Conventionalizing Deterrence? U.S. Prompt Strike Programs and Their Limits
About a decade ago, the U.S. started to examine options to develop and acquire Conventional Prompt Global Strike capabilities. This move fits in an effort to conventionalize deterrence, an effort initiated decades before and undertaken for profound and diverse motives. Although it has been renewed under the Obama administration, which aims to reduce the U.S. reliance on nuclear weapons, this ambition has resulted in very little concrete progress.
Budget cuts to defense spending and technological obstacles have forced the Pentagon to scale back its plans in terms of conventional strategic strike programs. Despite these setbacks, ten years from now the U.S. may well possess a conventional prompt strike capability in its arsenal. As a consequence, this paper also highlights some longer-term, operational and strategic issues that might arise from a context of crisis or war in which prompt strike capabilities could be used, and attempts to shed new light on the potential values these capabilities might have for U.S. national security.
Available in:
Regions and themes
ISBN / ISSN
Share
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Conventionalizing Deterrence? U.S. Prompt Strike Programs and Their Limits
Corentin BRUSTLEIN
Research fellow, coordinator of the Security Studies Center and head of the Deterrence and Proliferation program
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
Deterrence and Proliferation
The conflicts in Europe, Asia and the Middle East demonstrate a return of nuclear power to the balance of power. Arsenals are being modernized and expanded, while arms control is collapsing. This research program aims to analyze these phenomena.
Toward Space-Based Intelligence for All? The Case of the Spring 2026 Iranian Strikes
The conflict in the Middle East has highlighted the effectiveness of Iranian strikes in identifying targets and conducting precision strikes. This raises the question: which capabilities enabled the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to achieve these results?
Confronting Russia’s High-Velocity Arsenal: European Challenges and Solutions
Since February 2022, Russian missile and long-range drone strikes against Ukraine have served as near-daily reminders of what European states could face in a war with Russia. The same weapon systems battering Ukrainian infrastructure and population centers would be directed against European military and civilian targets in any confrontation between Russia and NATO. As Russian missile production expands and its arsenal diversifies, Europe must confront an uncomfortable question: how to deter, and if push comes to shove, fight Russia's long-range strike arsenal?
The War on Terrorism: Global Experts Reflect on Lessons Learned Twenty-Five Years After 9/11
Twenty-five years ago, the September 11 attacks prompted the invention of new security architectures that shaped the war on terrorism. Sixteen think tank experts from fifteen countries reflect on the successes, failures, and missed opportunities in the fight against terrorism—a fight that is still ongoing.
From Corsairs to Private Military Contractors. Nonmilitary Maritime Actors and the Historical Continuities of Naval Warfare
Since late 2023, several Houthi attacks on commercial shipping have involved privately contracted armed teams conducting defensive engagements and coordinating immediate response efforts, often in the relative absence of regular naval forces during the immediate hostilities at sea. These cases highlight a strategic tension that increasingly confronts modern navies. On the one hand, they are expected to conduct persistent, low-intensity maritime security tasks such as counterpiracy, maritime policing, and the protection of commercial shipping. On the other hand, they face renewed pressure to prepare for high-intensity conflict against peer and near-peer adversaries amid the return of great power competition.