“IW in GPC” Global Counterinsurgency Redux

By Dr. Thomas A. Marks

As the U.S. security community continues its pivot to great power competition, two decades of concentration upon sub-state challengers increasingly lose focus. On the one hand, we’re back in the Cold War – regardless of what it is called. On the other hand, no one in charge seems to have the foggiest notion of what actually occurred during the Cold War. Thus, the re-invention of the wheel is the order of the day. Few concepts highlight the point as well as “IW in GPC” or “Irregular Warfare in Great Power Competition” – termed most recently “Competition.”(1)

Irregular Warfare (IW) is doctrinally defined as “a violent struggle among state and nonstate actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant populations. IW favors indirect and asymmetric approaches, though it may employ the full range of military and other capabilities, in order to erode an adversary’s power, influence, and will. It is inherently a protracted struggle that will test the resolve of our Nation and our strategic partners.” (2)

Ambiguity has been created by the word “violent” being dropped without explanation from the Summary of the Irregular Warfare Annex to the National Defense Strategy 2020 (p.2) even as the accompanying discussion states that the armed forces, through their doctrinal major activities (COIN, CT, FID, UW, and SO), (3) must determine how to engage with competitors who “seek to prevail through their own use of irregular warfare, pursuing national object...