The Convergence - The Army's Mad Scientist Podcast

Latest Episodes:

49. Weaponizing Weather: The Global Security Threat of the Future with Dr. Elizabeth Chalecki Jan 27, 2022

Show notes

Elizabeth L. Chalecki is an Associate Professor of International Relations and Environmental Sustainability at the University of Nebraska Omaha, a Research Fellow in the Environmental Change and Security Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center, and a Research Chair with Fulbright Canada. Her expertise lies in the areas of climate change and security, international environmental policy, and the intersection of science/technology and International Relations. Dr. Chalecki has authored groundbreaking research on geoengineering and just war, and has published over 25 books, articles, and chapters on diverse topics such as climate change and Arctic security, environmental terrorism, climate change and international law, public perceptions of environmental issues, and water in outer space. She also serves as an environmental security subject matter expert for NATO. Dr. Chalecki holds a Ph.D. in International Relations from the Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy at Tufts University, a M.Sc. in Environmental Geography from the University of Toronto, and an M.A. from Boston University.

In our interview with Dr. Chalecki, we explore the broad global security implications of climate change and manipulation; their effects on Army and DoD readiness, operations, and mission requirements; and potential approaches for mitigating and regulating these threats. The following bullet points highlight key insights from our discussion:

The consequences of climate change will force countries to reconsider their definitions of security. Instead of traditional military force size and strength, the stability of the environment will reflect the security of nations. Importantly, climate change is a security threat interconnected with the actions of other countries.

Temperature increases and precipitation changes caused by climate change will have incalculablesecond order effects. Food security, civil unrest, migration, border insecurity, and disease patterns will all be shaped by the changing environment.

Climate change will alter Army operations. The Army’s focus may shift to humanitarian support and peacekeeping missions in regions destabilized by climate change. Additionally, the emergence of novel diseases in deployment regions could reduce the size of the Army’s recruitment pool due to increased social resistance to vaccinations.

Humans are looking at geoengineering– specifically solar radiation management (i.e., shielding the Earth from the Sun’s rays) and carbon dioxide sequestration – to fight climate change. However, these solutions are impossible to test without consequence, necessitating their careful development and regulation via international law. Currently, there is no national policy nor international law in place regulating geoengineering. Failed attempts at geoengineering could harm the global ecosystem worse than the climate change it seeks to mitigate, with potentially destabilizing effects.

As governments fail to address climate change, individuals and subnational groups may be motivated to act in radical ways. Governments should anticipate this increased risk of eco-terrorism in their efforts to maintain stability and prevent further degradation to the environment.

The global community should reconsider what it means to be both sovereign and a citizen. National borders split people with common ecosystems who would benefit from collaboration. Domestic actions by individual governments can have repercussions on shared ecosystems far beyond their territorial borders.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratoryfor our next episode of The Convergence podcast — featuring CPT Maggie Smith and MAJ Joe Littell from the Army Cyber Institute, United States Military Academy, West Point, discussing the impact of information operations on recruitment, retention, and overall force readiness, as well as re-thinking our processes for gaining information advantage over our adversaries.

If you enjoyed this post, check out Dr. Chalecki‘s presentation on Avoiding a Climate Arms Race, from last year’s Climate Change – Threats, Resilience, and Adaptation Webinar; as well as her works page, Should We Govern Geoengineering like Nuclear Weapons or the Internet? and Geoengineering Must Stay Peaceful;

Manipulating the Climate: What Are the Geopolitical Risks? by our colleagues at RAND Review;

… and Shén fēng: Military Use of Weather Modification Technology, by Rory Fedorochko;

… as well as the following Mad Scientist content on climate change:

Own the Heat: DoD Climate Change Action with Richard G. Kidd IV and associated podcast

The Inevitable Threat: Climate Change and the Operational Environment

Deepening Climate Emergency

“The Heat is On” in “The Queue” Redux!

Climate Change: Destroyer of World, by CPT Kyle Hallowell

On Thin Ice…, by proclaimed Mad Scientist Seth Gnesin

Water: A Fluid Challenge for the Future, by proclaimed Mad Scientist Caroline Duckworth

Takeaways from the Mad Scientist Global Perspectives in the Operational Environment Virtual Conference

Climate Change as a Threat Multiplier, by LTCOL Nathan Pierpoint, Australian Army

Climate Change Laid Bare: Why We Need To Act Now, by proclaimed Mad Scientist Sage Miller

Future Threats: Climate Change and Islamic Terror, by Matthew Ader

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog post do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Army Futures Command (AFC), or Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).

48. Through the Soldiers' Eyes: The Future of Ground Combat with Denys Antipov, Heydar Mirza, Nolan Peterson, John Spencer, Jim Greer, and COL Scott Shaw Jan 06, 2022

Show notes

The character of warfare has consistently changed over time, with technology evolving from edged weapons, bows and arrows, gunpowder, and battlefield mechanization, to more advanced technologies today, including long-range precision weapons, robotics, and autonomy. However, warfare remains an intrinsic human endeavor, with varied and profound effects felt by Soldiers on the ground. To explore this experience with those engaged in the tactical fight, we spoke with the following combat veterans, frontline reporters, and military training experts for this episode of The Convergence:

Denys Antipov is a Ukrainian war veteran who served as a platoon leader and reconnaissance drone operator with the 81st Airborne Brigade in the Ukrainian Army, defending his homeland and fighting Russian paramilitary groups and anti-government separatists in the Donbas in 2015-2016.

Heydar Mirza spent 36 days on the frontline as a war reporter in Terter and Agdere during the 44-day Second Nagorno-Karabakh war during the Fall of 2020. He is currently the program author and host of the weekly RADIUS military analysis program on Azerbaijan Public Television and Radio Broadcasting Company – ICTIMAI TVand Caliber.az YouTube channel.

