomous weapons centers on ethical considerations versus the strategic advantage they may offer.
China’s approach to military modernization emphasizes autonomous systems and intelligent warfare, aiming for superiority in future conflicts.
The arms race in advanced technologies is not limited to weaponry but extends to enabling capabilities that could transform military operations and decision-making.

Noteworthy Facts

China supports an international agreement to ban the use of fully autonomous lethal weapons but not their development.
Chinese military development includes autonomous drones, submarines, and the envisioning of intelligentized warfare.
The US and China’s competition in advanced technology is seen as a new kind of arms race, extending beyond conventional military hardware to encompass enabling technologies like AI and quantum computing.

Practical Implications

The proliferation of autonomous and intelligent systems could redefine warfare, emphasizing speed, decision-making, and the ability to operate in complex environments.
Ethical and control concerns regarding autonomous weapons may lead to international norms or agreements, albeit with challenges in enforcement and verification.
The strategic competition in emerging technologies necessitates a balance between innovation, ethical considerations, and international cooperation to manage risks and maintain stability.

Recommendations

International dialogue and cooperation are essential to address the challenges posed by lethal autonomous weapons and the broader implications of advanced military technologies.
Investment in research and development is critical for maintaining parity in the high-tech arms race, with a focus on ethical considerations and control mechanisms.
Transparency and confidence-building measures can help manage strategic competition, reducing the risk of escalation and fostering stability in international relations.

Additional Insights

The convergence of military needs and civilian technological advancements, such as AI and quantum computing, blurs the lines between defense and commercial sectors.
The ethical dimensions of using biotechnology and AI in military contexts raise significant concerns, necessitating robust ethical frameworks and international norms.
The space domain is becoming increasingly militarized, with implications for global security and the need for governance frameworks to ensure peaceful use.

Human Command, Machine Control

Chapter 7 explores ethical, legal, and practical aspects of using intelligent machines in warfare, particularly focusing on autonomous weapons. It discusses the impact of such technologies on future conflicts, the ongoing debate over human control versus machine autonomy in military actions, and the importance of integrating ethical considerations into the development and use of military technology.

Key Concepts

Barrel Bombs: Described as low-cost, crude weapons designed for maximum indiscriminate damage, highlighting ethical concerns in warfare.
Intelligent Machines in War: Examines the debate over the role of AI and autonomous systems in military operations, emphasizing the ethical implications.
Human Command and Machine Control: Advocates for a model where humans maintain decision-making authority over increasingly autonomous military technologies.
Legal and Ethical Accountability: Stresses that humans should remain legally and ethically accountable for actions taken by autonomous systems in warfare.
Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS): Discusses the use, development, and ethical considerations of AWS, comparing their potential impact to that of nuclear weapons in terms of deterrence and ethical deployment.

Practical Implications

Ethical Principles in Military Technology: Emphasizes the importance of incorporating ethical considerations into the development and use of autonomous military systems.
Transparency and Accountability: Calls for transparency in the development and deployment of autonomous weapons to build trust and ensure alignment with legal and ethical standards.
Military Use of AI: Highlights the necessity of preparing for a future where AI plays a significant role in warfare, including the potential for AWS to reduce civilian casualties and protect troops.

Recommendations

Maintain Human Oversight: Ensure that intelligent military machines are always under human command to preserve ethical accountability.
Develop Trust Through Training and Testing: Rigorous training and testing of autonomous systems are essential to build trust in their reliability and effectiveness.
Legal and Ethical Frameworks: Update and adapt legal and ethical frameworks to address the unique challenges posed by autonomous weapons.
International Cooperation: Work towards international agreements to regulate the development and use of autonomous weapons, ensuring they are used ethically and do not escalate conflicts.
Transparency in Development: Adopt a policy of transparency in the development and deployment of autonomous weapons to foster public trust and international dialogue on ethical use.

Critical Analysis

Ethics vs. Efficiency: The text grapples with the tension between the efficiency and effectiveness of autonomous weapons in warfare and the ethical implications of their use, including the potential for reduced civilian casualties.
Human vs. Machine Decision-Making: Discusses the comparative advantages and limitations of human and machine decision-making in the context of warfare, considering the potential for machines to perform certain tasks more effectively than humans.
Deterrence and Defense: Considers the role of autonomous weapons in deterrence and defense strategies, analogous to nuclear weapons, highlighting the ethical considerations of using such technologies as a last resort.

