Dealing with Today's Asymmetric Threat to U.S. and Global Security: The Need for an Integrated National Asymmetric Threat Strategy; Executive summary

摘要

Following the end of World War II, through the four decades of the Cold War, the U.S. government adopted a fairly consistent series of national security strategies to counter the relatively uniform and traditionally staid communist threats of that era. Likewise, during the nearly 12-year interregnum between the end of the Cold War and September 11, 2001, U.S. national strategies remained relatively unchanged as the world adjusted to having a single superpower and witnessed only relatively minor international conflicts. With the attack on the United States on 9/11, however, the post-Cold War era changed markedly, as a new, lethal, and asymmetrical threat to the West entered the world stage. This terrorist threat, grown on a foundation of instability and religious extremism, has capably and creatively leveraged technology, strategic communications, and divergent Western policies and priorities to enhance both its credibility and efficacy. As a result, the U.S. must rethink the policies, structures, and processes that have guided its national security strategy for the past 60 years. This paper is designed to stimulate a dialog on what this new strategy ought to be. It builds upon the ideas presented in a May 2008 symposium, co-sponsored by the National Defense University (NDU) and CACI International Inc. The NDU-CACI symposium focused on four major functional areas of responsibility integral to a new asymmetric threat response paradigm: Global Diplomacy, Strategic Communications, Securing the Homeland, and Global Strategy to Counter Terrorism and Extremism. The symposium recognized that a successful response to the broad nature and versatility of the threat will require a whole government approach that leverages partnerships with diverse nongovernment actors and wields a wide range of disciplines, including communications, law enforcement, business, and academia. Military capabilities must be coupled with 'soft power.'.