strategic implications of virtual warfare:
DESCRIPTION
Strategic Implications of Virtual Warfare:. by Captain Terry C. Pierce USN. Explaining Virtual Warfare as a Strategic Disruptive Innovation. Principles of Warfare Culminating Seminar 13 April 2005. Principles for the Employment of all Elements of National Power. Question:. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Strategic Implications of Virtual Warfare:
by Captain Terry C. Pierce USN
Explaining Virtual Warfare as a Strategic Disruptive InnovationExplaining Virtual Warfare as a Strategic Disruptive Innovation
Principles of Warfare Culminating Seminar 13 April 2005
Principles of Warfare Culminating Seminar 13 April 2005
Principles for the Employment of all Elements of National Power
Principles for the Employment of all Elements of National Power
Question:
How will senior military leaders integrate the elements of power (diplomatic, informational, military, and economic) to achieve a disruptive innovation in the Global War on Terror ?
How will senior military leaders integrate the elements of power (diplomatic, informational, military, and economic) to achieve a disruptive innovation in the Global War on Terror ?
Eff
ect
on
Lin
kag
es
Eff
ect
on
Lin
kag
es
Lin
ka
ges
U
nc
han
ge
d
Lin
ka
ges
Ch
an
ge
d
A New Typology for Defining Technology & Doctrine A New Typology for Defining Technology & Doctrine
Reinforced Components
Overturned Components
Effect of ComponentsEffect of Components
IncrementalInnovation
IncrementalInnovation
Weapon andsystem upgrades
Weapon andsystem upgrades
ArchitecturalInnovation
ArchitecturalInnovation
BlitzkriegCarrier Warfare
Amphibious WarfareContinuous Aim
Gunfire
BlitzkriegCarrier Warfare
Amphibious WarfareContinuous Aim
Gunfire
ModularInnovationModular
Innovation
Analog to digitalShip’s steering
system
Analog to digitalShip’s steering
system
RadicalInnovation
RadicalInnovation
SubmarinesAircraft CarriersVM-22 Osprey
SubmarinesAircraft CarriersVM-22 Osprey
Sustaining improves performance of
established warfighting methods along an
established trajectory that the warfighters
currently value.
Sustaining improves performance of
established warfighting methods along an
established trajectory that the warfighters
currently value.
Trajectory Performance Sustaining Innovation
Trajectory Performance Sustaining Innovation
War
fig
hti
ng
Per
form
ance
Time
Demands of Warfighting
(Performance requirements of warfighting.)Progress due to sustaining technologies.
Trajectory Performance Sustaining Innovation
Trajectory Performance Sustaining Innovation
{
PerformancePerformanceGapGap
} PerformancePerformanceExcessExcess
Disruptive innovation improves
performance along a trajectory path
that traditionally has not been valued.
Disruptive innovation improves
performance along a trajectory path
that traditionally has not been valued.
Trajectory Performance Disruptive Innovation
Trajectory Performance Disruptive Innovation
War
fig
hti
ng
Per
form
ance
Time
Trajecto
ry of D
isruptiv
e Innovatio
n
DisruptiveInnovation
Trajectory Performance Disruptive Innovation
Trajectory Performance Disruptive Innovation
Progre
ss Due to
Sustaining
Technologies
Demands of
Warfighting
(Performance
requirements of
warfighting)
Linear Armored Warfare Tanks Aircraft Mobile Troop Carrier
TanksMobile Troop
Carrier
Aircraft
Link
age
Linkage
Linkage
Blitzkrieg
Disruptive InnovationNovel Linkages of Existing Components
Disruptive InnovationNovel Linkages of Existing Components
Trajectory
Overshoot
19201920
Sustaining vs. Disruptive InnovationLinear vs. Non-Linear Armored Warfare
Sustaining vs. Disruptive InnovationLinear vs. Non-Linear Armored Warfare
TIME
CA
PA
BIL
ITIE
S
New P
erfo
rman
ce
Non-Lin
ear
Armore
d War
fare
Germ
any
Demands of Warfighting
19161916 19401940
Susta
inin
g In
nova
tion
Susta
inin
g In
nova
tion
Linea
r Arm
ored W
arfa
re
Britis
h
BLITZKRIEG
Disruptive Innovation
Points to PonderPoints to Ponder
• Disruptive and sustaining constructs correlate to
what Williamson Murray calls the “revolutionary”
and “evolutionary” phenomena of innovation.
• 90 percent of innovations are sustaining in nature
and most senior military leaders are adept at
championing these innovations.
• 10 percent of innovations are disruptive in nature
and most senior military leaders are not adept at
championing these innovations.
Strategic Environment Irregular
Non-state and state actors employing “unconventional” methods to counter stronger state opponents—terrorism, insurgency, etc. (erode our power)
(e.g., terrorism, insurgency, civil war, and emerging concepts like “unrestricted warfare”)
Likelihood: very high; strategy of the weak
Disruptive Competitors employing technology or
methods that might counter or cancel our current military advantages. (capsize our power)
(e.g., technological – bio, cyber, or space war, ultra miniaturization, directed-energy, other – diplomatic blackmail, cultural or economic war)
Likelihood: low, but time works against U.S.
Traditional States employing military forces in well-
known forms of military competition and conflict. (challenge our power)
(e.g., conventional air, sea, and land forces, and nuclear forces of established nuclear powers)
Likelihood: currently decreasing due to historic capability-overmatch and expanding qualitative lead
Catastrophic Terrorist or rogue state employment of
WMD or methods producing WMD-like effects against American interests. (paralyze our power)
(e.g., attack on homeland, global markets, or key ally that would generate a state of shock and preclude normal behavior)
Likelihood: moderate and increasing
LIKELIHOOD
VU
LN
ER
AB
ILIT
Y
Lower Higher
Higher
Lower
Capabilities-based planning should apportion risk across challengesCapabilities-based planning should apportion risk across challengesCapabilities-based planning should apportion risk across challengesCapabilities-based planning should apportion risk across challenges
Beneath the Changing Surface, a Core of Ideas and Relations
Beneath the Changing Surface, a Core of Ideas and Relations
War is a product of thought.
The Core is Described by Linkages Between Elements and Core Relations
The Core is Described by Linkages Between Elements and Core Relations
Outcome Meaning
Place
SHAPES STRIKES
RESTRICTS
Time
Technology
COORDINATES
Force
The Paradox of Familiar Character and Continual Surprise
Domains of WarDomains of War
Level 1Traditional Domain
Level 2 Embedded Domain
Level 3 Virtual Domain
Combat Attrition/ Maneuver Warfare
Separation Technology SOF/ SWARM Warfare
Precipitation Technology
Location:
Virtual
Embedded (separate)
Separated (force combat)
Lead Technology
Net-C
entric W
arfareCo
mb
ined
Eff
ects
War
fare
Proposition: Enemies under pressure retreat to more asymmetric levels
War
fig
hti
ng
Per
form
ance
Time
Disruptive In
novation: V
irtual W
arfare
DisruptiveInnovation
Trajectory Performance of Virtual Warfare: A Disruptive InnovationTrajectory Performance of Virtual Warfare: A Disruptive Innovation
Sustaining Technologies American Way of War
Demands of
Warfighting
(Performance
Requirements of
Warfighting)
Implications of Sufficient Structure View of GWOT
Implications of Sufficient Structure View of GWOT
• Need for Disruptive Innovation to Combat the Virtual Domain
• Virtual Domain new dimension of Place
• Precipitation Force requirement
• Simultaneity Force requirement
• Coalition Warfare Must Include the Virtual Domain
Questions?Questions?