Additional Insights

Impact on Future Warfare: The discussion suggests that intelligent machines will significantly impact how wars are fought, with a shift towards more autonomous operations.
Global Military Balance: The text raises concerns about the strategic competition in military technology development, especially between the United States and authoritarian regimes like China and Russia, and its implications for global security and ethical standards in warfare.
Public Opinion and Policy: Reflects on the complexity of public opinion regarding the development and use of autonomous weapons and the need for informed policy decisions that balance ethical considerations with national security interests.

A Military Internet of Things

Chapter 8 explores the concept and implications of a military Internet of Things (IoT), focusing on the integration of autonomous, low-cost, and intelligent machines into U.S. military operations. It highlights the shift from traditional, manned military platforms to a network of interconnected, intelligent systems capable of operating with minimal human intervention. The narrative is framed around the author’s experiences and insights into experimental programs like the XQ-58A Valkyrie and the Orca, as well as broader strategic considerations for modernizing military capabilities in the face of evolving technological landscapes and potential future conflicts.

Key Concepts

Military Internet of Things (IoT): A network of autonomous, interconnected systems that enhance military capabilities by operating with minimal human intervention.
Intelligent Machines: Autonomous systems capable of performing complex tasks, including data collection, processing, and execution of commands, with limited human oversight.
Attritable Platforms: Low-cost, expendable military systems that can be deployed in large numbers, enhancing operational flexibility and reducing the risk associated with losing high-value assets.
Command and Control: The evolving concept of military leadership and decision-making facilitated by advanced technology, enabling a shift from human-centric to machine-assisted operations.

Ideas

The transition towards a military IoT represents a fundamental shift in warfare, prioritizing speed, flexibility, and mass deployment of low-cost autonomous systems over traditional, high-cost, manned platforms.
Intelligent machines, like the Valkyrie and Orca, embody the initial steps towards realizing the potential of a military IoT, demonstrating capabilities that could significantly enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness.
The concept of attritability in military assets underscores a strategic pivot to using expendable platforms, allowing for more aggressive operational postures with manageable financial and human risks.
The future of command and control in the military is envisioned as a hybrid of human strategic oversight and autonomous system management, reflecting a deeper integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in decision-making processes.

Noteworthy Facts

The XQ-58A Valkyrie and the Orca represent pioneering efforts in developing autonomous military systems capable of performing with limited human input.
The cost disparity between traditional and autonomous platforms (e.g., dozens of XQ-58As for the price of one F-35A, and multiple Orcas for the cost of one Virginia-class submarine) illustrates the economic advantages of transitioning to a military IoT.
The U.S. military’s current operational and logistical challenges stem partly from outdated technology and the lack of integrated, intelligent systems, impacting efficiency and responsiveness.
The potential of AI and machine learning to revolutionize sensor data analysis and reduce reliance on human labor for routine tasks is a critical component of the military IoT vision.

Practical Implications

Adoption of a military IoT and intelligent machines can significantly reduce operational costs, increase mission flexibility, and enhance the U.S. military’s ability to project power efficiently.
The shift towards attritable and autonomous systems could alter global military balance, requiring adversaries to reconsider their strategic and tactical calculations in potential conflicts.
The development and integration of intelligent machines necessitate a reevaluation of existing command and control structures, with a focus on optimizing human-machine collaboration.
The U.S. military’s technological modernization efforts must prioritize interoperability and information-sharing capabilities to realize the full potential of a networked, autonomous force.

Recommendations

Accelerate research, development, and deployment of autonomous systems and AI to solidify the U.S. military’s technological edge.
Prioritize the development of secure, robust communication networks to support the seamless integration of autonomous systems across various domains.
Implement training and doctrinal updates to prepare military personnel for the operational realities of a networked, machine-assisted battlefield.
Engage with industry and academic partners to leverage advancements in commercial technology for military applications, ensuring the rapid adoption of innovative solutions.

Additional Insights

The concept of a military IoT aligns with broader trends in technology and society, reflecting the increasing reliance on interconnected, intelligent systems in various aspects of life.
The challenges of integrating autonomous systems into existing military frameworks highlight the need for adaptive strategies and policies that can accommodate rapid technological change.
The ethical and strategic implications of autonomous warfare require careful consideration, particularly regarding the delegation of decision-making authority to machines and the potential impact on international norms and laws of conflict.

