The Committee of Public Safety

Risen from the Grave?

There are nine possible rings of defense around the United States of America.

This assumes that the United States continues to roughly correspond territorially to its current territorial limits. That itself is a big assumption. The United States could, more rapidly than most would dare contemplate, fracture due to internal strains. This is a more likely threat than conquest from the outside, given the difficulties faced with moving large numbers of troops from Eurasia to the Americas.

• The United States could fragment into multiple United Stateses, each seeking the legitimacy of the original and fighting over the symbolic trappings that signify that legitimacy (e.g. we have the original parchment of the Constitution!).
• The United States could fragment into a smaller rump United States and an assortment of powerful regional states.
• The United States could fragment into regions, city states, or even individual states.

Any such scenario would re-open the North American continent to Eurasian intrigue, an outcome that was largely foreclosed by the forcible reunification of the United States in 1865 followed by the expulsion of the French from Mexico two years later. The United States would be haunted by the Mandate of Heaven: the ambition beating in the heart of every local president or governor of each fissaparous Unionlet would be to recreate Greater America. American nationalism would invert and become more like the nationalism of contemporary Russia and China, a negative nationalism, the nationalism of victimhood. Instead of its focus on an expanding future, America would turn around and focus on regaining a receding past. The casual cosmopolitan would be thrown to the side while the theme of American culture would become nashi “ours”. This flavor of American nationalism was last seen, to a minor extent, from the end of the Vietnam War to the fall of the Berlin Wall.

America, if it recovered from its travails, would become a revisionist power. This role would be conceptually easier than the United States’ current strategic configuration. The role of the challenger is well established: many contemporary powers are playing the role right now.

Each ring represents a level of control. To quote Admiral J.C. Wylie:

The primary aim of the strategist in the conduct of war is some selected degree of control of the enemy for the strategist’s own purpose; this is achieved by control of the pattern of war; and this control of the pattern of war is had by manipulation of the center of gravity of war to the advantage of the strategist and the disadvantage of the opponent.

The successful strategist is the one who controls the nature and the placement and the timing and the weight of the centers of gravity of war, and who exploits the resulting control of the pattern of war toward his own ends.

There are a few principles under which control operates in the real world:

1. Control has several dimensions e.g. land, naval, space, air, social, cyberspace.
2. Each dimension of control is both a target of control and a medium through which control can be transferred to other targets of control.
3. Each dimension of control has two characteristics: resistance, how well it acts as a medium of control, and persistence, how long a target of control can be kept under control.
4. Some dimensions of control, offering little resistance, make better media of control than others. However, they are often hostile to persistent control. This means that they function more as media of control than as targets of control.
5. Control grows more rapidly through control of a dimension of control characterized by low resistance than a dimension of control characterized by high persistence.

There are three levels of control over a dimension of control (level 0 is no control at all):

1. Sufficient control to gain knowledge about a dimension of control.
2. Sufficient control to shape control over a dimension of control.
3. Complete control of a dimension of control.

There are six sub-levels of control, three negative and three positive. The negative and defensive sub-levels are:

1. Prevent others from getting knowledge you don’t want them to have.
2. Prevent others from shaping your level of control.
3. Prevent others from absolutely controlling you.

The positive and offensive sub-levels are:

1. Get knowledge about others, especially the knowledge the others don’t want you to have.
2. Shape others’ level of control.
3. Absolutely control others.

Ring 0 is the level the United States would have to fall below to grant another a sufficient level of control to dismember significantly the present fifty constituent states of the Union. Having noted some of the possible characteristics of Ring 0 previously, let’s move on to the nine rings proper.

Ring 1:

• Coastal defense of the west coast of North America, the Atlantic seaboard, the Great Lakes, and the northern Caribbean Sea.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project to Northern Eurasia, mid-Pacific, northern South America, and mid-Atlantic with air superiority over North America.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Minnesota, Washington State, Southern California, mid-Texas, Michigan, upper New York, and upper New England.
• Access to cyberspace.
• Access to space for missiles.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in Canada and Mexico. If not amenable, work to change.

Ring 2:

• Forward naval defense of the west coast of North America, the Atlantic seaboard, and the Caribbean Sea.
• Coastal defense of Ring 1.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project into Central Eurasia, western Pacific, central South America, and Atlantic Rimlands with air superiority over northeastern Pacific, Arctic, and north Atlantic.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations along borders with central reserves in New York State, Illinois, Texas, Minnesota, Southern California, and Washington State.
• Access to cyberspace.
• Access to space for missiles.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in Ring 1, northern Caribbean and nearby Atlantic islands. If not amenable, consider occupation of Canada, northern Mexico, Caribbean islands like Cuba, and Atlantic islands like the Bahamas and Bermuda.