Nolan Peterson is Senior Editor at Coffee or Die Magazine and The Daily Signal‘s Ukraine-based foreign correspondent. A former U.S. Air Force special operations pilot and veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, he was among the first journalists to embed with Ukrainian forces in combat in eastern Ukraine. In Iraq, he embedded with Kurdish peshmerga forces in operations around Mosul and Sinjar. He has reported from throughout Eastern Europe, France, the U.K., and was onboard the USS George H.W. Bush off the Syrian coast to cover the air war against ISIS.

John Spencer is the Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute, Co-Director of the Urban Warfare Project, and host of the Urban Warfare Project podcast. He served over twenty-five years in the U.S. Army as an infantry Soldier, with two combat tours in Iraq as both an Infantry Platoon Leader and Company Commander. He has also served as a Ranger Instructor with the Army’s Ranger School, a Joint Chief of Staff and Army Staff intern, fellow with the Chief of Staff of the Army’s Strategic Studies Group, Strategic Planner and then Deputy Director of the Modern War Institute where he was instrumental in the design and formation of the institute. He has just returned from walking the battlefields of Nagorno-Karabakh, gleaning lessons learned about modern combat on complex terrain.

Jim Greer (Colonel, USA-Ret.) graduated from the U.S. Military Academy in 1977 and served 30 years in CONUS, Europe, and the Middle East, including combat operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, and the Balkans. He commanded an infantry-heavy battalion task force in Bosnia, led the OIF Study Group in the invasion of Iraq, was Chief of Staff of Multi-National Security Transition Command – Iraq, and commanded 1st Armor Training Brigade. Agent of change, futurist, and concept developer, he played a significant role in Army transformation for Force XXI digitization and the Objective Force, was the Army’s representative to DOD’s Revolution in Military Affairs, and led the transformation of Initial Entry Training from a Cold War paradigm to one that prepared Soldiers for 21st Century combat. An educator and trainer, he taught tactics at West Point and was the Director of the School of Advanced Military Studies.

COL Scott Shaw is the G-3, U.S. Army I Corps. He previously commanded the Asymmetric Warfare Group, providing global operational advisory support to U.S. Army forces to rapidly transfer current threat-based observations and solutions to tactical and operational commanders in order to defeat emerging asymmetric threats and enhance multi-domain effectiveness.

In our interviews with the aforementioned SMEs, we explore their respective experiences in modern warfare at the “bleeding edge” of battle, the future of conflict, and the requirements and challenges facing future ground warfighters. The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interviews:

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs, or drones) are becoming increasingly commonplace on the battlefield for reconnaissance, direct strike, and area denial (i.e., mine emplacement) missions. These comparatively low cost systems enable lesser powers and non-state actors to execute air domain operations, lower operational risk to Service personnel, and may be operated by Soldiers with limited training. While larger UAVs can be disrupted or disoriented by direct fire and jamming devices, the size and speed of smaller drones makes them especially difficult to interdict. Further, distinguishing enemy from friendly drones will become an increasingly complicated challenge for Soldiers as they proliferate on future battlefields.

Modern warfare will continue to require Soldiers to traverse, operate in, and clear complex terrain. Even in urban environments, however, artificial intelligence (AI) and enhanced aerial observation technology will make it increasingly challenging to mask military operations. Thus, it will be imperative to train Soldiers to mask their movements and operations, even down to individual heat signatures.

Information operations will continue to adapt to the technological age, allowing adversaries to weaponize informationagainst Soldiers and their families, allies and partners, and local populations. This pervasive messaging will attempt to win the hearts and minds of nations, as well as confuse and disrupt militaries. Such messaging could attempt to persuade Soldiers of their failures, contradict orders they are given, or convince domestic populations of their force’s imminent defeat by triumphant adversaries. In some cases, these efforts may lead decisionmakers to cut access to social media networks altogether.

Adaptable, innovative leadership will be critical in a rapidly changing environment. Recent conflicts have witnessed the convergence of old weapons, basic infantry tactics, and combined arms maneuver, integrated and repurposed with new technologies at the point of need. U.S. Army Leaders will need to quickly adopt and integrate technological advancements with their Soldiers and be willing to consider constant force reorganization to maintain dominance on the battlefield. These changes will also require the Army to continue developing high levels of trust between the Force and its Leaders, particularly as these relationships are tested in contested environments.

Problem solving, understanding technological capabilities, and the initiative to fill leadership positions attrited through combat are key skillsets for Soldiers on the future battlefield. Coding, understanding data’s capabilities and limitations, and facility/agility with new technologies will enable future Soldiers to operate seamlessly, both on and off the battlefield.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratory for our next episode of The Convergence podcast -- Innovation at the Edge -- featuring senior military leaders, field and company grade officers, and young Soldiers discussing innovation at the unit and individual level, thinking differently about modern warfare, and implementing grassroots transformation across the U.S. Army.

47. How China Fights with Ian Sullivan, Kevin Pollpeter, Amanda Kerrigan, Peter Wood, Elsa Kania, Andrea Kendall-Taylor, and Doowan Lee Dec 09, 2021

