Innovation and Military Strategy: Shifting to Decentralized and Dispersed Approaches

Operational command and control have long operated on a model that centralizes decision-making while allowing for decentralized execution. More recently, this has evolved into a nuanced structure that combines centralized command, distributed control, and decentralized execution (Mulgund, 2021). However, as we stand on the cusp of a new era marked by disruptive technologies and diversified actors, the adequacy of these traditional models comes into question.

Recent conflict theaters offer telling insights, suggesting that we are in the midst of a profound reconfiguration in the utilization of military force. While still in their infancy, emerging trends point toward a seismic shift—from a state-dominated paradigm of centralized control to one characterized by decentralization and a multiplicity of involved actors. This dispersion takes place across a significantly more heterogeneous ecosystem and heralds changes in three crucial dimensions: front-line decision-making, the role of private corporations in defense, and novel financing models that redefine how military capabilities are acquired and sustained.

Observations from Afghanistan, 2021

During the -Allied withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, a seminal shift in military operations became palpably evident. Ad-hoc alliances sprang into existence, comprising an unlikely mix of politicians, philanthropists, private military companies, and state officials, among others. Remarkably, this eclectic cohort interfaced directly with military decision-makers, thanks in part to open-access digital platforms commonly used by civilians (Phillips, 2023; McLeary, 2022). Enabled by commercially sourced space imagery and instant messaging applications, these civilian consortia effectively co-orchestrated air operations alongside military units.

This collaborative model, which the author was a part of, transcends the traditional understanding of military-led activities as a monolithic, hierarchical enterprise. Instead, it suggests the emergence of a more diffuse and resilient operational ecosystem. Here, the monolithic ‘military evacuation operation’ gives way to a diversified network of stakeholders who collectively share the operational burden. This networked approach is more than a mere tactical expedient; it portends a strategic realignment. As hierarchical command structures yield to these more flexible and adaptive networks, a newfound agility can be harnessed—permitting quicker adaptations to rapidly changing operational realities.

Observations from the Conflict in Ukraine, 2022

Amid the grim backdrop of the conflict in Ukraine, a remarkable canvas of innovation and adaptability has also come to the fore. At the crux are a series of unique partnerships that have emerged, uniting individuals like Elon Musk, tech behemoths such as Amazon Web Services and Microsoft, and pioneering firms like SpaceX and Starlink who between them are providing ‘white hat’ cyber and infrastructure support (Gralla, 2023; Moore, 2022). Like Afghanistan in 2021, Ukraine is demonstrating that no longer is defense a theater commanded solely by centralized government agencies; it is becoming a polycentric sphere where ad-hoc, purpose-driven collaborations lead the way.

One standout example lies in Ukraine’s nimble deployment of commercial drones, which frontline troops procure and adapt through additive manufacturing techniques (Times, 2023; Ross, 2023). The financial implications are stark. Commercial drones, such as the DJI Mavic 3 available at around $2,000 per unit, offer a sharp contrast to their military-grade counterparts, like the $5 million Bayraktar TB2 or the $30 million MQ9 Reaper (MIT Technology Review, 2023). While one can’t simply equate these drones on cost alone—each has distinct operational attributes—the ability to rapidly deploy cost-efficient capabilities speaks volumes about the new defense landscape.

This shift extends to the financial realm, where Ukraine exemplifies emerging trends that challenge traditional defense financing models. Crowdfunding is no longer the preserve of startups and social causes; it is infiltrating the military arena. Citizens are contributing to the acquisition of armaments,[1] effectively decentralizing financial control traditionally held by national governments. This transformation, while still embryonic, holds implications far beyond Ukrainian borders, with the potential to alter the arms trade through the creation of secondary markets, arms control norms, and even the citizen-state relationship. In a digital age infused with cryptocurrencies, the adaptability and reach of such financing models are likely to proliferate, particularly given the often inherent dual-use nature of new technologies making them easier to invest in.

Decentralization, Dispersal and Privatization

At the heart of what was seen in Afghanistan in 2021 and what is being seen in Ukraine is a paradigmatic shift characterized by decentralization, dispersal, and an unprecedented privatization of capability. This evolution is evidenced in areas ranging from national infrastructure management by private corporations to the intermingling of state and non-state actors in conflict zones (Capoot, 2022; Lough, 2023). Importantly, these developments are not just tactical diversions; they mark a profound transformation of state-centric warfare, weaving it tightly with dual-use technologies and global capital flows (Sabbagh, 2023).

Contrary to this ongoing transformation, many in the corridors of power view such developments as mere anomalies. For instance, the prevalent official narrative sees the conflict in Ukraine as an exception, not a signpost for future warfare (CIA, 2022). This thinking, while comforting, risks strategic myopia. Afghanistan and Ukraine serve as harbingers, highlighting that future warfare will transcend tactical adjustments to demand a recalibration of strategy. A confluence of factors—technological decentralization, the democratization of military capability, and changing capital flows—is contributing to this complex tapestry (Bowden, 2021) resulting in a kaleidoscope of conflict.

In this context, what we are seeing is not just a transformation but the start of a revolution. Decision-making is becoming more localized; the industrial base is dispersing. [2] Traditional demarcations separating the state, commercial sectors, and civil society are blurring. In this brave new world, the velocity of innovation and the accessibility of cost-effective armaments will be defining parameters. If we misconstrue these shifts as merely episodic, we risk not just tactical failures but strategic obsolescence.

In today’s rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape, an in-depth comprehension of decentralization and dispersal is not merely academic—it’s a strategic imperative. These twin concepts are in a reciprocal relationship with the contemporary theater of military operations; they both influence and are influenced by the strategic realities on the ground.

Decision-making is becoming more localized; the industrial base is dispersing.

– Robert Murray

At its core, decentralization pertains to the devolution of decision-making authority. By distributing control across various nodes, military organizations stand to gain from enhanced adaptive capacities, more robust collaboration, and accelerated rates of innovation. Dispersal, meanwhile, deals with the physical and functional allocation of assets and responsibilities, effectively serving as the spatial counterpart to decentralization. It emphasizes how the placement of assets—be it personnel, technology, or capital—can complement decentralized decision-making.

When combined, decentralization and dispersal forge a robust, intricate operating environment. Such a framework enables militaries to harness a more eclectic array of actors, technologies, and strategic doctrines. Importantly, this is not merely a theoretical construct but a practical one, marked by the presence of diverse stakeholders—ranging from state entities and the private sector to individual contributors.

In such a landscape, militaries can pivot to new operational paradigms characterized by agility and adaptability. Imagine a coalition of forces enriched by the capabilities of technology firms and specialists—each contributing unique skills and resources. Such synergy can catalyze rapid responses to fluid, unpredictable challenges, thus transcending traditional models as witnessed in Kabul in 2021. To elucidate this further, Figure 1 delineates three salient characteristics that define how decentralized and dispersed operational frameworks could revolutionize military efficacy.