Russia has been dismissed as a declining by some policymakers and analysts who prefer to focus on competition with China. Yet Russia remains one of the most assertive and powerful states in the international system and ignoring the threat it poses is a strategic error.
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.
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.
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.
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.