Escalation

Reconstructing the Ladder: Towards a More Considered Model of Escalation

Reconstructing the Ladder: Towards a More Considered Model of Escalation

In the field of geopolitical analysis and strategy, models and frameworks are crucial. They inform the focus of the analyst, how to measure and evaluate the area of attention, and what to expect in the future. This process can occur consciously as part of a formal analytical procedure, or subconsciously, through the mental models that an analyst internalises. The escalation ladder is one such model. It advises an analyst to focus on how a state escalates and de-escalates against its competitors, and how to measure actions against the different escalation levels, or steps, on the ladder.

How the U.S. Can Recapture Escalation Control

How the U.S. Can Recapture Escalation Control

Escalation control was once firmly part of the U.S. strategic lexicon. The term fell into disuse because it was assumed U.S. unipolarity made it dominant in any post-Cold War political-military competition. But such assumptions are clearly incorrect today. Indeed, U.S. responses to rival nations’ efforts to dominate escalation narratives have tended to telegraph timidity rather than strength.

Political Interference, Strategic Incoherence, and Johnson’s Escalation in Vietnam

Political Interference, Strategic Incoherence, and Johnson’s Escalation in Vietnam

The American experience in Vietnam defined a generation, spurring civil unrest and the degradation of trust in important political and military institutions. Spanning the course of two decades, the United States’ engagement in the conflict reflected the heightened global tension of the Cold War. American involvement in Vietnam began as early as 1950, initially in the form of assistance to the French during the First Indochina War. By the end of the Kennedy administration, the United States had begun to send American advisers and military forces to Vietnam, aiming to prevent the spread of communism to Southeast Asia.