Strategic Command Academic Alliance

Purpose

Develop an academic community of interest focused on research and analysis of deterrence, assurance, and associated
strategic level national security themes in a rapidly changing, multi-domain global threat environment.

Goals

» Advance deterrence and assurance thinking beyond Cold War era narratives.

» Stimulate rigorous academic research into deterrence, assurance, and other concepts of strategic thought for the 21st Century.

» Promote collaboration among academic and military Alliance members.

» Encourage development of national security professionals to meet future research, analytic, and decision-making requirements.


 

USSTRATCOM Analytic Agenda Research Questions

Focus Area 1:  Security Environment

  • What are the strategic implications of a two nuclear peer environment (e.g., for U.S. policy, nuclear modernization, arms control, strategic stability dialogues)?
    • What is the role, if any, of parity in such an environment?
    • Does it change how we think about 3rd, 4th, nth actors?
  • What is the impact on U.S. strategy of increasing ties between U.S. strategic competitors? What are the implications for stability (e.g., strategic stability, first strike stability, crisis stability, arms race stability)?
  • Describe the potential implications for U.S. policy, strategy, and force posture of a security environment where multiple potential adversaries are increasing reliance on nuclear weapons.
  • How do U.S. perceptions of topics like warfare, nuclear use, deterrence, stability, and the spectrum of conflict compare to those of its competitors?  What risks arise in the differences among these perspectives?
  • Given a rapidly evolving security environment, what are the potential risks to effectively assuring U.S. allies or deterring potential adversaries? Describe the “known unknowns” and hypothesize the “unknown unknowns.”
    • What may buy down these risks (e.g., policy, strategy, posture, capabilities)?
  • How might adversary perceptions of their ability to deny the United States the use of the electromagnetic spectrum for command and control, sensing, etc. affect stability (e.g., strategic stability, first strike stability, crisis stability, arms race stability)?

 

Focus Area 2:  Deterrence and Escalation Maneuver

  • What are the escalation dynamics of simultaneous conflicts with more than one strategic adversary?
    • How might those dynamics shift according to the relationship between adversaries (e.g., adversaries cooperating, coordinating, allied)?
  • What strategies or approaches are necessary to deter multiple strategic actors simultaneously?
    • How might the strategies and capabilities needed to deter a second adversary change if we are already in conflict with one?
    • How might the United States and its allies shape the environment to enhance strategic stability among multiple nuclear-armed actors?
  • How do deterrence and compellence strategies evolve across the spectrum of conflict? 
    • What strategic approaches or concepts promote de-escalation or restoration of deterrence?
    • What effects do non-nuclear capabilities have on escalation dynamics?
  • What methods can be used to measure the effectiveness of a deterrence strategy?
  • How might nuclear and non-nuclear integration enhance strategic deterrence? Extended deterrence? What are the potential risks?
  • What are the key challenges to realizing integrated deterrence within and outside the Department of Defense (DOD), and how can they be resolved, managed, or mitigated?
  • Describe and evaluate alternative restore deterrence strategies and operational concepts. What are the risks and benefits of responding to adversary aggression in a manner proportional to the values threatened?
  • How should joint command and control doctrine for the combatant command and its functional components be modified to accept and enable the envisioned Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2) concepts of real-time centralized control?
    • What are the electromagnetic spectrum implications of this shift and potential paths to address?

 

Focus Area 3:  Assurance and Extended Deterrence

  • What is required of U.S. alliance architectures to address the growing momentum of adversaries acting against and/or subverting the liberal, rules-based international order?
  • How does the United States and its allies remain resilient against adversarial nuclear coercion?
  • How might the United States enhance the credibility of its extended deterrence commitments to its allies?
    • How might advanced non-nuclear capabilities or conventional-nuclear integration enhance the credibility of U.S. extended deterrence commitments?
    • How should deterrence efforts be shared or divided among allies?
    • What would be the consequences, especially to the credibility of U.S. security commitments and ally relationships, if allies or partners developed sovereign nuclear capabilities?