Move, Shoot, Communicate

Chapter 9 focuses on the evolving nature of warfare, drawing parallels between historical and current military technologies and strategies. Jan Bloch, a banker passionate about military issues, predicted the devastating impact of technological advancements on warfare in his book The Future of War. Despite his accurate foresight on warfare becoming more lethal due to innovations like machine guns and smokeless gunpowder, Bloch wrongly believed the carnage of modern combat would deter large-scale wars. World War I, unfolding much as he predicted, proved otherwise.

The chapter further explores the parallels between the pre-World War I era and current military technological advancements, particularly highlighting the challenges and opportunities the United States faces in maintaining military dominance amidst rising powers like China and the rapid evolution of military technology.

Key Concepts

Revolution in Military Affairs: Technological and other changes that fundamentally alter military force construction and operation.
Military-Technological Parity: A state where competing powers possess similar technologies, making advantage more about the effective use and rapid acquisition of technology rather than its possession.

Ideas

Bloch’s analysis led to the prediction of trench warfare and a shift from hand-to-hand combat to long-range engagements facilitated by new technology.
Despite technological advancements in warfare, military doctrines lagged, leading to the massive casualties of World War I.
Today’s military challenges echo past dilemmas, with advancements in technology once again outpacing strategic and tactical adaptation.

Noteworthy Facts

Jan Bloch was not a military man but a banker who profoundly influenced military theory.
Bloch’s predictions came true with World War I, demonstrating the impact of technology on warfare.
The current era mirrors the late 19th and early 20th centuries, with rapid technological advancements posing both threats and opportunities for military strategy.

Practical Implications

The proliferation of precision strike weapons and information technologies, particularly by China, has challenged the traditional U.S. military dominance.
Modern warfare demands a reevaluation of movement, shooting, and communicating strategies, with an emphasis on adapting to technological advancements and changing battlefield dynamics.
The future military advantage may rely on mass, ubiquity, and the ability to quickly adapt and deploy new technologies.

Recommendations

Adapt Military Doctrine: Modernize military doctrines to keep pace with technological advancements and changing warfare dynamics.
Invest in Emerging Technologies: Prioritize investment in AI, cyber capabilities, and autonomous systems to ensure competitive advantage.
Rethink Assumptions: Challenge longstanding military assumptions in light of new technologies and the rise of peer competitors like China.
Develop Resilient Networks: Build decentralized, resilient communication and logistics networks to withstand and recover from attacks.

Critical Analysis

The assumption that technological superiority alone can ensure military dominance is flawed. Adaptability, doctrine, and strategy play equally crucial roles.
The parallel drawn between the pre-World War I era and the current technological landscape in military affairs offers a valuable lesson on the potential for unforeseen consequences of technological advancements.
The emphasis on technological parity with China underscores the need for a strategic reassessment of U.S. military strategy to maintain global leadership and deter potential conflicts.

Additional Insights

The historical context provided by Bloch’s work and its relevance to current military challenges highlights the cyclical nature of military innovation and its impact on warfare.
The concept of the kill chain and its importance in modern warfare underscores the shift from traditional combat methods to information and technology-centric strategies.
The discussion on the practical implications and recommendations for adapting to the changing nature of warfare provides a roadmap for future military planning and strategy development.

Defense Without Dominance

Chapter 10 details the efforts and perspectives of John McCain and the author in shaping U.S. defense policy, particularly in response to rising challenges from China and other great powers. It emphasizes the need for a shift in strategy towards defense without dominance, recognizing the changing landscape of global military power and technological advancements.

Key Concepts

Defense Without Dominance: A strategic approach focusing on preventing adversaries, especially China, from achieving military dominance, rather than seeking absolute U.S. military supremacy.
National Defense Strategy (NDS): The 2018 NDS prioritizes long-term strategic competition with China and Russia, reflecting McCain’s vision of focusing U.S. military efforts on countering major power competitors.
Great Power Competition: The recognition that the U.S. must adapt its military and defense strategies to a world where great powers, notably China, can impose significant limitations on U.S. actions and ambitions.

Noteworthy Facts

The letter to Secretary of Defense James Mattis highlighted the need for a pivot in U.S. defense strategy towards addressing the challenges posed by great powers, particularly China.
The 2018 National Defense Strategy marked a significant shift by prioritizing strategic competition with China and Russia.
McCain’s advocacy led to legislative and policy efforts aimed at modernizing the U.S. military and defense acquisition processes to better address future challenges.

