What is the nature of armed conflict in the 21st Century?

In the chapter “Rusting Sword,” the authors explore the decline of decisive conflict in the post–Cold War area. Drawing from empirical data, they argue that armed conflict has progressed more to nonvictory and less to decisive outcomes than previous epochs. From the rise of the dispersion of information (away from the state to the broader populace) to the growth of intrastate conflict, there has been investment in blood and treasure with a limited return, resulting in a shift that “highlights both misalignment of strategic objectives and military objectives and a new character of war” (p. The book is admittedly biased toward ground operations but is well researched, drawing from lessons learned documents from the US’s recent conflicts across the Middle East. The authors bring forward some salient points about conflicts that have evolved greatly, but which the US is still fighting. 4). Like similar strategy texts, this book looks at the evolving character of war and competition in the new century while accepting that the nature of war remains the same. The central thesis for the book “outlines a new approach to thinking about military art rooted in increasing connectivity and defines a new domain of competition, the human domain” (p. Military Strategy in the 21st Century: People, Connectivity, and Competition advocates a strategy focusing on the development of the human domain and information warfare in relation to national and theater-level policy making. The text draws upon retired Army lieutenant general Charles Cleveland’s distinguished Special Forces career and the careers of Benjamin Jenson, Susan Bryant, and Arnel David, all of whom are active or retired US Army officers with strategic planning backgrounds. Military Strategy in the 21st Century: People, Connectivity, and Competition by Charles Cleveland, Benjamin Jensen, Susan Bryant, and Arnel David.

What is the nature of armed conflict in the 21st Century?