Ring 3:

• Forward naval defense from Hawaii and Alaska into western to central Pacific and, in case of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), into the Arctic; and from east coast into North Atlantic islands and northern South America.
• Coastal defense of Ring 1.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project into non-Heartland Eurasia and Africa with air superiority over Pacific Ocean, Arctic Ocean, and Atlantic Rimlands.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentration in Ring 2 plus ability to occupy neighboring continental territory, nearby offshore islands, and raid Central and South America.
• Access to cyberspace with limited offensive capacity.
• Access to space for missiles and satellites.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in Ring 2, Panama, and Iceland. If not amenable, consider occupation of Ring 1, Ring 2, Panama, and Iceland.

Ring 4:

• Forward defense in western Pacific with force projection into offshore islands like Formosa, the Philippines, and Japan and ability to project force into Atlantic Rimlands and, in case of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), into the Arctic facing Eurasian Rimlands.
• Coastal defense of Ring 1, Hawaii, and Alaska plus any necessary portions of Ring 1-3.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project into Heartland Eurasia and Africa with air superiority over Western Hemisphere  to the Eurasian Rimlands.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Ring 3 with ability to occupy countries in the Western Hemisphere and the ability to raid Eurasian Rimlands along Atlantic and Pacific.
• Access to cyberspace with limited cyber offensive capability.
• Access to space for missiles and satellites.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in the Ring 3, the British Isles, Western Europe, Central America, Guam, Japan, Formosa, the Philippines, and Mexico. If not amenable, consider occupation of Ring 3, the Philippines, and Ireland.

Ring 5:

• Naval force projection into East Eurasian Rimlands from lodgments in East Eurasian islands like Japan, Formosa, and the Philippines; force projection into west Eurasian Rimlands from lodgments on offshore islands like Great Britain, and the ability to raid into the Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Sea, and, in case of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), to project power into the previously inaccessible North Eurasian Rimland.
• Coastal defense of Ring 3.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project into Heartland Eurasia and Africa on raids with air superiority over Eurasian Pacific and Atlantic Rimlands.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Ring 4 plus the ability to occupy islands immediately off the coast of Eurasia and the ability to raid Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Rimlands.
• Access to cyberspace with with medium cyber offensive capability.
• Access to space for missiles and satellites with limited space offensive capacity.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in the Ring 4, British Isles, Western Eurasia, East Eurasia, Korea, Japan, Formosa, Indonesia, and Southeast Asia. If not amenable, consider occupation of Ring 4, Japan, Great Britain, and Formosa.

Ring 6:

• Naval mastery of Atlantic and Pacific and the ability to raid into the Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Sea, and, in case of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), to project power into the previously inaccessible North Eurasian Rimland.
• Coastal defense of Ring 3.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project anywhere on Earth with air superiority over everywhere except the very inner recesses of the Heartland.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Ring 5 plus the ability to occupy Atlantic and Eurasian Rimland and the ability to raid Indian Ocean and Mediterranean Rimlands.
• Access to cyberspace with major cyber offensive capability.
• Access to space for missiles and satellites with limited space offensive capacity.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in Ring 5, South Eurasia, Southern Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. If not amenable, consider occupation of Ring 5, Borneo, Sumatra, Korea, Atlantic Eurasian Rimland, and Southern Africa.

Ring 7:

• Naval mastery of all the world’s oceans.
• Coastal defense of Ring 4.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project anywhere on Earth with air superiority everywhere.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Ring 6 plus the ability to occupy Mediterranean and South Asian Rimland.
• Access to cyberspace with major cyber offensive capability.
• Access to space for missiles and satellites with major space offensive capacity.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in Ring 6 and South Eurasian Rimlands. If not amenable, consider occupation of Ring 6 and South Eurasian Rimlands.

Ring 8:

• Naval mastery of all the world’s oceans.
• Coastal defense of Ring 5.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project anywhere on Earth with air superiority everywhere.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Ring 7 plus the ability to occupy the outer Heartland.
• Mastery of cyberspace.
• Mastery of space.
• Encouragement of amenable regimes in Ring 7 and Heartland. If not amenable, consider occupation of Ring 7 and Heartland.

Ring 9:

• Naval mastery of all the world’s oceans.
• Coastal defense everywhere.
• Submarines for commerce raiding and for launching nuclear armed ICBMs.
• Air power able to project anywhere on Earth with air superiority everywhere.
• Land-based nuclear armed ICBMs capable of hitting Eurasia.
• Army concentrations in Heartland.
• Mastery of cyberspace.
• Mastery of space.
• Mastery of land.