Show notes

Over the past two decades, China has transformed its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) through a holistic approach — modernizing its weaponry, force structure, and approaches to warfare, to include operations in the cyber and space domains, while improving its professional military education. Although Russia remains a near-peer threat, China has ascended to become the United States’ lone pacing threat. The PLA’s momentous progress in warfighting capabilities and concepts, coupled with its whole-of-nation approach to competition, crisis, and conflict, enables it to challenge the United States across all domains and the Diplomatic, Information, Military, and Economic spheres. Army Mad Scientist interviewed the seven world-class SMEs regarding our near peer threat to learn How China Fights: Ian Sullivanserves as the Senior Advisor for Analysis and ISR to the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2, at the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC G2). He is responsible for the analysis that defines and the narrative that explains the Army’s Operational Environment, which supports integration across doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy. Mr. Sullivan is a frequent and valued contributor to the Mad Scientist Laboratory, including the previous episode in this series, How Russia Fights. Peter Woodis a program manager and defense analyst at Blue Path Labs, a strategic advisory firm. He previously edited China Brief, a publication of the Jamestown Foundation. He has an M.A. from the Hopkins-Nanjing Center for Chinese and American Studies (HNC) and a B.A. in Political Science from Texas Tech University. He is proficient in Chinese. Elsa B. Kania is an Adjunct Senior Fellow with the Technology and National Security Program at CNAS. Her research focuses on Chinese military strategy, military innovation, and emerging technologies. Her book, Fighting to Innovate, should be forthcoming with the Naval Institute Press in 2022. At CNAS, Ms. Kania has contributed to the Artificial Intelligence and Global Security Initiative and the “Securing Our 5G Future” program, while acting as a member of the Digital Freedom Forum and the research team for the Task Force on Artificial Intelligence and National Security. Ms. Kania is a Ph.D. candidate in Harvard University’s Department of Government. She is also a graduate of Harvard College and has received a Master of Arts in Government from Harvard University. Ms. Kania was a Boren Scholar in Beijing, China, and she maintains professional proficiency in Mandarin Chinese. She is a proclaimed Mad Scientist and valued contributor to the Mad Scientist Laboratory.Kevin Pollpeter is a research scientist in the CNA China Studies Division. He is an internationally recognized expert on China’s space program and is widely published on Chinese national security issues, focusing on Chinese military modernization, China’s defense industry, and Chinese views on information warfare. His publications include China Dream, Space Dream: China’s Progress in Space Technologies and Implications for the United States; Planning for Innovation: Understanding China’s Plans for Technological, Energy, Industrial, and Defense Development; and “Chinese Writings on Cyberwarfare and Coercion,” in China and Cybersecurity: Espionage, Strategy, and Politics in the Digital Domain. A Chinese linguist, he holds an M.A. in international policy studies from the Monterey Institute of International Studies and is currently enrolled in a Ph.D. program at King’s College London. Dr. Amanda Kerrigan is a Research Scientist in the China and Indo-Pacific Security Affairs Division at CNA, where her research has focused on Chinese developments in artificial intelligence (AI) and Chinese media responses to U.S. military operations and activities worldwide. Dr. Kerrigan holds a Ph.D. in China Studies from Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, a Master’s degree in Chinese Politics and Diplomacy from Fudan University in Shanghai, and a Bachelor’s degree in Asian Studies from Georgetown University. She was a Fulbright Fellow in China from 2015-2016, studying protest and violence in China’s health care system. Fluent in Chinese, she spent four years living between mainland China and Taiwan. Her previous professional experiences include working in the China Practice at the Albright Stonebridge Group and with Johns Hopkins Medicine International. Doowan Lee is CEO and co-founder of VAST-OSINT, an AI startup. He builds data analytic tools to expose and analyze the provenance of disinformation and adversarial information operations by enriching and visualizing cyber data for content authentication. He is also a senior advisor to the Institute for Security and Technology (IST) and adjunct professor of politics at the University of San Francisco. He leverages emerging AI technologies to empower open society and support national security. He specializes in disinformation analysis and great power competition in the Information Environment. Before founding VAST-OSINT, he taught at the Naval Postgraduate School for more than eleven years as a faculty member and principal investigator. He was also featured in a previous podcast episode, Disinformation, Revisionism, and China.Andrea Kendall-Taylor is a Senior Fellow and Director of the Transatlantic Security Program at CNAS. She works on national security challenges facing the United States and Europe, focusing on Russia, authoritarianism and threats to democracy, and the state of the Transatlantic alliance. Prior to joining CNAS, Ms. Kendall-Taylor served for eight years as a senior intelligence officer. From 2015 to 2018, she was Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council (NIC) in the ODNI. Prior to joining the NIC, Ms. Kendall-Taylor was a senior analyst at the CIA where she worked on Russia and Eurasia, the political dynamics of autocracies, and democratic decline. Ms. Kendall-Taylor is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. Ms. Kendall-Taylor was also featured in the previous episode, How Russia Fights. In our interview with the aforementioned SMEs, we explore How China Fights, to include intelligentized warfare, maneuver, fires, information operations, cyber, and more! The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview: Beginning in 2004, China’s PLA undertook a major modernization effort to reinvent itself as a rival to the United States. It invested in extensive technology development, undertook major force restructuring, and created new, specialized units for advanced warfare. Though the PLA lacks combat experience, it has become progressively more assertive in competition.China has completed extensive research and development in artificial intelligence (AI) and autonomous systems. Specifically, China will use this technology to support drones across all military operations, including combat and logistical support. China is now the United States’ most technologically sophisticated adversary, though its concentration on this “science” of warfare may be at the expense of the “art” of battle, or the focus on training creative, resilient human forces.China will also leverage its AI proficiency in “intelligent warfare,” integrating machines in military decision making. This strategy will shift warfare to the key cyber and space domains and increase its emphasis on obtaining high-quality military data.In its modernization campaign, China created a Strategic Support Force (SSF) for information warfare, space operations, and cyber activities. The consolidation of these capabilities demonstrates China’s perception that these will be the decisive domains in future warfare. Further, documentation demonstrates that China sees information operations as a regular, rather than irregular, warfare technique.China has also sought to fully integrate itself into the global economy and digital infrastructure through programs like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). This effort increased the strength and resilience of its economy, portrayed China as a willing and capable development partner, and provided itself with increased access to operation spaces for future systems confrontations.Though China’s relationship with Russia is limited and transactional, the rate of cooperation between the two nations has increased in recent years. They are increasingly aligned on policy goals such as countering U.S. influence and democracy promotion, and seek to combine Chinese capital with Russian talent to fully advance their respective international standings. Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratoryfor our next episode of The Convergence podcast “Through Soldiers’ Eyes: The Future of Ground Combat,” featuring subject matter experts — military analysts, combat veterans, and combat reporters — discussing their experiences in modern warfare at the “bleeding edge” of battle, the future of conflict, and the requirements and challenges facing future ground warfighters.Learn more about China as our Pacing Threat in the following TRADOC G-2 content: ATP 7-100.3, Chinese Tactics; People’s Liberation Army Ground Forces Quick Reference Guide; China Trifold; the China products page; and information on PLA weapon systems accessed via the Worldwide Equipment Guide (WEG) on the OE Data Integration Network (ODIN). … explore the following Mad Scientist Laboratory China content: The Operational Environment (2021-2030): Great Power Competition, Crisis, and Conflict, along with its source document China’s PLA Modernization through the DOTMLPF-P Lens, by Dr. Jacob Barton “Intelligentization” and a Chinese Vision of Future War Competition and Conflict in the Next Decade Disrupting the “Chinese Dream” – Eight Insights on how to win the Competition with China Competition in 2035: Anticipating Chinese Exploitation of Operational Environments Disinformation, Revisionism, and China with Doowan Lee and associated podcast China and Russia: Achieving Decision Dominance and Information Advantage, by Ian Sullivan The PLA and UAVs – Automating the Battlefield and Enhancing Training A Chinese Perspective on Future Urban Unmanned Operations China: “New Concepts” in Unmanned Combat and Cyber and Electronic Warfare The PLA: Close Combat in the Information Age and the “Blade of Victory” … and check out the following additional content on China: China’s Military Civil Fusion Strategy: A View from Chinese Strategists, by Alex Stone and Peter Wood People’s Liberation Army: Army Campaign Doctrine in Transition by Kevin McCauley THE PLA BEYOND BORDERS Chinese Military Operations in Regional and Global Context, edited by Joel Wuthnow, Arthur S. Ding, Phillip C. Saunders, Andrew Scobell, and Andrew N.D. Yang Deciphering the PLA’s New Joint Doctrine: A Conversation with Dr. David Finkelstein, a podcast by our colleagues at the China Power Projectat the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