Recommendations

Prioritize Defense Innovation and Modernization: Focus on developing technologies and strategies that enhance the U.S. military’s ability to operate in contested environments, particularly against near-peer competitors.
Strengthen Alliances: Enhance military cooperation and interoperability with allies to ensure a collective defense posture that can effectively counterbalance Chinese military power.
Adopt a Defense-Centric Strategy: Shift from an offense-dominant military doctrine to one that emphasizes defense, resilience, and the ability to deny adversaries’ objectives, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region.
Rethink Military Presence and Posture: Adjust U.S. military deployments and force structure to prioritize strategic regions and capabilities that deter adversaries and protect key U.S. interests.
Embrace Technological Advancements: Leverage emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and autonomous systems, to maintain a competitive edge in military capabilities.

Critical Analysis

The shift towards a strategy of defense without dominance represents a pragmatic acknowledgment of the changing global power dynamics, where outright military dominance is increasingly unattainable against peer competitors like China.
McCain’s approach, advocating for a focused and prioritized defense strategy, challenges traditional views of U.S. military power and its role in global affairs, suggesting a more restrained and strategic use of military resources.
The emphasis on alliances and partnerships highlights a strategic asset the U.S. holds over competitors like China, though it requires a reevaluation of how these relationships are managed and leveraged in the context of great power competition.

Additional Insights

The Role of Technology in Future Conflicts: Understanding how emerging technologies could redefine warfare and defense strategies is crucial for maintaining strategic advantages.
Adapting to New Forms of Warfare: The U.S. must prepare for conflicts that extend into cyberspace, space, and the information domain, recognizing that future battles may not conform to traditional models of warfare.
Economic and Military Linkages: The interplay between economic power, technological innovation, and military capabilities underscores the complex nature of great power competition and the need for a comprehensive strategy that addresses all facets of power.

Bureaucracy Does Its Thing

Chapter 11 delves into the complexities and inefficiencies of the U.S. defense bureaucracy. In 2019, Defense Secretaries Mattis and Spencer attempted to reallocate the Navy’s budget to invest in new capabilities like unmanned vessels and considered reducing aircraft carrier investments due to the growing Chinese threat. Their plan to retire the USS Harry Truman early to save costs was overturned by political pressure and lobbying, illustrating the challenge of shifting defense priorities towards future capabilities.

Key Concepts

Bureaucratic Inertia: The defense budget process is slow and resistant to change, favoring existing programs over new technologies.
Political Pressure: Decisions in the Department of Defense are heavily influenced by Congress, lobbyists, and industry stakeholders, often at the expense of innovation and future readiness.
Strategic Misalignment: The focus on maintaining legacy systems and platforms detracts from the U.S. military’s ability to adapt to future warfare technologies.

Practical Implications

Budgetary Constraints: The reliance on established defense programs consumes resources that could be directed towards innovative technologies critical for future conflicts.
Capability Gaps: The slow adaptation of new technologies may leave the U.S. military at a strategic disadvantage in future high-tech warfare.

Supporting Evidence

The decision to keep the USS Harry Truman operational despite strategic assessments underscored the difficulty of reallocating defense budgets towards future capabilities.
The Pentagon and Congress’s budgetary process is described as slow, cumbersome, and resistant to incorporating rapidly evolving technologies.

Recommendations

Streamline the Budget Process: Simplify and accelerate the defense budgeting process to allow for quicker adoption of new technologies.
Increase Transparency: Improve communication with Congress and the public about the strategic need for investing in future capabilities.
Encourage Innovation: Allocate a portion of the defense budget specifically for research and development of emerging technologies.

Critical Analysis

The entrenched bureaucratic and political systems within the Department of Defense and Congress significantly hinder the U.S. military’s ability to adapt to the rapidly changing nature of warfare. There is a critical need for reform in how defense priorities are set and how the budget process accommodates the integration of new technologies.

Additional Insights

The struggle between maintaining traditional military capabilities and investing in new technologies reflects a broader challenge of balancing immediate security needs with long-term strategic planning. This dilemma is compounded by the complex interplay of bureaucratic inertia, political interests, and the influence of the defense industry.

Future Perspectives

The ongoing tension between traditional defense priorities and the need to invest in emerging technologies will likely continue to shape U.S. defense strategy. Success in future conflicts will depend on the ability of the Department of Defense and Congress to navigate these challenges and prioritize investments that enhance the U.S. military’s technological edge.

