The global security architecture established after the Second World War is rapidly changing under the pressure of autocratic countries. Today’s threat landscape is very different from the threat landscape inherited from the post-Cold War period. The Defense strategy for the 21st Century, therefore, will have to take into consideration the new geostrategic framework to tailor responses to the new situation
04/28/2024
The rules-based world order established by the victorious countries of the Second World War is falling under the blows of new conflicts: the ongoing wars, therefore, are the instrument chosen to redistribute power between states on a global scale. The 1990 Charter of Paris, the basis of the security architecture in Europe, was violated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and before that by the Russian invasion of Georgia. The end of the Cold War has led to the “atomization of threats,” many of which (like Hamas, for example) possess weapons and the support of powerful regional states (Iran) that, in some cases, make them as capable as the states.
In the Middle East, the military capabilities of some groups combined with ideological fanaticism has rendered inefficient the normal cost-benefit calculation underlying the military deterrence on which long-term regional stability is based. If military deterrence becomes less effective in deterring attacks from counterparts, it is necessary to strengthen the resilience of countries. In today’s scenarios, therefore, having only sustainable Armed Forces is a necessary but not sufficient element.
The resilience of a country goes beyond the scope of investments in defense (military pillar) alone, it must also consider the other two pillars of national security, namely the economic one and that of Soft power linked to national values and therefore to the protection of its citizens. Today’s major issues related to war and peace go beyond the study of military contingencies and must be assimilated to the scenarios dealt with by the geopolitics of natural disasters and pandemics.
Western countries today must be both ready to deter possible attacks from external aggressors and prepared to absorb, recover and prevail should military deterrence fail its purpose. The most important question is whether a country, as a whole, has the planning, structures, capabilities and, above all, the mindset and will, necessary to achieve a sufficient level of resilience. These concepts cannot be implemented or generated on the eve of a possible storm. New national planning to deal with new crises is necessary to deal with problems that may eventually arise over time.
The sector plans would cover allocation, storage of fuel, energy, water, food, transportation, shipping, aviation, communications, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, construction resources and so on. Therefore, 21st century defense cannot only be focused on the Armed Forces and long-term investments, but must also prepare the economic, industrial, agricultural and civil defense sectors to be ready for any eventuality.
Many autocratic states want to require the transition from the post-Cold War unipolar world to a multipolar world, the rules of which are not yet known, thus raising the levels of uncertainty for the resolution of ongoing conflicts. Every country needs to develop national resilience capacity in the short term to increase levels of national security and better navigate the tumultuous 21st century.
