Irregular Warfare Essay

There is a general discord among stakeholders on the definition of irregular warfare and where the term and concept fits within the joint and the individual services’ doctrine. The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review report uses the term “irregular” only once in its one hundred and five pages and only in terms of a focus on building the joint force’s capability and capacity to deal with irregular warfare while maintaining a clear conventional and nuclear global superiority. Currently, the definition is ambiguous and results in conflict or duplication of efforts across Department of Defense stakeholders. For the purposes of this paper, the stakeholders discussed are the Army and the Marine Corps. Stakeholders must reach a consensus and clearly define irregular warfare in order to establish comprehensive irregular war policy and strategy.

Department of Defense Directive 3000.07, defines irregular warfare as:

“a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population(s). Irregular warfare favors indirect and asymmetric approaches, though it may employ the full range of military and other capacities, in order to erode an adversary’s power, influence, and will.” This definition is broad and has led many military leaders to simply describe irregular warfare as anything that is not regular war. If leaders turn to this over simplified definition, then one can logically and incorrectly infer that non-violent operations such as humanitarian assistance and disaster relief are forms of irregular warfare. The problem with classifying irregular warfare as a distinct and separate form of warfare is that stakeholders must in turn dedicate resources solely for the purposes of dealing with...

... middle of paper ...

...ilar concepts yet different terms to describe irregular warfare. The Army uses the term hybrid threat to describe conditions in which the Army and the joint force is engaged in operations other than traditional force on force high intensity operations. The Marine Corps uses the 3 block concept to describe its approach to irregular warfare and relies on the commander to react with the appropriate operational approach in time and space throughout his area of responsibility. It is imperative for the joint force and all government stakeholders to reach a consensus on the definition of irregular warfare in a time that is characterized by persistent conflict and reduced budgets. Failure to do so could result in loss of institutional knowledge, inefficient processes, flawed doctrine and a waste of resources across the military and other government stakeholder agencies.