pentagon policy reflects changing lanscape of conflict around the world

A recent Washington Post article outlined new Pentagon policy aimed at countering many of the new types of conflict facing the United States and the world. Using the term “irregular warfare,” the Pentagon is purportedly reallocating resources from “traditional combat” to more unconventional conflict, in addition to greater cooperation with foreign security forces and polities.

While I’m certainly no security studies expert, I would venture that this readjustment of the arguably most powerful force on the planet must reflect some significant shift in the nature of conflict around the world, and not just those conflicts in which the U.S. is in someway engaged. Admittedly, part of the readjustment is the result of the asymmetric power wielded by the U.S. military and those who would challenge it, forcing terrorists, etc to resort to nontraditional methods of engagement. At the same time, part of the readjustment may be attributed to the rise in “minor conflicts” as quantified by the UCDP reports discussed in lecture. Not only does the shift in policy reflect the vast increase in the ratio of minor to major conflict, but also the changing nature of conflict. The report cited in the Washington Post article identifies challenges such as terrorist networks, drug cartels and other non-state actors as now meriting as much Pentagon attention and resources as traditional enemy combatants. In support of the findings of Laitin and Fearon, the report identifies environments of “weak and failing” states as presenting the greatest threat to international security.

Another interesting reading of this article might be from the perspective of globalization theories. The new Pentagon Policy seeks to establish a “global network” of official security forces and intelligence agencies, aided presumably by rapidly sharing information. Moreover, more focus is being placed on language training for U.S. military personnel. All of this is in an effort to bolster local security forces abroad, in hopes that strong and secure states will provide less opportunity for threats like Al-Qaeda to develop.