Fit for Purpose?; The U.S. Strategic Posture in 2030 and Beyond, LLNL-MI-815397

Format is approximately 7 inches by 10 inches. [2], 124, [4] pages. Footnotes. Figure. Small tear at top of spine/front cover. Dr. Brad Roberts has served as director of the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory since 2015. From 2009 to 2013, he was deputy assistant secretary of defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy. In this role, he served as policy director of the Obama administration's Nuclear Posture Review and Ballistic Missile Defense Review and led their implementation. Prior to entering government service, Dr. Roberts was a research fellow at the Institute for Defense Analyses and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, editor of The Washington Quarterly, and an adjunct professor at George Washington University. Between leaving the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2013 and assuming his current responsibilities, Dr. Roberts was a consulting professor at Stanford University and William Perry Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). While at CISAC, he authored a book entitled The Case for US Nuclear Weapons in the 21st Century, which won the Choice Award for Outstanding Academic Title in 2016. Doctorate in international relations, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Masters, London School Economics and Political Science; and Bachelors in international relations, Stanford University. Includes contributions by Linton Brooks and John R. Harvey! From Brad Roberts' Introduction: Many of the metrics by which to assess whether the 2030 strategic posture of the United States will be fit for purpose are not yet in clear focus. By 2030, the new complexity of this strategic landscape will have become more familiar to us. And the real world will have provided its own tests of the fitness of the posture. The essays included here explore different facets of this agenda from varied perspectives. The opening three chapters address the nuclear foundation of the U.S. strategic posture. Laboratory Director Bill Goldstein begins with an examination of the role of the U.S. nuclear enterprise in supporting national deterrence requirements, arguing that that role is broader than many think and has evolved significantly over the last decade or two. He and John Harvey strike cautionary notes about the ability of the enterprise to deliver the capabilities required by 2030, given the toxic combination of prolonged under-investment in the weapons complex and barriers to modernized production processes. Sheryl Hingorani then explores the additional burdens on the complex that would follow a geopolitical or technical surprise, arguing that hedge strategies as so far practiced have not yet adequately addressed the risk of strategic surprise. The next four essays examine non-nuclear elements in the U.S. strategic posture. I take up the missile defense topic. Dean Wilkening then addresses conventional prompt strike, arguing that hypersonic capabilities can add significantly to the U.S. strategic posture of 2030. Ben Bahney addresses space and counter-space capabilities. Paul Bernstein then takes up the question of how to ensure the needed integration of the tools in the strategic toolkit, arguing that success can be achieved only with steady incremental progress in tackling numerous obstacles. The next three essays examine the 2030 U.S. strategic posture in comparative terms. Linton Brooks explores the balance among Russia, China, and the United States in 2030, arguing that the U.S. position will likely have been maintained but not improved. Anya Loukianova Fink sets out likely Russian views of the strategic balance in 2030 and comes to conclusions analogous to those of Linton Brooks. Michael Shoebridge puts his focus on China's soft power strategy, arguing that it will make significant advances over the coming decade. The volume closes with my discussion of conclusions. We recognize that the picture presented here is incomplete-that there are ma.…