Full show notes at the publisher

46. How Russia Fights with Ian Sullivan, Samuel Bendett, Katerina Sedova, and Andrea Kendall-Taylor Nov 18, 2021

Show notes

Russia is a formidable adversary that is currently undergoing transformative modernization. Its combat proficient force has inculcated lessons learned from recent combat operations in Syria, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine; selectively invested in niche capabilities (e.g., autonomy, robotics, and artificial intelligence) to add precision strike to its already formidable fires, enhance decision making, augment combined arms formations and logistics support, and safeguard its Soldiers; and professionalized to a more balanced ratio of contract to conscript Soldiers. A master of information confrontation, Russia employs cyber, information operations, and disinformation to offset any conventional force asymmetries. Above all, Russia remains a persistent, vice a declining power!

Army Mad Scientist interviewed the following four world-class SMEs about our near peer threat to learn How Russia Fights:

Ian Sullivanserves as the Senior Advisor for Analysis and ISR to the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2, at the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC G2). This is a Tier One Defense Intelligence Senior Level (DISL) position. He is responsible for the analysis that defines and the narrative that explains the Army’s Operational Environment, which supports integration across doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy. Mr. Sullivan is a career civilian intelligence officer, who has served with the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI); Headquarters, U.S. Army Europe and Seventh Army, Deputy Chief of Staff, G-2 (USAREUR G2); and as an Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) cadre member at the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). Prior to assuming his position at the TRADOC G2, Mr. Sullivan led a joint NCTC Directorate of Intelligence (DI)/Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Counterterrorism Mission Center (CTMC) unit responsible for WMD terrorism issues, where he provided direct intelligence support to the White House, senior policymakers, Congress, and other senior customers throughout the Government. He was promoted into the Senior Executive ranks in June 2013 as a member of the ODNI’s Senior National Intelligence Service, and transferred to the Army as a DISL in January, 2017. Mr. Sullivan is also a frequent and valued contributor to the Mad Scientist Laboratory.

Katerina Sedovais a Research Fellow at Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET), where she works on the CyberAI Project. Most recently, she advised SEN Maggie Hassan on cybersecurity and technology policy issues and drafted key legislation as a TechCongress fellow with the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Previously, she published research and advised projects on disinformation, state-sponsored information operations and OSINT for the NATO Strategic Communications Center of Excellence, the Department of State, and the Department of Defense. She started her career at Microsoft, where she led engineering teams in the security, networking, and performance components of the internet browsing platform. She was named as an inventor on multiple patents awarded to Microsoft. Ms. Sedova is a proclaimed Mad Scientist, having participated in our AI Speeding up Disinformation panel discussion during the Mad Scientist Weaponized Information Series of Virtual Eventslast year.

Sam Bendettis an Adviser with CNA’s Strategy, Policy, Plans and Programs Center (SP3), where he is a member of the Russia Studies Program. He is also an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). His work involves research on the Russian defense and technology developments, unmanned and autonomous military systems and AI, as well as Russian military capabilities and decision-making during crises. He is a Member of CNA’s Center for Autonomy and Artificial Intelligence, and a proclaimed Mad Scientist, having contributed multiple insightful blog posts to the Mad Scientist Laboratory, and presented informative topics during a number of Army Mad Scientist webinars and conferences. He is also a Russian military autonomy and AI SME for the DoD’s Defense Systems Information Analysis Center.

