Read the most recent CSIS research on U.S. national security strategy.
DoD should not make the mistake of preparing for “great power competition” by investing only in high-intensity capabilities. While the U.S. should indeed be prepared for direct conflict, much of the fighting will be conducted through irregular warfare operations.
While the U.S. is prioritizing relationships with nations that have highly-developed space programs, China is building out partnerships with nations that have underdeveloped programs. If the U.S. does not reorient its focus, it risks ceding leadership in this critical domain to China.
A presidential transition usually means a new direction for NASA. But in this case, the Biden administration should prioritize two key Trump-era initiatives — the Artemis Program and LEO commercialization — given their importance to the future of space exploration and development.
Justifying ongoing U.S. military occupations by warning that China or Russia will stand to benefit from the ensuing power vacuum is illogical. There are a number of reasons to think that adversaries will struggle to gain meaningful influence following a U.S. withdrawal.
Despite criticism, the creation of the Space Force as an independent service was a timely, strategically-important decision. It would be a bad idea to roll it back into the Air Force.
Calls to revive the Cold War-era United States Information Agency (USIA) are rooted more in the lack of cohesive strategy for global public diplomacy than in any real suitability of the agency for the modern era. Instead, the government should deploy existing tools and resources to engage global publics and advance U.S. interests.
Since the launch of Sputnik during the Cold War, the United States has prioritized STEM education in an effort to grow and maintain a competitive edge — often at the expense of civic education. However, U.S. national security also depends on Americans’ understanding of and commitment to our democratic institutions.
Using “the Pentagon” or “the White House” as if they were actors in the political process risks misleading readers from what is going on.
The 2018 National Defense Strategy called out the “reemergence of long-term, strategic competition.” While this was a smart shift in focus, the widely used “great power competition” is the wrong term to describe this new priority.
In the nuclear realm, the challenge of civilian control is solved with presidential authority. Understanding and addressing the concessions that presidents might make to military expertise surfaces the precarious nature of civilian nuclear command and control.