 

Focus Area 4:  Emerging and Future Technology

  • What impact might advanced technologies have on assurance and deterrence?
    • How might technologies 50 years in the future impact the security environment?
    • What impact might these advanced technologies have on stability (e.g., strategic stability, first strike stability, crisis stability, arms race stability)?
  • What technologies or technological trends might lead to capabilities with greater lethality than nuclear weapons? Describe the potential implications of such capabilities. What are the potential impacts on stability (e.g., strategic stability, first strike stability, crisis stability, arms race stability)?
  • What are the potential benefits and risks of leveraging artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) or other novel technology applications for nuclear strategy development, nuclear command and control and operations, or nuclear enterprise modernization?  How can risks be mitigated?
    • In what aspects of strategic deterrence can AI/ML provide the greatest benefits for the lowest risk?
  • What processes and procedures might accelerate the coordination between military and civilian organizations to exploit, attack, protect, and manage the electromagnetic spectrum operational environment to attain electromagnetic spectrum superiority?
  • What are the benefits and risks to deployed warfighters of commercial and military use of current and emerging communication standards such as 5G and 6G?
    • How should DOD design wrap-around technologies to enable these benefits while protecting against the inherent risk?
  • Describe the potential benefits of joint force and coalition force frequency de-confliction enabled by spectrum sharing technologies that allow unsynchronized simultaneous transmission over the same frequency bands by commercial and U.S. forces.
  • How might coherent electromagnetic attack or sensing between mission aircraft and unmanned systems improve the overall range of effects or detection against a threat?
  • How might electromagnetic spectrum-dependent systems leverage AI solutions real time?
  • How might campaign-level modeling and simulation capture the impacts of electromagnetic attack (EA), electromagnetic support (ES), and electromagnetic protection (EP) on the joint force?
    • To what extent would higher fidelity modeling of EA, ES, and EP of EMS-dependent systems result in significantly altered outcomes of current model success or failure metrics?

 

U.S. Strategic Command Academic Alliance 2022-2023 Academic Year Research Topics in PDF
U.S. Strategic Command Academic Alliance 2021-2022 Academic Year Research Topics in PDF
U.S. Strategic Command Academic Alliance 2020-2021 Academic Year Research Topics in PDF
U.S. Strategic Command Academic Alliance 2018-2019 Academic Year Research Topics in PDF
U.S. Strategic Command Academic Alliance 2017-2018 Academic Year Research Topics in PDF

 

School of Strategic Force Studies

 

 

Todd Robinson, Assistant Professor
Military and Security Studies
Air University
todd.robinson.4@us.af.mil

 

 

 

John M. Wiest, Assistant Dean
College of Engineering
john.m.wiest@ua.edu

 

 

 

Sharon K. Weiner, Associate Professor
School of International Service

skweiner@american.edu

 

 

 

Zdzislaw Sliwa, Dean
Baltic Defence College

Zdzislaw.Sliwa@baltdefcol.org

 

 

 

Adriana Seagle, Program Director
Intelligence and Security Studies

aseagle@bellevue.edu

 

 

California State University

Mark Clark, Professor and Director
National Security Studies Program

mtclark@csusb.edu

Steven Childs, Associate Professor
National Security Studies Program

SChilds@csusb.edu

 

 

 

Christopher J. Ferrero, Assistant Professor
Intelligence and National Security Studies

cferrero@coastal.edu
 

 


 

Mark Deinert, Associate Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering
mdeinert@mines.edu

 

 

 

Peter Harris, Assistant Professor
Department of Political Science
peter.harris@colostate.edu

 

 


Command and General Staff College (CGSC)
 

Barry M. Stentiford, Director
Advanced Strategic Leadership
Studies Program (ASLSP)

barry.m.stentiford.civ@mail.mil

 

 

School of International and Public Affairs


 

 

Erika Moreno, Professor
Political Science and International Relations

erikamoreno@creighton.edu

 



James M. Ragland, Coordination/Manager
Nuclear Enterprise Branch

james.m.ragland.civ@mail.mil
 

 

 

 

Adam N. Stulberg, Professor
The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

adam.stulberg@inta.gatech.edu

Jenna Jordan, Assistant Professor
The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

jenna.jordan@inta.gatech.edu

Margaret E. Kosal, Associate Professor
The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

margaret.kosal@inta.gatech.edu

Lawrence Rubin, Associate Professor
The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

lawrence.rubin@inta.gatech.edu

Rachel Whitlark, Assistant Professor
The Sam Nunn School of International Affairs

rachel.whitlark@inta.gatech.edu

 

 

 

Matthew Kroenig, Associate Professor
International Relations Field Chair Dept. of Government

mhk32@georgetown.edu

 

 

 