Andrea Kendall-Taylor is a Senior Fellow and Director of the Transatlantic Security Program at the CNAS. She works on national security challenges facing the United States and Europe, focusing on Russia, authoritarianism and threats to democracy, and the state of the Transatlantic alliance. Prior to joining CNAS, Ms. Kendall-Taylor served for eight years as a senior intelligence officer. From 2015 to 2018, she was Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council (NIC) in the ODNI. In this role, Ms. Kendall-Taylor led the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) strategic analysis on Russia, represented the IC in interagency policy meetings, provided analysis to the National Security Council, and briefed the DNI and other senior staff for White House and international meetings. Prior to joining the NIC, Ms. Kendall-Taylor was a senior analyst at the CIA where she worked on Russia and Eurasia, the political dynamics of autocracies, and democratic decline. Ms. Kendall-Taylor is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service.

In our interview with the aforementioned SMEs, we explore how Russia fights, addressing unmanned and autonomous systems, maneuver warfare, special operations, cyber warfare, information operations, proxy forces, and more! The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview:

Despite popular discourse casting Russia as a declining power, the Russian military remains a near-peer competitorwith significant capabilities in competition, crisis, and conflict. Russia’s military continues to undergo a transformative modernization effort, learning from its extensive combat experience in Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgia, Crimea, Syria, Libya, and eastern Ukraine.

The United States cannot simply cast Russia as a declining power and pivot its focus away from the nation entirely.Instead, the U.S. military should continue to monitor Russian military modernization and strategy.

The Russian military continues to develop and implement an advanced force of autonomous and robotic systems supported by AI.This technology will be tested and adopted to enhance decision-making and safeguard Soldier’s lives, ultimately making Russian operations more effective. The deployment of this technology will represent a long-term, transformative change for the Russian military.

Russia will continue to pursue dominance in information operations. These comparatively inexpensive“grey zone” tactics will seek to fracture liberal alliances, influence elections, undermine trust in democratic institutions, and weaponize ambiguity and uncertainty. Even if operations are ultimately discovered, they may still succeed by casting the target as vulnerable and elevating the perceived capabilities of the Russian attackers.

Russia will continue seeking to “win without fighting” by implementing rapid military operations immediately followed by offers for a diplomatic resolution.Such tactics prevent U.S. military mobilization and force the United States to choose between accepting Russian solutions or purposefully escalating conflict.

Russia is seeking to develop advanced autonomous systemsto increase its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. These systems will increase the precision of Russian reconnaissance-fire complexes, enhancing Russia’s ability to dominate enemies via firepower.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratoryfor our next episode of The Convergence podcast featuring SMEs from CNA, CNAS, Georgetown University’s CSET, and TRADOC G-2 discussing our pacing threat and exploring How China Fights, to include intelligentized warfare, maneuver, fires, information operations, cyber, and more!

45. Learning About the Future Through History with Dr. Brent L. Sterling Oct 28, 2021

Show notes

Brent L. Sterling has been an adjunct lecturer at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University for the past twenty years, teaching courses on security studies, military strategy, and operations. He is the author of Other People’s Wars: The US Military and the Challenge of Learning for Foreign Conflicts and Do Good Fences Make Good Neighbors? What History Teaches Us about Strategic Barriers and International Security. Dr. Sterling has spent the past thirty years as a defense analyst, including positions at the Central Intelligence Agency and consulting firms working for the U.S. Department of Defense.

In our interview with Dr. Sterling, we discuss how militaries learn (or don’t!) from foreign conflicts, what pitfalls await those trying to learn from historical conflicts, how focusing only on “relevant” observations hampers our creativity in analyzing warfare, and what strategists can do to avoid past mistakes. The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview:

In Other People’s Wars, Dr. Sterling provides a longitudinal evaluation spanning the 19th and 20th centuries on what the U.S. military learned from foreign conflicts. Exploring the Crimean, Russo-Japanese, Spanish Civil, and Yom Kippur Wars as use cases, Dr. Sterlingidentifies how effectively the U.S. assimilated key lessons from each of these conflicts and developed responsive capabilities across doctrine, organization, training and education, materiel, leadership, personnel, facilities, and policy (DOTMLPF-P); drew erroneous conclusions; or failed to act altogether. Importantly, Dr. Sterling compares the success of learning from these wars across the U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force.
Studying foreign conflicts allows the U.S. military to learn about new technologies, their applications, and novel problem sets, facilitating proactive responsesto problems before they are encountered in the field. For example, at the beginning of the 20th century, the U.S. Army was reconsidering the future of the bayonet. Observations from the Russo-Japanese War, where knife fighting was prevalent — especially in night assaults, given the heightened risk of friendly fire — led Army Leaders to determine that the weapon was still relevant, and should be maintained.
Learning from foreign wars can be a challenging endeavor, as it frequently runs counter to deeply-rooted institutional biases.Services’ culture and bureaucratic politics can limit the implementation of lessons learned from other nations’ conflicts. Insufficient access to information can also prevent the Services from fully appreciating the important implications of remote conflicts involving less than peer adversaries.
The U.S. military also needs to be mindful that other observers learn from foreign conflicts, too. For example, while the U.S. Army learned of the importance and adopted Anti-Tank (AT) guns from observing combatants during the Spanish Civil War, these weapons were quickly rendered obsolete by what other powers observed in this conflict, largely rendering AT guns ineffective by the advent of WWII. Thus, considering the viewpoint from other observers is critical in preparing for the next war.
Cooperation with foreign combatants is more important than direct observation when trying to learn from foreign wars.Access to information and contextual perspective can allow for understanding of the conflict without requiring direct U.S. presence.
Increased levels of disinformationwill make learning and effective decision-making more challenging, especially under the time pressure induced by conflict.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratory for the debut our new The Convergence podcast series entitled “How They Fight.” Our first episode will focus on Russia and feature subject matter experts from CNA, Center for a New American Security, Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, and the TRADOC G-2 discussing how Russia fights, addressing unmanned and autonomous systems, maneuver warfare, special operations, cyber warfare, information operations, proxy forces, and more!

