Investing in People Is the Real Key to Integrated Deterrence.

• Author: Faulkner, Mark
• Position: COMMENTARY

The United States' capacity to conduct uncontested operations anywhere in the world has provided it a unique advantage for more than a century. Today however, the United States is adapting to a world in which near-peer competitors are increasingly able to challenge its interests and contest its operations.

In November, the Institute for Defense and Business in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, cohosted a panel alongside the National Defense Industrial Association on the topic of contested logistics. It was a professionally diverse panel, representative of the nation's approach to integrated deterrence and consisting of individuals from both defense and business.

Alan Estevez, the Department of Commerce undersecretary for industry and security, and Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Steve Sklenka, deputy commander of Indo-Pacific Command, both spoke about the logistics challenges facing the United States and the need for leaders from both the military and industry to think and act faster and integrate more than in the past to succeed in today's contested security environment.

The nation has entered an era never witnessed in the history of modern warfare. This rings true across the Defense Department, as discussed in the National Defense Strategy released in October. The document offers that "the scope and scale of threats to the homeland have fundamentally changed." Not only has the magnitude of potential conflict grown, but the battlespace itself has been expanded through advancements in technology, with more powerful, lethal and autonomous weapons systems employed across multiple domains, including cyber and space.

These advancements have made conventional operations more challenging, as they have increased our competitors' ability to operate in the "gray zone." China sits comfortably in this space and challenges America's ability to determine what actions constitute crossing a "red line" and require a military response.

This obligates the United States to closely examine its strategic decisionmaking process together with its tool kit of potential responses. This also poses the related question, is the nation adequately equipped to integrate across its government, or as the National Security Strategy defines it, "leverage the full array of American advantages, from diplomacy, intelligence, and economic tools to security assistance and force posture decisions"?

Many would argue that, as a whole, the United States is on the correct path to achieving an...