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
Download the full analysis
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
Author(s)
Corentin BRUSTLEIN
Research fellow, coordinator of the Security Studies Center and head of the Deterrence and Proliferation program
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
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.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
Strategic Shift in NATO’s Support for Ukraine. A Study of NSATU and PURL Initiatives
French Forward Deterrence: What Is in It for the Baltic States?
For what may be its most significant stress test since the end of the Cold War, European deterrence is under strain. Russia’s war against Ukraine has demonstrated Moscow’s willingness to use force and its ability to combine conventional operations with nuclear signalling, coercive rhetoric, and hybrid actions. At the same time, the gradual deterioration of transatlantic relations has revived concerns about the reliability of extended deterrence.
Europe at the Crossroads of DefTech: Rethinking the European Defense Innovation Ecosystem
“The way I look at Iron Dome is as the ultimate manifestation of the future of the United States’ role in future conflicts, which is not to be the world police, but to be the world gun store,” said Palmer Luckey in November 2023. Luckey is the founder of Anduril, one of the most prominent DefTech companies. The ambition is clear: to participate in global rearmament by capitalizing on the quality of American innovations and to dominate the arms market—at least in the West—through technological mastery.
Taking the Pulse: Is France’s New Nuclear Doctrine Ambitious Enough?
French President Emmanuel Macron has unveiled his country’s new nuclear doctrine. Are the changes he has made enough to reassure France’s European partners in the current geopolitical context?