Matthew Bunn, Professor
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

matthew_bunn@harvard.edu

 

 

Indiana University

Sarah Bauerle Danzman, Assistant Professor
Department of International Studies
sbauerle@indiana.edu

 

 

Maurice E. Dawson, Assistant Professor
Director, Center for Cyber Security and
Forensics Education

mdawson2@iit.edu

 

 

 

Ellen Pirro, Teaching Professor
Political Science

ebpirro@iastate.edu

Scott Feinstein, Assistant Professor
Political Science

sgfeinst@iastate.edu

 

 

 

 

Jonathan Bierce, Strategic Architect
Supervisor, Operations and Threat Assessments Group

Jonathan.bierce@jhuapl.edu

Rob Vercher, Program Area Manager
Deterrence Analysis Prototyping & Development
Air Force Strategic Systems
Robert.vercher@jhuapl.edu

 

 


Philip Merrill Center for Strategic Studies
SAISMerrillCenter@jhu.edu

 

 

 

David Graff, Director
Security Studies

dgraff@ksu.edu

 

 

         Louisiana Tech Research Institute
 

Sumeet Dua, Associate Vice President for Research and Partnerships
Louisiana Tech University
sdua@latech.edu

Warren Ward, Chief of Staff and Director of Operations
Louisiana Tech Research Institute
wardwg@ltri.org

 

 

 

John P. Rose, Department Head
Department of Defense and Strategic Studies Program

johnprose@MissouriState.edu

Gary L. Geipel, Director of Doctoral Studies
Department of Defense and Strategic Studies Program
ggeipel@MissouriState.edu

 

 

Naval Postgraduate School
 

Wade Huntley, Senior Lecturer and Academic Director
School of International Graduate Studies

wlhuntle@nps.edu

Jeffrey Larsen, Research Professor
Department of National Security Affairs

jeffrey.larsen@nps.edu

 

Richard Evans, Interim Executive Director
National Strategic Research Institute
info@nsri.nebraskaresearch.gov

 

 

 

Paul Bernstein, Senior Research Fellow
Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction

Paul.Bernstein@ndu.edu

Justin Anderson, Senior Policy Fellow
Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction

justin.anderson.civ@ndu.edu

 

 

Thomas Ambrosio, Professor 
Criminal Justice & Political Science

Thomas.ambrosio@ndsu.edu

 

 

William F. Lyons Jr., Director 
Center for Global Resilience and Security

wlyons@norwich.edu

Yangmo Ku, Chair
History and Political Science Department

yku@norwich.edu

 

 

 

Bethany Goldblum, Founder & Director
Nuclear Policy Working Group

bethany@berkeley.edu

Andrew Reddie, Associate Research Professor
Goldman School of Public Policy

areddie@berkeley.edu

 

 

Przemyslaw Mazur
Institute of Security Studies

przemyslaw.mazur@up.krakow.pl

Rafal Kopec
Institute of Security Studies
rafal.kopec@up.krakow.pl

 

 

John Hodgson, Associate Director
Center for Security Research and Education

jgh161@arl.psu.edu

Darryl Farber, Assistant Teaching Professor
College of Engineering and School of
International Affairs
dlf112@psu.edu

 

 

 

Steve Cimbala, Distinguished Professor
Political Science

Sjc2@psu.edu

 

 

 

Heather Williams, Director 
Project on Nuclear Issues

hwwilliams@csis.org

 

 

Purdue University

Stacey L. Connaughton, Director
Purdue Policy Research Institute

sconnaug@purdue.edu

Daniel DeLaurentis, Professor
School of Aeronautics and Astronautics
ddelaure@purdue.edu

Sorin Matei, Associate Professor
Associate Professor, College of Liberal Arts
smatei@purdue.edu

 

 

Royal Danish Defence College

 

Carina Ann Meyn, Assistant Professor
Institute for Strategy
came@fak.dk

 

 

 

Harold Trinkunas, Deputy Director
Center for International Security and Cooperation

antanas@stanford.edu

 

 

 

Nicholas Taylor
United Kingdom Deterrence and Assurance

Academic Alliance
ntaylor@mail.dstl.gov.uk

 

 

 

Shane Smith, Director
Institute for National Security Studies
michael.smith@afacademy.af.edu

 

 

 

Edward Kaplan, Dean
School of Strategic Landpower

edward.a.kaplan.civ@army.mil

 

 

 