If you enjoyed this post, check out the following related content:

The Case for Restructuring the Department of Defense to Fight in the 21st Century

Top Attack: Lessons Learned from the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War and associated podcast

Insights from the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict in 2020 (Parts 1 and 2)

“Once More unto The Breach Dear Friends”: From English Longbows to Azerbaijani Drones, Army Modernization STILL Means More than Materiel

The Convergence: The Future of Ground Warfare with COL Scott Shaw and associatedpodcast

Lessons from the Cold War: “The Ugly American” and Multi-Domain Operations

Why the Next “Cuban Missile Crisis” Might Not End Well: Cyberwar and Nuclear Crisis Management

Jomini’s Revenge: Mass Strikes Back!

Making the Future More Personal: The Oft-Forgotten Human Driver in Future’s Analysis

43. A New American Way of Training with Jennifer McArdle Sep 30, 2021

Show notes

Jennifer McArdle is an Adjunct Senior Fellow with the Defense Program at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) and a Product Strategist at Improbable LLC, an emerging global leader in distributed simulation technology for military planning, training, and decision support. Her research focuses on military innovation, readiness, and synthetic training. She currently serves as an expert member of a NATO technical working group that is developing cyber effects for the military alliance’s mission and campaign simulations. Her work has been featured in Real Clear World, The Cyber Defense Review, National Defense Magazine, and War on the Rocks, among others. Ms. McArdle previously served as an Assistant Professor of Cyber Defense at Salve Regina University, where she lectured on the relationship between national security and disruptive technologies.

In our interview with Ms. McArdle, we discuss the future of the Synthetic Training Environment, flexibility and scalability in training systems, and the critical need for a new agile approach to training that can keep pace with the dynamic character of warfare. The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview:

Synthetic training will be instrumental in providing the next generation of Soldiers with the tools they need to succeed in a new era of warfare. The adoption of synthetic training and simulation will empower realistic individual and collective multi-echelon and multi-domain training and mission rehearsal, advanced wargaming, and enhanced decision-making.
The New American Way of Training Initiative at CNAS examines how the military will be required to train and fight in the future, using the Cold War as a model. During the Cold War, intense tension and sporadic ‘hot’ proxy conflicts spurred a series of innovations that required radical changes to military training and organization. This new CNAS initiative will help ensure that our future individual and collective training programs meet the needs of our warfighters, today and in the future.
The DoD should focus on developing modular synthetic training architectures, enabling it to adapt training and simulations more readily as warfare evolves. This method differs from current synthetic simulators, which are monolithic in nature (i.e., large, complicated, and un-editable platforms). Modular training simulations will give future Soldiers ‘degradation dominance,’ or the ability to maintain high levels of performance under duress.
The DoD should require modular components of training platforms in future acquisition contracts. Such contracts will also reduce cost for the DoD, as updating platforms will require less overhaul than monolithic platforms.
Synthetic training is particularly important for success in multi-domain operations. Due to safety and security concerns, the military does not incorporate live cyber elements in its training exercises. However, synthetic environments would enable Soldiers to experience the stress of such elements in a risk-free environment, better preparing them for the realities of multi-domain operations.
Successfully prioritizing training support will require the DoD to dedicate itself to organizational change. Breaking down ‘knowledge silos’ and promoting the cross-pollination of ideas will ensure that the DoD is able to use its latent talent and fully exploit the benefits of breakthrough technologies.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratory for our next episode of “The Convergence,” featuring our interview with Terry Young, Founder and CEO, sparks & honey — “a cultural intelligence consultancy helping organizations understand explosive and immediate cultural shifts, as well as cultural tastes that develop over time.” We will discuss the future of workplaces, the meaning of true diversity and how to achieve and measure it, and how to leverage AI and machine learning to build cultural intelligence across a wide spectrum of future topics on 14 October 2021!

If you enjoyed this post and podcast, check out the following related content:

From Legos to Modular Simulation Architectures: Enabling the Power of Future (War) Play, by Jennifer McArdle and Caitlin Dohrman

The Synthetic Training Environment [view via a non-DoD network], presented by then MG Maria Gervais, Director, STE Cross Functional Team (CFT) / Deputy Commanding General, Combined Arms Center-Training (DCG, CAC-T), from the Mad Scientist Installations of the Future Conference, co-sponsored by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Installations, Energy and Environment (OASA (IE&E)) and the Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI) on 19-20 June 2018 in Atlanta, Georgia, and see her associated slide deck

The STE discussion in the Top Ten Takeaways from the Installations of the Future Conference

The Metaverse: Blurring Reality and Digital Lives with Cathy Hackl and associated podcast

Gamers Building the Future Force and associated podcast

Fight Club Prepares Lt Col Maddie Novák for Cross-Dimension Manoeuvre, by LTC(P) Arnel David, U.S. Army, and Major Aaron Moore, British Army, along with their interview in The Convergence: UK Fight Club – Gaming the Future Army and associated podcast

The Convergence: The Future of Software with Major Rob Slaughter, then listen to the associated podcast

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog post do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Army, Army Futures Command (AFC), or TRADOC.

42. Global Entanglement and Multi-Reality Warfare with COL (USA-RET) Steve Banach Sep 16, 2021

Show notes

COL Stefan Banach (USA-Ret.) is a Distinguished Member of the 75th Ranger Regiment and served in that organization for nine years, culminating with command of the 3rd Ranger Battalion from 2001-2003. He led U.S. Army Rangers during a historic night combat parachute assault into Afghanistan on October 19, 2001, as the “spearhead” for the Global War on Terror. Steve subsequently led U.S. Army Rangers in a second combat parachute assault into Al Anbar Province in western Iraq in 2003. He served with distinction in the United States Army from 1983 to 2010. Since then, he has provided executive consulting services to a diverse range of clients at a number of prestigious institutions. Steve Banach also serves as the Director, Army Management Staff College, an element of Army University responsible for “igniting the leadership potential for every Army civilian.”

