Russia has intensified its military investments in the Arctic in recent years. As a result, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has increased its focus in the region concerning its defense planning. The resource-rich Arctic region has led to competition between countries, including the United States and China. The Russian Arctic build-up is meant to militarise the region to gain control over other nations. However, the United States works towards ensuring the people of the region benefit from the implemented sustainable economic development. The paper will discuss the Russian Arctic build-up with close consideration of Russia as a near-peer threat to the US and national security.
Summary of the Current Status of Near-Peer Threat
A report released by the US Department of Defence indicated that near-peer threats are at the maximum level ever since the cold war (Vergun, 2020). The threats come from near-peer competitors such as Russia and China. In April 2020, the US Space Command announced that Russia had experimented a direct-ascent anti-satellite missile, which is believed to have the ability to damage low-earth orbit satellites (Priebe et al., 2020). The current deployment of counter-space capabilities and new testing and developments by China and Russia represent the greatest strategic threat to the US. The 2020 Defense Space Strategy released in June 2020 by the US DoD designated space as a separate war domain (Vergun, 2020). In a statement released by Matthew Donovan, the US undersecretary of defense stated that the US DoD must advance to effectively address these threats (Evers, 2021).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Russia's competencies in proxies, Special Forces, unmanned systems, and cyber have made the United States re-evaluate its organization and fighting tactics. The so-called hybrid warfare implemented by Russia is a threat to the US and its allies (Alexander & Jaffer, 2018). Russia is modernizing its forces to include nuclear, conventional, and asymmetric means. Besides, Russia's use of information confrontation and cyber in their Force is well known. According to the commander of European Command, Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, the functional part of Russia's principle is that they view these hybrid activities below the threshold of conflict, unlike the United States (Priebe et al., 2020). Given the current increase in near-peer threats from Russia, Scaparrotti opined that it is important to battle Russia in all its operational areas. It is to ensure success in the government's efforts to combat Russia's activities.
My Level of Leadership
I am at the operational Air Force leadership level. The operation of the Air Force in several domains increases the need to have leaders in three different levels: strategic vision, operational competence, and tactical expertise. Different leadership levels require a distinct mixture of experience and qualities. The operational level balances the full range of institutional competencies. Airmen in this leadership level understand the wider perspective of the Air Force concerning the incorporation of diverse capabilities and individuals when executing an operation. Leaders in this docket transform from being specialists in the Force to leaders with wide views fully equipped with operational competencies (Alexander & Jaffer, 2018). They apply an understanding of team and organizational dynamics based on their knowledge of themselves and their followers. Operational leaders spearhead teams by maximizing diversity, taking care of people, developing followers, and inspiring others. Airmen in this leadership level also negotiate with others, especially those external to the Force. In large organizations, these leaders build teams and coalitions to foster collaborative relationships. An operational leader achieves success by combining force, time, and space with a specific operational objective (Priebe et al., 2020). The operational factors are essential in making proper decisions in the Force.
Impact, Link, and Association between Near-Peer Threats and Operational Leadership
According to Donovan, to successfully combat near-peer threats, the US DoD must attract and retain soldiers with the best leadership skills. Operational leaders will ensure that the US operations are above those of near-peer competitors to eliminate the threat. With current developments by Russia, a good operational leader will ensure that DOD civilians, Marines, airmen, sailors, and soldiers have the best training, education, equipment, and policies (Alexander & Jaffer, 2018). Since these leaders are responsible for most activities in the field, for instance, in the Arctic region, they ensure that the tactics employed at the field counteract the current build-up by Russia and other near-peer threats like China (Priebe et al., 2020). The current condition of near-peer threats requires more team competencies than individual expertise. Therefore, operational leadership will be appropriate since it shifts institutional competencies to organizational from personal. Operational competence leadership level fosters builds teams and coalitions essential in combating near-peer threats from Russia (Evers, 2021). As much as they work below the major command, these leaders will ensure precise implementation of decided tactics and commands from higher leadership levels such as MAJCOMS and COCOMS.
Impact, Link, and Association of Near-Peer Threats with Higher Levels
Near-peer threats from Russia, especially from their build-up in the Arctic, originates from their development in the space domain. Cyberspace mission in the US is placed under Air Force Space Command (AFSPC), which gives the latter powers over the control of space activities related to the near-peer competitor. Besides, major command (MAJCOM) has the necessary operational knowledge and expertise on communication technology, which is essential in combating Russia in Arctic regions (Alexander & Jaffer, 2018). The 2020 Defense Space Strategy designated cyberspace as a war-fighting domain. Therefore, higher-level commands such as MAJCOMs and COCOMs are essential in training and equipping forces to provide cyberspace competencies for the Force (Evers, 2021). Besides, they develop programs and advocate for resources to ensure the Air Force combats the near-peer threats. These higher commands ensure that they follow directions precisely as ordered to achieve desired results without making innovations meant to enable them to adapt to the changing conditions (Evers, 2021). To cope with the environment created by Russia in the Arctic region, MAJCOMs and COCOMs ensure that they adopt better-trained personnel, more knowledgeable personnel, and better ways of collaboration and sharing information.
Near-Peer as a Threat to National Security
Over the years, the United States has maintained its status as a force without equal competitors. However, there has been a recent growth in near-peer threats from sophisticated opponents such as China and Russia. China and Russia have currently increased their capabilities in cyber-attack and space military. According to a statement released by James Mattis, Secretary of Defense, the United States currently has no predetermined right to victory on the War Field (Alexander & Jaffer, 2018; Parker, 2018)). Therefore, with this development, the country is vulnerable to external attacks from these near-peer competitors, posing a threat to national security. Near-peer competitors have increased their competencies in cybersecurity since the technology is now more widely available, faster and cheaper (Evers, 2021). Russia has currently tested the newest missiles and weapons that might be dangerous to the US superpower (Parker, 2018). As they seek to gain full control over the Arctic region, which is opposed by the US, Russia might use its sophisticated weapons to attack the US. Hence, the current development of near-peer competitors is a threat to national security.
Conclusion
Over the years, the US has enjoyed monopoly powers in the military after the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, the country currently faces threats from near-peer competitors, who have developed weapons that almost equal their capabilities. Russia has invested in cyberspace, and its capabilities are a threat to the national security of the US. The US has to apply correct leadership competencies to ensure their success on the battlefield, especially now that they lack the preordained right to win in all their fights like before.
References
Alexander, K. B., & Jaffer, J. N. (2018). Ensuring us dominance in cyberspace in a world of significant peer and near-peer competition. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs , 19 , 51-66. https://nationalsecurity.gmu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/GJIA-19-1-FINAL-rev-57-72.pdf
Evers, Z. M. (2021). NATO and Russia in the Arctic. Christopher Kojm , 56. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5f2ed301da84567c22edd5bf/t/60465dd391f63f1780c75895/1615224276673/Winter+2021_Evers.pdf
Parker, P. (2018, June 11). Are Defense Networks Up to the Near-Peer Challenge? SIGNAL Magazine. https://www.afcea.org/content/are-defense-networks-near-peer-challenge.
Priebe, M., et al. (2020). Multiple Dilemmas: Challenges and Options for All Domain Command and Control . Rand Corporation Santa Monica United States. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA300/RRA381-1/RAND_RRA381-1.pdf
Vergun, D. (2020). Near-Peer Threats at Highest Point Since Cold War, DOD Official Says . US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2107397/near-peer-threats-at-highest-point-since-cold-war-dod-official-says/.