Thomas Sherlock, Professor
Political Science
Thomas.Sherlock@westpoint.edu

 

 


National Security, Political Science Department

 

 

 


Strategy and Policy Department
 

 

 

 

Matthew Fuhrmann, Director
Graduate Studies, Political Science

mfuhrmann@pols.tamu.edu

 

 

 

Roberto Furfaro, Associate Professor
Systems and Industrial Engineering

robertof@email.arizona.edu

 

 

 

Erik Gartzke, Director
Center for Peace and Security Studies

egartzke@ucsd.edu

 

 

 

Lewis Griffith, Lecturer and Director
Defense and Security Policy Lab
Josef Korbel School of International Studies
lewis.griffith@du.edu

Jill Schmieder Hereau, Associate Director
Sié Chéou-Kang Center for International Security and Diplomacy

Jill.SchmiederHereau@du.edu

 

 

Michael Denning, Director
Office of Graduate Military Programs
gmjdenning@ku.edu

Don Haider-Markel, Professor and Chair
Department of Political Science
prex@ku.edu

Trent Williams, Assistant Director
Department of Political Science
trentwilliams@ku.edu

 

University of Miami

Brian D. Blankenship, Assistant Professor
Department of Political Science
bxb731@miami.edu

 

 

 
 

Tyler White, Director
National Security Program

twhite4@unl.edu

Elsbeth J. Magilton, Executive Director
Space, Cyber, and Telecommunications
Law Program, College of Law

elsbeth@unl.edu

 

 

 

Chuck M. Rowling, Associate Professor
Department of Political Science

rowlingcm@unk.edu

 

 

 

Michelle Black, Assistant Professor
Political Science

michellblack@unomaha.edu

Lana Obradovic, Assistant Professor
Political Science

lobradovic@unomaha.edu

 

 

 

Evan Renfro, Assistant Professor
Political Science

evan.renfro@uni.edu

 

 

 

Michael Desch, Director
Notre Dame International Security Center

Michael.Desch.4@nd.edu

 

 

 

Phil Williams, Director
Matthew B. Ridgway Center
for International Security Studies

ridgway1@pitt.edu

 

 

 

Ashley Townshend, Director
Foreign Policy and Defence

Ashley.townshend@sydney.edu.au

 

 

 

Russel Hirst, Associate Professor and
Managing Editor

International Journal of Nuclear Security

rkh@utk.edu

Elis Vllasi, Senior Research Associate and Lecturer
Center for National Security Foreign Affairs
evllasi@utk.edu

 

 

Alan J. Kuperman, Associate Professor
Coordinator, Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project

akuperman@mail.utexas.edu

 

 

 

Jeannie Johnson, Founding Director & Associate Professor
Center for Anticipatory Intelligence

jeannie.johnson@usu.edu

Matt Berrett, Cofounder & Professional Practice Faculty
Center for Anticipatory Intelligence
matthew.berrett@sdl.usu.edu

Briana Bowen, Cofounder & Associate Director
Center for Anticipatory Intelligence
briana.bowen@usu.edu

 

 

 

Shale Horowitz, Professor
Department of Political Science

shale@uwm.edu

 

 

David Dorondo, Associate Professor
Department of History
dorondo@email.wcu.edu

 

 



Department of Political Science

Points of Reference for the Conduct of
21st Century Deterrence and Assurance Research

 

Deterrence and Assurance are abstract political-military concepts.   They are also conditions attained in the minds of deterrees and assurees, achieved only at their respective discretion, and only in nuanced context of their unique decision spaces.  Activities undertaken to achieve deterrence and assurance goals comprise planning and execution of a strategy, an equally abstract concept requiring similar research consideration.  Simply stated, research involves gaining understanding of both the nature of a given deterrence and assurance problem, and how to address it.

With these themes in mind, new thinking in deterrence and assurance is not exclusively adversary and/or military in scope.  It calls for research into topics that go beyond consideration of adversary military capabilities and attendant U.S./Allied means to countervail them.  Topics include (but are not limited to) local, regional, and international political and economic factors; socio-cultural and decision-making dynamics; as well as psychological lines of inquiry, all of which are geared toward informing policies pursuant to tailored deterrence and allied assurance objectives.