How the Future Can Win

Chapter 12 discusses the transition from the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) to a more resilient network of unmanned aircraft and satellites for the U.S. Air Force, emphasizing the importance of adapting to modern warfare challenges. This shift faced opposition from Congress and defense contractors but was ultimately successful due to strategic political maneuvering.

The broader theme explores the difficulty of implementing defense innovation within the U.S. military-industrial-congressional complex, advocating for a system that incentivizes rapid development of new capabilities to address future warfare challenges.

Key Concepts

JSTARS to Advanced Network Transition: The U.S. Air Force’s strategic shift from reliance on the outdated JSTARS platform to a distributed network of intelligence assets.
Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Challenges: The political and economic interests that complicate defense innovation and budgeting processes.
Incentives for Defense Innovation: The necessity of restructuring incentives to prioritize rapid development and deployment of new defense technologies.

Practical Implications

Political Strategy for Defense Innovation: Effective engagement with Congress and stakeholders is crucial for implementing significant changes in defense strategy.
Creating Incentives for Innovation: Establishing incentives that encourage the development and adoption of new technologies and operational concepts is essential for future readiness.
Empowering Military Mavericks: Supporting innovative leaders within the military to drive change and adapt to new warfare challenges.

Recommendations

Redefine Defense Priorities: Focus on developing integrated networks and capabilities that address the current and future strategic challenges, moving away from legacy systems.
Leverage Competition: Use competitions to identify and deploy the most effective solutions for defense challenges.
Foster Collaboration: Encourage partnerships between traditional defense contractors, technology companies, and startups to spur innovation.
Enhance Transparency and Accountability: Improve the defense acquisition process to be more responsive to emerging threats and technological advancements.
Revitalize Congressional Earmarks with Transparency: Consider the strategic use of earmarks to fund promising defense technologies and projects, with full transparency to prevent corruption.

Critical Analysis

Cultural and Systemic Barriers: The entrenched interests and risk-averse culture within the defense establishment pose significant barriers to rapid innovation and adaptation.
Need for Clear Problem Definition: The military and Congress must collaboratively define specific operational problems to focus innovation efforts effectively.

Additional Insights

Impact of Political Will: The success of defense innovation initiatives often hinges on the ability of leaders to navigate and influence the political landscape.
Role of Private Sector and Investment: Creating a conducive environment for private investment in defense technology requires clear government commitment and procurement practices that prioritize innovation.

Conclusion

Christian Brose concludes by reflecting on personal emotions following John McCain’s death, critiques the current state of American politics and defense, and emphasizes the need for a reimagined approach to national security. Brose shares intimate moments of reflection and gratitude for his experiences with McCain, juxtaposed with his observations of political dysfunction and its implications for America’s future security. He stresses the necessity for change in the face of evolving global threats, particularly from technologically advanced adversaries like China.

Key Concepts

Failure of Imagination: The central theme, highlighting the inability of American leaders to foresee and adapt to the changing nature of global warfare and security challenges.
Political Dysfunction: Critique of the current American political landscape, marked by divisiveness and inefficiency, which hampers the country’s defense capabilities and readiness.
Technological Advancement and Warfare: The urgent need for the U.S. to leverage its technological prowess to maintain a strategic advantage in future conflicts.
McCain’s Legacy: Reflections on John McCain’s impact and the ideals he represented, including unity, courage, and dedication to national service.

Political and Defense Challenges

Divisiveness: The detrimental impact of political divisiveness on national unity and security.
Budgetary Inefficiency: Criticism of Congress’s inability to provide timely budgets for the military, undermining defense preparedness.
Bureaucratic Obstacles: The struggle within the defense establishment to adopt best technologies due to politics and bureaucracy.

Recommendations for Change

Imagination and Adaptability: Calls for a bold reimagining of America’s defense strategy to address future challenges effectively.
Technological Integration: Advocacy for integrating cutting-edge technology into defense practices to maintain a competitive edge.
Bipartisan Cooperation: The necessity for political leaders to transcend divisiveness and work collaboratively on defense and security issues.

Critical Analysis

Brose argues that America’s greatest obstacle is not external threats but internal stagnation and lack of visionary leadership.
He warns of the consequences of failing to adapt, including the potential for other nations, notably China, to surpass the U.S. in military and technological capabilities.

Additional Insights

Hope vs. Strategy: Echoing McCain, Brose emphasizes that hope alone is insufficient for national defense; proactive and strategic planning is essential.
Cultural Shift: Advocates for a cultural shift in Washington, D.C., from short-term political gains to long-term national security priorities.