In our interview with Steve Banach, we discussed global entanglement, multi-reality warfare, and the urgent need for a new paradigm and cognitive approach to warfare for the U.S. Army and larger Joint Force. The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview:

The U.S. military needs to develop a ‘fourth Army,’ whose form and function are capable of gaining logic from disorder. This Army will be better prepared to operate in the multi-reality, technologically integrated battlespace that is already upon us.
The next war will be characterized by operations within the virtual battlespace. To prepare for this phase of warfare, the U.S. Army needs to develop new mental models to understand the vulnerabilities that arise from an increasingly interconnected world. Such an effort should feature the development of a ‘virtual battlespace maneuver’
Our adversaries are working to integrate technologies from autonomous weapons systems to social media to dominate this new battlespace. Future adversaries will not always be on a physical battleground, but the impacts of their operations will be felt both by the U.S. military and civilian population as they seek to create systemic shock and paralysis. The Army should redevelop its total force design and increase its operational arc to prepare the United States for this new form of conflict.
Weapons of ‘mass deception’ will be increasingly prevalent in conflict, as social media is manipulated to prevent population education and engagement with critical issues. The United States should increase awareness of this threat via programs in both civilian and military education.
Asymmetric ethics in the virtual battlespace will necessitate the development and communication of zones of acceptability and limits of tolerance. These standards should be accompanied by specific response outlines to both deter and defend against enemy attacks in this sphere.
Our adversaries capitalize on global entanglement and multi-reality warfare by creating dependence on connectivity, increasing surveillance of online networks, and using data collected to understand and manipulate the population. This strategy involves technologies from FitBits to biometric scanners and takes advantage of a world in which every individual has an online presence.
Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratory for our next episode of The Convergence — A New American Way of Training — featuring Jennifer McArdle, Product Strategist at Improbable and Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, discussing the future of the Synthetic Training Environment, flexibility and scalability in training systems, and the critical need for a new agile approach to training that can keep pace with the dynamic character of warfare.

If you enjoyed today’s post and podcast, check out the following related content:

The Future of War is Cyber! by CPT Casey Igo and CPT Christian Turley

A House Divided: Microtargeting and the next Great American Threat, by 1LT Carlin Keally

Nowhere to Hide: Information Exploitation and Sanitization

The Exploitation of our Biases through Improved Technology, by Raechel Melling

LikeWar — The Weaponization of Social Media

The Death of Authenticity: New Era Information Warfare

Influence at Machine Speed: The Coming of AI-Powered Propaganda by MAJ Chris Telley

Damnatio Memoriae through AI and What is the Threshold? Assessing Kinetic Responses to Cyber-Attacks, by proclaimed Mad Scientist Marie Murphy

Sub-threshold Maneuver and the Flanking of U.S. National Security, by Dr. Russell Glenn

The Erosion of National Will – Implications for the Future Strategist, by Dr. Nick Marsella

Weaponized Information: What We’ve Learned So Far…, Insights from the Mad Scientist Weaponized Information Series of Virtual Events, and all of this series’ associated content and videos [access via a non-DoD network]

Weaponized Information: One Possible Vignette and Three Best Information Warfare Vignettes

Disinformation, Revisionism, and China with Doowan Lee Aug 19, 2021

Show notes

Today’s episode of “The Convergence” podcast features our conversation with Mr. Doowan Lee, CEO, VAST-OSINT and Board Advisor, Zignal Labs, originally published last October. Mr. Lee is a National Security expert in influence intelligence, disinformation analysis, data analytics, network visualization, and great power competition. Before joining Zignal Labs, Mr. Lee served as a professor and principal investigator at the Naval Postgraduate School, where he executed federally funded projects on collaborative information systems, network analysis, and disinformation analysis. His article entitled The United States Isn’t Doomed to Lose the Information Wars explores Russian and Chinese disinformation campaigns and was featured in Foreign Policy last fall.

The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview with Mr. Lee:

- - Our adversaries see disinformation as just an effective tool that provides strategic and global reach. We see it as irregular warfare when it is anything but irregular.

- - Disinformation, or the historical term propaganda, has been around forever. COVID-19 has accentuated this threat vector or surface.

- - The Chinese government outlined their national information operations policy in "The Communiqué on the Current State of the Ideological Sphere” (also known as Document #9):

- Nations talking about the spread of open societies are attempting to undermine the CCP.

- The CCP will maintain positive control of all media.

- The CCP will professionalize information operations.

This policy resulted in the development of the “Great Firewall,” the “Golden Shield" project, and the PLA’s Strategic Support Forces.

- - The CCP and the Kremlin are increasing their coordination on national security activities and, in some cases, are increasing their collaboration. This resulted in a joint statement that stated the two governments would work together to undermine disinformation that seeks to destabilize the Russian and Chinese governments.

- - How is our Great Competition strategy working to prevent Chinese and Russian collaboration?

- - Slaughtering the “Golden Calf”

- Information Operations are not irregular warfare. DROP THE ADJECTIVE! There is nothing irregular about these operations and they are probably the most regular or everyday form of competition we face.

- Embrace our doctrine. We are not using our tools such as international or bilateral exercises for advantage, while our adversaries are using these exercises, oftentimes in the same contested space, to their information advantage.

- Stop trying to make perfect decisions. Instead, work to perfect decision making using rapid experimentation, learning, and implementation.

- - When engaging the younger generations, we need to discuss data and civil liberties, the philosophy of science or acquiring knowledge, ethics, and critical thinking.

- - What keeps me up at night? Technologies that create strategic latency between offense and defense. Deep fakes is one of these technologies. It has a high first mover advantage and identification tools do not prevent them from getting into the “wild” and impacting our society.