While better understanding into how objectives might be achieved vis-à-vis a given deterrence and assurance problem set remains a central focus, equally as pertinent is appreciating the mechanics of how objectives are to be achieved.  Such research involves understanding the political, fiscal, and bureaucratic aspects of marshalling limited national resources into coherent deterrence and assurance strategies.  Underlying all of this is the need to understand the nature of the term strategy itself.

While not exhaustive, researchers are encouraged to consider the following alphabetized list of references selected with each of these themes in mind as they pursue efforts to add to the literature.

 


 

UNDERSTANDING NATIONAL INTERESTS: 


NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIC POLICY GUIDANCE: 


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE RESEARCH: 


THINKING ABOUT STRATEGY: 


THINKING ABOUT THREAT:


THINKING ABOUT DETERRENCE AT THE “STRATEGIC” LEVEL: 


THINKING ABOUT DETERRENCE AT THE “OPERATIONAL” LEVEL:


TAILORED DETERRENCE: 


EXTENDED DETERRENCE:


DETERRENCE SUCCESS AND FAILURE:


ARMS CONTROL AND DETERRENCE:


UPDATING DETERRENCE EDUCATION:


ASSOCIATED RESEARCH CATEGORIES: 

Strategic Intelligence


Strategic Culture


Decision-Making Dynamics


Behavioral Dynamics


Legacy Deterrence Theory


Deterrence in the “Second Nuclear Age”


Deterring Terrorism


History


ONLINE DIGITAL RESEARCH RESOURCES:


VIDEO RESOURCES:

Concept of Deterrence


Practitioners of Deterrence


MUSEUMS:



Points of Reference for the Conduct of 21st Century Deterrence and Assurance Research in PDF

LARRY D. WELCH DETERRENCE WRITING AWARD

The Commander, United States Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) is sponsoring a competition for the best research papers on the subject of strategic deterrence. Participating researchers are asked to submit papers to USSTRATCOM by June 1, 2025.

Submissions will be judged in one of two categories. The “junior” category is for undergraduate and masters students. The “senior” category is for doctoral students, postdocs, and entry to mid-level professionals. The winning author in each category will be recognized with an award, publication in a peer reviewed journal and travel funding to attend the 2025 Deterrence Symposium.

NEW for 2025!

  • Norwich University, Journal of Peace & War Studies (JPWS) will serve on the junior category selection panel and publish the winning paper in JPWS
  • Joint Force Quarterly (JFQ) will serve on the senior category selection panel and publish the winning paper in JFQ

Criteria for papers:

  • Recommended paper length: 4,000-5,000 words. Articles substantially longer will not be eligible for publication
  • Citation format for footnotes/endnotes must follow The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th ed.
  • Please confirm your manuscript is not under consideration for publication elsewhere
  • Submissions must not contain any classified references or material
  • For additional information, please see the submission guidelines for Journal of Peace & War Studies or Joint Force Quarterly.

Submission requirements:

A panel of defense policy experts will judge papers on the following:

  • Applicability to current deterrence issues
  • Quality of argument
  • Implications for future deterrence analysis, planning, and operations
  • Historical accuracy
  • Quality of reference material

Research topics:

For more information click here

STUDENT RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATIONS

In addition to sponsoring the Welch Deterrence Writing Award, we are pleased to offer students the opportunity to present deterrence and assurance related research through poster sessions at the 2025 United States Strategic Command Deterrence Symposium. The top undergraduate and graduate student submissions will be selected to present their research both days of the symposium during event breaks and between panel sessions. Selected students will also be provided no-cost symposium registration and travel funding to attend.


Why should a student participate? The Deterrence Symposium provides an excellent opportunity for students to engage deterrence experts from military, government, academia, and industry. As in previous years, we anticipate over 700 U.S. and international participants. We suggest students bring copies of their research and business cards.

Poster element recommendations:

  • Title/Author
  • Abstract: Identify research topic, intent of research, and findings/conclusion.
  • Body: What are the main questions paper is addressing?
  • Data/empirics: Opportunity to use graphs, charts or quantitative analysis. Visual representations of argument or data is very useful in a poster.
  • Conclusions: Be clear and concise. What did you find and how is this similar/different from previous analyses? What is the “bottom line” of your analysis?
  • Have references available.

Poster size and visual format: Will be provided to selected students

Submission details: Submit poster proposal, abstract of the research, university affiliation and contact information no later than 1 July 2025 via email to Dr. Jennifer Bradley at stratcom.offutt.j5.mbx.welch-writing-award-mailbox@mail.mil