Bias, Behavior, and Baseball with Keith Law Aug 05, 2021

Show notes

In this latest episode of “The Convergence,” we talk with Keith Law, Senior Baseball Writer at The Athletic, which he joined in January 2020 after spending thirteen and a half years at ESPN. Before joining ESPN.com in June 2006, Keith spent just over four years as the Special Assistant to the GM of the Toronto Blue Jays, and prior to that had written for Baseball Prospectus. Keith Law is the author of Smart Baseball: The Story Behind the Old Stats That Are Ruining the Game, the New Ones That Are Running It, and the Right Way to Think About Baseball, published in April 2017; and The Inside Game: Bad Calls, Strange Moves, and What Baseball Behavior Teaches Us About Ourselves, published in April of this year.

In today’s podcast, Keith Law discusses the parallels between baseball and the Information Environment, how stats skew our thinking, and the implications of anchoring bias:

- - The brain develops cognitive biases to manage extensive information. These biases lead information consumers to draw false conclusions and ignore conflicting data.

- - Anchoring bias occurs when the brain latches onto the first piece of information, even if it is irrelevant to what you are working on.

- - Creating radical change in a large, traditional organization, like the Army or a sports team, is best done through an individualized grassroots effort. Radical change, especially from people new to the organization, does not usually “win hearts and minds.”

- - Information environments are full of persistent yet harmful beliefs. These need to be addressed, as those with these beliefs are often more aggressive about promoting their viewpoints.

- - “Credibly foolish beliefs” benefit from a “first mover” advantage. These irrational narratives are rarely challenged by peers. Once these fallacies are adopted, they are difficult to let go.

- - Data collection tools are becoming democratized, leading to individuals having more agency over information.

- - To become a better writer, future analysts should work to become better readers, especially when it comes to reading books and articles outside the genre they write in. For people with a STEM background, being able to write well provides a personal competitive advantage for future employment.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratory for our next podcast which, given the West's current focus on blunting China's ambitions, will feature last year’s interview with Doowan Lee discussing disinformation, changes over time in approaches to information warfare, and revisionism and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on 19 Aug 2022.

40. Gamers Building the Future Force with Air Force Gaming Jul 22, 2021

Show notes

Air Force Gaming (AFG) is the official gaming program and competition hub for the United States Air Force and Space Force. Over 86% of Airmen and Guardians between the ages of 18-34 identify as gamers. AFG was started to help Airmen of all ages, ranks, and backgrounds find common ground through video games, while also promoting mental acuity, fine motor coordination, and competitive excellence. Its mission is to create an inclusive gaming community for Airmen of all ages, ranks, and backgrounds.

Capt Zach “ZB” Baumann co-founded AFG, and for the better part of 2020, led the explosion of AFG's digital reach to 575K impressions and 40K profile visits (doubling its digital footprint of followers on social media and verified members on its Discord server) across five platforms, and tirelessly built the connective tissue between the Department of the Air Force, DoD at large, and the gaming industry — ultimately leading to AFG’s “acquisition” by the USAF in November of 2020. AFG is helping to bridge the gap between the DoD’s digital natives (tomorrow’s leaders) and digital immigrants (today’s leaders).
Capt Oliver “OliPoppinIt” Parsons founded AFG and leads a diverse group of Airmen and Guardians all across the world. AFG strives to be the leading DoD eSports/gaming organization. In 2020, he led the AFG Space Force Call of Duty team to victory in the first ever transatlantic Armed Forces eSports bowl (CODE Bowl).
MSgt Michael Sullivan co-founded AFG, launching the Department of the Air Force’s first gaming and eSports organization, with a primary focus in mental health and resiliency for service members. MSgt Sullivan led day to day operations; advised on the organization’s direction, event planning, and brand implementation; developed its “Ambassador” volunteer program, on-boarded, and trained 50+ personnel; and established the first ever USAF/USSF official eSports teams, achieving the Championship title in an international tournament.
In today’s podcast, Capt Baumann, Capt Parsons, and MSgt Sullivan discuss how gaming breaks down barriers in rank, generation, and geography; identities the digital talent residing in the gaming community; and how video games can cultivate the future Senior Leaders in the military. The following bullet points highlight key insights from our interview:

AFG seeks to identify and engage gamers already ‘within the gate’ of the Air and Space Forces, providing an online platform where Airmen and Guardians can network and develop skills in teaming, organization, and strategy. AFG hopes to expose the benefits of gaming to the DoD, counteracting the outdated stereotype that gaming is a waste of resources.
AFG engages service members on a massive array of games, ranging from tabletop games like chess to interactive streaming games like Minecraft and League of Legends. This feature of the community allows for the inclusion of a wide spectrum of gamers with different skills and interest levels.
AFG emphasizes that almost all ‘techies’ are ‘tinkerers’ who can use games to test new strategies and creative processes. Thus, games provide service members with opportunities to fail in a safe environment. Embracing this feature of gaming, in which new strategies can be developed and tested, can help create a culture of game appreciation in DoD, even up to the level of Senior Leaders.
Importantly, gaming communities within the DoD can facilitate better talent management. Gaming exposes ‘hidden talents’ among service members, helping the branches identify tomorrow’s leaders that are already serving.
Gaming can also help promote cooperation and competition across the branches of the military. As each branch works to develop new ways to engage gamers, they can learn from each other, advancing the DoD mission collectively.

Stay tuned to the Mad Scientist Laboratory for our next episode of “The Convergence,” which, now that the 2021 Baseball Season is in full swing, will feature last year’s interview with proclaimed Mad Scientist Keith Law, author and Senior Baseball Writer with The Athletic, discussing the parallels between baseball and the Information Environment, how stats skew our thinking, and the implications of anchoring bias.

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

The Convergence – The Army’s Mad Scientist Podcast

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected