Security Policy: Principles of Strategic National Defence in the Age of Intelligence

Introduction – A World in Flux
Core Definitions and Strategic Concepts
- What is National Defence Today?
- Security, Defence, and Intelligence: A Strategic Triad
- From Classic to Emerging Threats
The Evolution of Defence Doctrines
- Post-WWII and Cold War Paradigms
- Asymmetric Warfare and Hybrid Threats
- The Rise of AI and the Weaponization of Systems
Europe
4.1 United Kingdom – Strategic Defence Review 2025
4.2 France – Strategic Autonomy and European Defence
North America
5.1 United States – Strategic Defence in 2025
East Asia
6.1 Japan – Reinterpreting Pacifism
6.2 South Korea – Deterrence on the Peninsula
6.3 China – Civil-Military Fusion and Global Security Ambitions
South Asia
7.1 India – Strategic Autonomy in a Multipolar Order
Eurasia
8.1 Russia – The Logic of Hybrid Warfare
Principles of Strategic Defence in the Age of Intelligence
9.1 Multidimensional Deterrence
9.2 Infrastructure Resilience and Civil Preparedness
9.3 Technological Sovereignty and Cyber Integrity
9.4 Human Security as Strategic Security
9.5 Interoperability and Global Alliances
9.6 Alliances and Strategic Partnerships in the 21st Century
The Integrated Humanist Perspective on Security
- Moral Responsibility and Ethical Defence
- Science, Truth, and Epistemic Integrity
- Open-Source Diplomacy and Trust
- Liberty in the Surveillance Age
- The Human Spirit as Strategic Asset
Conclusion – Defending the Future

1. Introduction – A World in Flux

In the early 21st century, the nature of global security has entered a profound transformation. The Age of Intelligence—defined by artificial intelligence, cyber operations, quantum communications, autonomous weapons, and advanced surveillance—has ushered in a new paradigm for national defence. No longer limited to tanks, missiles, and borders, modern security now extends into the realms of information, infrastructure, and identity itself.

States today must defend not only against visible enemies on battlefields, but also against invisible actors in code, finance, media, and atmosphere. Climate change, pandemics, mass migrations, and the weaponization of data join traditional threats like nuclear proliferation and geopolitical rivalries to form a complex, interlinked matrix of global risk.

In this volatile landscape, the great military powers—especially the United States, the United Kingdom, China, and Russia—are redefining their national defence strategies. From Britain’s Strategic Defence Review 2025, to America’s missile shield ambitions and recalibrated alliances, to China’s civil-military fusion doctrine and Russia’s hybrid warfare, the age-old question of how a nation defends itself has become inseparable from how it understands the world.

This article examines these evolving doctrines in depth, drawing from official policy documents, international strategy reviews, and independent analyses. It also proposes a new framework for understanding national defence—one rooted in resilience, ethical intelligence, and the integrated well-being of nations and peoples.

As we shall see, defence in the Age of Intelligence is no longer simply a matter of arms. It is a test of wisdom.

2. Core Definitions and Strategic Concepts

In order to engage in a meaningful evaluation of 21st-century defence strategy, we must begin with clarity: what do we mean by security, defence, and intelligence in this new era?

2.1 What Is National Defence Today?

National defence traditionally referred to the military protection of a nation’s borders and sovereignty through physical force—land armies, air forces, navies. In the Age of Intelligence, this definition is no longer sufficient. Defence must now encompass not only kinetic power but also digital infrastructure, psychological integrity, ecological stability, and economic sovereignty.

To “defend the nation” in 2025 means to ensure the survival, adaptability, and moral coherence of a society in the face of threats both visible and invisible—from hostile missile systems to hostile ideologies, from cyberattacks to climate-induced migration crises.

2.2 Security, Defence, and Intelligence: A Strategic Triad

These three terms, while interrelated, form distinct pillars:

Security refers to the broad condition of safety and stability within a society. It includes national security, human security, food and energy security, and environmental security. Security policy involves both internal and external risk management.
Defence is the structured response—often military, but increasingly civil and digital—used to deter or respond to hostile threats. It includes defence spending, armed forces, alliances, and strategies.
Intelligence refers to the collection and interpretation of information to inform decision-making, assess threats, and anticipate events. Today it encompasses not only traditional espionage and surveillance but also AI-driven predictive systems, open-source intelligence (OSINT), and psychological operations.

Together, these elements form the dynamic system by which a state seeks to survive, thrive, and lead in a world of complexity.

2.3 From Classic to Emerging Threats

Traditional threats like military invasion, terrorism, and nuclear proliferation remain potent. But defence planners in 2025 must also contend with an expanding spectrum of non-traditional, often networked threats:

Cyber Warfare: State-sponsored hacking, data theft, infrastructure sabotage
Biological and Pandemic Threats: Naturally occurring or lab-enhanced
Artificial Intelligence: Autonomous weapons, deepfakes, algorithmic manipulation
Information Warfare: Disinformation campaigns, narrative control, radicalization
Climate Security: Resource competition, disaster-driven conflict, infrastructure collapse
Space and Satellite Vulnerabilities: GPS, communication, surveillance systems as targets

These emerging domains require whole-of-society responses, often blurring the lines between civilian and military, public and private, foreign and domestic.

3. The Evolution of Defence Doctrines

From the trenches of World War I to the algorithmic battlegrounds of today, defence doctrines have transformed in response to changing technologies, threats, and philosophies. Understanding this evolution provides essential context for the strategic decisions of nations in the 21st century.

3.1 Post-WWII and Cold War Paradigms

After 1945, global defence policy was largely shaped by the bipolar standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union. The dominant doctrine was mutually assured destruction (MAD)—the notion that nuclear conflict between superpowers would be so catastrophic as to prevent its own occurrence.

Military planning focused on:

Nuclear deterrence
Proxy wars (Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan)
Technological supremacy (space race, stealth aircraft)
Alliances (NATO, Warsaw Pact)

Defence was seen as the maintenance of power equilibrium through overwhelming force and global positioning.

3.2 The Post-Cold War Shift

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to a period of unipolar dominance by the United States. Defence doctrines briefly transitioned toward peacekeeping, humanitarian intervention, and the “responsibility to protect.” However, the post-9/11 era brought new attention to non-state threats, particularly terrorism.

The War on Terror introduced:

Pre-emptive warfare (Iraq 2003)
Counterinsurgency (COIN) strategies
Drone warfare and targeted assassinations
Homeland security as a new frontier

This era emphasized speed, intelligence, and agility over brute force.

3.3 Asymmetric Warfare and Hybrid Threats

Asymmetric warfare refers to the ability of weaker actors to disrupt stronger adversaries using unconventional means—guerrilla tactics, cyberattacks, or information warfare. Hybrid threats blend conventional and irregular tactics, often within a disinformation campaign that masks attribution.

Examples include:

Russia’s annexation of Crimea (2014)
ISIS’s transnational insurgency (2014–2019)
Cyber sabotage of infrastructure in Ukraine, Iran, and the U.S.
State-funded troll farms, propaganda bots, and election interference

The battlefield has expanded into hearts, minds, routers, and satellites.

3.4 The AI Era and the Weaponization of Systems

In the 2020s, military planners began to seriously integrate artificial intelligence, quantum computing, satellite networks, and autonomous systems into national defence. The battlefield now includes invisible layers of real-time data analysis, predictive modelling, and machine-speed decision loops.

Current military transformations focus on:

Swarm drones and robotic vehicles
AI-driven surveillance and targeting
Space-based missile interception
Information dominance and cognitive security
Technological sovereignty and supply chain defence

We are entering a new phase of deterrence, where the capacity to dominate information and computation may be as decisive as nuclear firepower once was.

4.1 United Kingdom – Strategic Defence Review 2025

In March 2025, the UK government released its most comprehensive reassessment of national security in a generation: The Strategic Defence Review 2025 – Making Britain Safer: Secure at Home, Strong Abroad. Building on the 2021 Integrated Review, it reflects a growing awareness that the threats of the future demand deeper integration of military, economic, cyber, and civil resources.

Key Strategic Vision: “Secure at Home, Strong Abroad”

The Review outlines three overarching goals:

Strengthening homeland resilience to threats including cyberattacks, terrorism, pandemics, and infrastructure vulnerabilities.
Reinforcing Britain’s global influence, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, through defence alliances and technological leadership.
Modernizing the armed forces through data-driven decision-making, AI, and integrated operational structures across land, sea, air, cyber, and space.

It positions the UK as a “Science Superpower” and “Technology Ally,” aiming to lead not only through military strength but through innovation and diplomacy.

Military Reforms and Integrated Forces

The British Armed Forces are undergoing a restructuring toward a more agile, deployable, and multi-domain-capable force. Key changes include:

The Future Soldier program, focusing on smaller but more technologically sophisticated units.
Investment in cyber and electronic warfare capabilities, housed within the UK Strategic Command.
Continued modernization of Trident and commitment to maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent.
Development of a Multi-Domain Integrated Force—fusing cyber, space, maritime, air, and ground operations under single operational frameworks.

The Indo-Pacific Tilt

In recognition of the growing strategic importance of the Indo-Pacific, the UK is:

Deepening defence ties with Australia, India, and Japan.
Committing to naval deployments such as the Carrier Strike Group presence in the Pacific.
Supporting AUKUS and QUAD defence initiatives as part of a global democratic security network.

This marks a shift from Euro-Atlantic-centric policy toward a broader strategic horizon in response to China’s rise and global geopolitical competition.

Cyber, Space, and Infrastructure Resilience

The National Cyber Force, headquartered in Samlesbury, is central to the UK’s offensive and defensive cyber capabilities.
The UK is increasing investment in satellite communications, missile tracking, and secure quantum networks to ensure digital sovereignty.
Civil defence and public resilience are key themes—particularly against hybrid threats such as disinformation, blackouts, and biological threats.

Defence Industrial Base and Global Partnerships

The UK is promoting sovereign defence manufacturing capacity through support for BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, and other strategic firms.
Export-oriented partnerships, especially with NATO and Indo-Pacific democracies, support both security and economic growth.
Science and technology—especially AI, quantum, and next-gen communications—are being integrated as core pillars of defence.

The United Kingdom’s 2025 strategy reflects a world in flux: one where hard power, digital defence, and moral purpose must operate in unison. Britain is not merely aiming to defend its shores, but to help shape the rules and ethics of global security in the Age of Intelligence.

4.2 France – Strategic Autonomy and European Defence

France occupies a distinct position in global security. As the European Union’s only nuclear power and a founding member of both NATO and the United Nations, France continues to assert a defence doctrine rooted in indépendance stratégique—strategic autonomy. Under President Emmanuel Macron and successive administrations, this principle has guided France’s military modernization, European defence leadership, and global security engagement, particularly in the Sahel and Indo-Pacific.

Strategic Autonomy and the European Defence Identity

France’s national defence strategy prioritizes:

Operational sovereignty: The ability to conduct independent missions without reliance on foreign command.
European defence integration: Promoting the EU as a credible security actor alongside NATO.
A balanced global presence: Sustaining overseas military bases and maintaining an active voice in international crisis response.

While a committed NATO member, France has also pushed for a complementary European pillar of defence—one that includes the European Intervention Initiative (EI2) and stronger joint capabilities within the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).

The Nuclear Deterrent and Force Projection

France maintains a robust nuclear deterrent through its Force de dissuasion, comprising:

Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs) on Triomphant-class submarines
Air-Launched Cruise Missiles (ALCMs) deployed via Rafale fighter jets

President Macron has repeatedly emphasized France’s nuclear arsenal as a core pillar of European security, even offering dialogue on its role within broader EU deterrence frameworks.

In parallel, France maintains a force projection capacity across:

The Indo-Pacific: with bases in Djibouti, Réunion, New Caledonia, and French Polynesia
Africa: despite recent troop withdrawals from Mali and Niger, French forces remain strategically positioned in the Sahel and West Africa
Europe and the Mediterranean: via NATO missions and maritime patrols

Technological Sovereignty and the Defence Industry

France invests heavily in defence R&D and industry:

Dassault Aviation, Naval Group, Thales, and Airbus Defence and Space are central to French strategic autonomy
Programs like SCAF (Future Combat Air System) and MGCS (Main Ground Combat System) aim to create next-generation Franco-German-European systems
France also maintains a space command and invests in cyber, AI, and quantum security capabilities

A recurring theme is the protection of European technological sovereignty in an age dominated by U.S. and Chinese platforms.

Cyber, Space, and Hybrid Security

France’s Cyber Command (COMCYBER) leads national cyber defence and offensive operations
The French Space Command was established in 2019 to protect satellite and space-based assets
France’s security doctrine acknowledges the importance of narrative control and information sovereignty, particularly in combating disinformation and foreign influence in elections

France’s Global Security Role

France seeks to balance its Atlantic and European identities with a global outlook:

Reaffirming commitment to multilateralism, peacekeeping, and the UN Charter
Maintaining presence in Indo-Pacific diplomacy via India-France-Japan trilaterals
Enhancing defence diplomacy with African and Francophone states, despite rising challenges from Russia, China, and regional instability

France’s defence strategy in 2025 is a careful dance: between Europe and NATO, between deterrence and diplomacy, between strategic independence and integrated alliances. Its vision remains Gaullist at its core—but updated for a multipolar, cyber-volatile, AI-driven world.

5.1 United States – Strategic Defence in 2025

In 2025, the United States faces a more contested world than at any time since the Cold War. With near-peer competition from China and Russia, threats from rogue states like North Korea and Iran, and the rise of autonomous warfare and cyber-espionage, America’s national defence strategy has returned to fundamentals: deterrence, force projection, and homeland protection—augmented by new technologies and strategic doctrines for the Age of Intelligence.

Strategic Direction: Peace Through Strength

The current U.S. strategy—guided by President Donald Trump’s second administration—emphasizes “peace through strength”. It focuses on:

Deterring Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific
Strengthening the U.S. homeland against cyber and missile threats
Demanding increased defence contributions from allies (5% GDP goal for NATO)
Integrating advanced technology into all defence domains

The 2025 National Defense Strategy, under development by Under Secretary Elbridge Colby, reaffirms a return to realism and primacy, prioritizing rapid military readiness and global freedom of action.

The Golden Dome: Space-Based Missile Defence

A centerpiece of the 2025 vision is the proposed Golden Dome—a vast space-based missile defence initiative. Echoing Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, this system aims to:

Deploy satellites equipped with interceptors and sensors
Neutralize ballistic, cruise, and hypersonic threats in early-flight stages
Secure the homeland and allies against advanced missile capabilities from China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran

With an estimated cost between $175 and $542 billion, it represents both a technological gamble and a strategic leap. Initial contracts involve a fierce competition among Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, SpaceX, and Palantir.

Missile Defence and Nuclear Posture

The 2025 Missile Defense Review (MDR) outlines a multilayered approach:

Expand the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system
Integrate new directed energy and non-kinetic interceptors
Establish redundancy through space and regional theatre systems

Meanwhile, the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) is being updated in anticipation of the possible end of all U.S.-Russia nuclear treaties in 2025. Key goals:

Preserve a credible nuclear triad
Ensure survivability of U.S. deterrent forces
Counterbalance Chinese nuclear expansion and Russian tactical threats

The NPR signals a hardening stance: nuclear modernization is non-negotiable.

Cyber, AI, and Next-Gen Warfare

U.S. Cyber Command continues offensive and defensive operations to preempt foreign attacks
Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC) supports AI integration into battlefield decision-making, logistics, and surveillance
DoD is accelerating swarm drone development, hypersonic glide vehicles, and autonomous systems

The race to dominate intelligent systems is a strategic arms race—both technological and philosophical.

Alliances and Burden Sharing

The U.S. remains deeply committed to NATO, but with heightened pressure for European allies to spend at least 5% of GDP on defence (3.5% military, 1.5% strategic infrastructure)
In the Indo-Pacific, the U.S. strengthens AUKUS, QUAD, and bilateral ties with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and India
Africa, Latin America, and the Arctic have emerged as new theatres of strategic interest

There is also renewed emphasis on defence industrial base revitalization and energy security as national security issues.

In 2025, American defence doctrine once again reflects its foundational belief: that strength deters war, and weakness invites it. Yet this strength is no longer measured only in aircraft carriers or nuclear submarines—but in satellites, algorithms, alliances, and informational superiority.

6.1 Japan – Reinterpreting Pacifism

Japan stands at the intersection of rising regional insecurity and deep constitutional restraint. Since the end of World War II, Japan’s Self-Defense Forces (SDF) have operated under the pacifist Article 9 of its Constitution, which renounces war as a sovereign right. But in response to China’s growing assertiveness, North Korea’s missile testing, and uncertainties around U.S. long-term commitment, Japan has embarked on a historic transformation of its defence doctrine—one that both respects its postwar legacy and redefines its regional role.

Strategic Transformation: From Passive Defence to Proactive Deterrence

In 2022, Japan unveiled its National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy, and Defense Buildup Program, initiating the largest rearmament since WWII. By 2025, these plans are accelerating, with several key pillars:

Doubling defence spending to 2% of GDP by 2027, aligning with NATO standards
Acquiring counterstrike capabilities—long-range missiles capable of striking enemy launch sites
Enhancing missile defence systems against hypersonic and cruise threats
Upgrading cyber, space, and electronic warfare capabilities

The strategic posture has shifted from “exclusively defence-oriented” to a multi-layered deterrence strategy, aimed at both denial and retaliation.

Alliance with the United States

Japan remains the most important U.S. ally in the Indo-Pacific. U.S. forces are stationed at major bases in Okinawa, Yokosuka, and Misawa.
The U.S.-Japan Alliance Coordination Mechanism (ACM) ensures joint response to regional contingencies.
Joint exercises focus on island defence, anti-submarine warfare, and integrated missile defence.
Japan is integrating into regional defence coalitions through AUKUS technology sharing and QUAD security dialogue.

The alliance provides strategic depth to both nations while enhancing interoperability and intelligence sharing.

Technological Advancements and Strategic Assets

Development of the Type 12 standoff missile and participation in the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) with the UK and Italy signal a push toward indigenous deterrent power.
Japan’s Space Operations Squadron monitors satellite threats and aims to secure orbital dominance.
The Cyber Defense Command, launched in 2022, is being expanded to respond to increasingly complex threats from China, North Korea, and Russia.

These efforts reflect a strategic bet: that technological advantage is the new backbone of national resilience.

Legal and Public Debate

Despite growing support for military normalization, Japan’s pacifist identity remains deeply embedded:

Article 9 has not been formally amended, though reinterpretations by successive governments have broadened operational scope
The public remains divided, especially regarding nuclear sharing or first-strike scenarios
Civil society and opposition parties continue to warn against remilitarization and entanglement in foreign wars

Japan’s evolving defence posture is thus not only a response to external threats—it is a negotiation between past trauma and future necessity.

Japan in 2025 exemplifies a nation navigating the razor’s edge between tradition and transformation. Its future security lies not in abandoning pacifism, but in reinterpreting it—through readiness, deterrence, and principled strength in a world increasingly shaped by uncertainty.

6.2 South Korea – Deterrence on the Peninsula

South Korea faces a unique security dilemma: it must prepare for both high-tech warfare and the persistent threat of sudden escalation from its unpredictable northern neighbor. In 2025, the Republic of Korea (ROK) is deepening its alliance with the United States while also enhancing its independent capabilities, adapting to a volatile Northeast Asian environment shaped by missile threats, grey-zone tactics, and great power rivalries.

The North Korean Threat: Missiles, Drones, and Escalation Risk

North Korea continues to advance its missile and nuclear capabilities:

Testing of hypersonic glide vehicles, ICBMs, and solid-fuel ballistic missiles has accelerated
Development of nuclear-capable tactical weapons and miniaturized warheads is ongoing
Increased use of drones and cyberattacks to harass South Korean infrastructure

These advances, coupled with provocative rhetoric and artillery drills near the DMZ, raise the specter of strategic surprise—placing enormous pressure on South Korea’s readiness and early warning systems.

Extended Deterrence and the U.S.–ROK Alliance

The U.S.–ROK alliance remains the backbone of Korean security:

Combined Forces Command (CFC) ensures integrated wartime command
U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), headquartered in Camp Humphreys, provides rapid response and strategic deterrence
Nuclear consultation groups have been formed to discuss extended deterrence and nuclear posture coordination
Joint military exercises, previously scaled down, are now fully reinstated and expanded

President Yoon Suk-yeol’s administration has actively supported closer alignment with U.S. strategic policy, including participation in QUAD dialogue frameworks and interoperability with Indo-Pacific allies.

South Korea’s Indigenous Defence Capabilities

South Korea is no longer just a passive ally—it is becoming a formidable defence power in its own right:

The Three-Axis System provides layered deterrence:
- Kill Chain (preemptive strike)
- Korea Air and Missile Defense (KAMD)
- Massive Punishment and Retaliation (KMPR)
Development and deployment of:
- Hyunmoo-5 ballistic missiles
- Indigenous Iron Dome-style interceptors
- Advanced UAVs, cyber tools, and artillery counter-systems
The ROK Navy is investing in blue-water capabilities and light aircraft carriers to project power and secure sea lanes.

South Korea’s defence industry (e.g., Hanwha, LIG Nex1, Hyundai Rotem) is rapidly expanding, with rising arms exports to Europe, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.

Civil Preparedness and Information Warfare

South Korea remains highly vulnerable to North Korean psychological operations and disinformation campaigns, particularly targeting young voters and military morale.
Cybersecurity and civil defence drills are increasingly emphasized in schools, cities, and government institutions.
National debates continue over military service reforms, AI ethics in autonomous defence, and the long-term vision for Korean reunification or containment.

South Korea’s defence posture in 2025 is defined by dual imperatives: to stand firm with its allies against regional aggression, and to build the independent capabilities necessary for survival in a flashpoint zone. No other democracy lives so close to the edge of war—and yet prepares with such technical sophistication and strategic clarity.

6.3 China – Civil-Military Fusion and Global Security Ambitions

In 2025, China is redefining what it means to be a global military power. No longer limited to regional defence or passive deterrence, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has become a global instrument of statecraft—technologically empowered, ideologically guided, and integrated across civilian and military spheres. China’s defence doctrine blends historical grievance, technological ambition, and strategic patience with a sharpened focus on power projection and national rejuvenation.

Civil-Military Fusion: The Strategic Doctrine

Central to China’s defence strategy is the concept of civil-military fusion (CMF):

Blurring the lines between public and private sectors to accelerate military modernization
Leveraging AI, quantum computing, biotech, 5G/6G, and space technologies through civilian R&D pipelines
Legally requiring all Chinese companies—domestic and overseas—to share data and technology with the PLA

This enables rapid scaling of dual-use innovations, reduces costs, and makes foreign export controls less effective. The fusion doctrine is not just a tactic; it is a national organizing principle.

PLA Modernization and Strategic Posture

Under Xi Jinping’s “Strong Military Dream”, China has overhauled the PLA’s structure:

Established the Strategic Support Force for cyber, space, and electromagnetic dominance
Expanded the Rocket Force, responsible for nuclear and conventional missile operations
Reorganized the PLA into theater commands, improving joint operations

China’s 2023 Defence White Paper emphasized:

“Winning local wars under intelligentized conditions”
Integration of AI decision systems, autonomous drone swarms, and satellite coordination
Preparation for informationized warfare, where data, not bullets, wins battles

Belt and Road as Security Architecture

China’s global infrastructure initiative, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), now includes:

Dual-use port facilities in Pakistan (Gwadar), Sri Lanka (Hambantota), Djibouti, and potentially Equatorial Guinea
Digital Silk Road infrastructure—fiber-optic cables, 5G nodes, satellite stations—critical to surveillance and cyber dominance
A rationale for forward presence and “overseas PLA operations”, including protection of Chinese citizens abroad

While officially framed as economic cooperation, BRI nodes often coincide with geostrategic footholds.

The Taiwan Contingency and Indo-Pacific Competition

China’s defence planning is increasingly oriented toward a potential conflict over Taiwan:

Regular simulated blockade and amphibious landing drills by the PLA Navy and Air Force
Expansion of short- and medium-range ballistic missile capabilities
Assertive maritime behavior in the South China Sea, backed by a growing militia fleet of paramilitary vessels
Use of cognitive warfare—disinformation, cyber intrusion, and legal warfare—to undermine Taiwanese resilience

China’s goal is to force unification without war, but to win if war comes.

Nuclear and Cyber Posture

China is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal toward nuclear triad capability, building silos in western deserts and deploying submarine-launched systems
The Beidou satellite network supports secure military navigation, independent of GPS
China’s cyber operations focus on espionage, intellectual property theft, and supply chain infiltration, posing systemic risks to global infrastructure

In 2025, China’s military rise is no longer speculative—it is systemic. Its doctrine is not merely to deter or defend, but to shape a global order favorable to its interests, values, and regime survival. Whether this results in a peaceful new balance or a catastrophic confrontation will depend on the wisdom of the world’s response.

7.1 India – Strategic Autonomy in a Multipolar Order

India’s defence policy in 2025 reflects its position as a rising power navigating an increasingly multipolar and volatile world. Wedged between two nuclear-armed neighbors—China and Pakistan—India seeks to balance strategic restraint with assertive modernization. Its doctrine of strategic autonomy, rooted in post-colonial sovereignty, drives its independent defence decisions, even as it strengthens partnerships with the United States, France, and Indo-Pacific democracies.

Strategic Doctrine: Deterrence, Self-Reliance, and Multipolar Engagement

India’s official security doctrine—while not codified in a single document—rests on three pillars:

Deterrence through credible military strength, especially against Pakistan and China
Self-reliant defence production through the Atmanirbhar Bharat (“self-sufficient India”) initiative
Multipolar diplomacy—maintaining strong ties with Russia, expanding partnerships with the West, and avoiding entanglement in exclusive blocs

India’s foreign and defence ministries emphasize flexibility, with a long-term view of protecting sovereignty while building influence across the Global South.

Military Modernization and Indigenous Capability

India is rapidly upgrading its armed forces through both procurement and indigenous development:

Deployment of Agni-V ICBMs, Rafale fighters, and INS Arihant-class nuclear submarines
Indigenous systems: Tejas fighters, Arjun tanks, Akash missile systems, and BrahMos-II hypersonic cruise missiles
Establishment of Integrated Theatre Commands to improve joint operations

India’s defence budget is the third-largest globally, but modernization remains uneven. Emphasis is increasingly placed on AI integration, cyber defence, and quantum research, often in partnership with civilian tech sectors.

The China Factor and the Himalayan Front

India’s defence strategy has hardened significantly since the 2020 Galwan Valley clash with China:

Ongoing military build-up along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with improved infrastructure, UAV surveillance, and winterized deployments
Doctrinal shift from passive border defence to active deterrence and limited offensive capability
Emphasis on space surveillance, real-time satellite communications, and high-altitude logistics

While war is not expected, India’s military posture aims to deny China easy strategic leverage.

Pakistan and Two-Front Contingency Planning

Though China now dominates India’s long-term threat calculus, Pakistan remains a volatile flashpoint:

Ongoing risk of conflict in Kashmir, intensified by drone incursions and cross-border terrorism
India maintains a policy of “massive retaliation” as nuclear deterrence against first-use scenarios
Doctrinal and technological integration now includes two-front war planning

India’s doctrine relies on rapid mobilisation, intelligence dominance, and battlefield transparency.

Defence Diplomacy and the Indo-Pacific

India’s strategic partnerships reflect its global aspirations:

Core member of the QUAD (with U.S., Japan, Australia), focusing on maritime security and technology
Defence ties with France, Israel, Vietnam, and ASEAN
Increasing participation in multilateral exercises: Malabar, Varuna, Indra, RIMPAC

India’s Indian Ocean naval doctrine positions it as the key security provider from the Persian Gulf to the Strait of Malacca.

India in 2025 embodies the paradox of modern power: deeply sovereign yet globally engaged, reactive to threats yet proactive in diplomacy, and determined to build strength without becoming a pawn in great power rivalries. Its strategic autonomy is not isolation—it is an evolving blueprint for self-determined leadership in the Age of Intelligence.

8.1 Russia – The Logic of Hybrid Warfare

In 2025, Russia’s military doctrine has evolved into a distinct model of hybrid warfare—a fusion of conventional force, psychological operations, disinformation, economic leverage, and cyber capability. The prolonged war in Ukraine, global sanctions, and strategic isolation have not deterred Russia from pursuing what it sees as its rightful sphere of influence. Instead, Russia has adapted, internalized its constraints, and weaponized ambiguity.

The Post-Ukraine Doctrine: Adaptation under Pressure

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 marked a turning point in both European security and Russian military thinking. While early expectations of rapid victory collapsed, Russia adapted with a strategy of attrition, mobilization, and battlefield experimentation:

Expanded use of drones, electronic warfare, and private military contractors (PMCs) like Wagner (now reorganized into official paramilitary arms)
Shift to scorched-earth tactics, targeting energy and infrastructure in contested zones
Intensified focus on industrial mobilization, economic self-reliance, and domestic propaganda

The 2025 Russian Military Doctrine—partially declassified—reaffirms a belief in asymmetric offsetting: using non-linear and multi-domain tools to compensate for numerical or economic disadvantages.

Tactical Nuclear Posture and Escalation Dominance

Russia retains the world’s largest arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons and remains committed to the doctrine of “escalate to de-escalate”:

Using or threatening limited nuclear strikes to freeze or deter adversary responses
Emphasis on dual-capable systems, like Iskander-M and Kinzhal missiles, which blur the line between conventional and nuclear thresholds
Regular nuclear exercises and public statements to maintain psychological leverage

With U.S.-Russia arms control agreements now expired or suspended, the nuclear threshold is lower and less predictable than in decades past.

Cyber, Disinformation, and the “Information Front”

Russian strategic thinkers view information as both terrain and weapon. The Kremlin continues to pursue:

Cyberattacks on infrastructure, elections, and financial systems (e.g., NotPetya-style operations)
Narrative warfare, blending truth, half-truths, and falsehoods to disorient public opinion
Support for far-right and far-left populist movements abroad to weaken Western cohesion
A state-media and troll-farm ecosystem that exports chaos under the guise of news

The information front allows Russia to project power without clear fingerprints—a key feature of hybrid war.

Eurasian Strategic Ambitions

Despite sanctions and international censure, Russia remains active in consolidating influence across its near abroad:

Militarization of the Arctic, with new naval and missile facilities positioned for control of shipping lanes
Attempts to rebuild dominance in Central Asia through economic and military pacts
Support for separatist movements and frozen conflicts in Georgia, Moldova, and the Balkans

Moscow’s strategic goal is clear: to prevent further NATO expansion, undermine European unity, and force recognition of a “multipolar world order”.

Defence Industry and Sanctions Evasion

Russia’s military-industrial complex has adapted through parallel imports, domestic substitution, and partnerships with Iran, North Korea, and China
Emphasis on low-tech/high-volume warfare: mass production of artillery shells, drones, and mobile systems
Integration of AI and battlefield automation within limits of available components

Despite capacity limitations, Russia’s doctrine values endurance, improvisation, and psychological resilience.

Russia’s 2025 security strategy is not about matching the West system for system—it is about destabilizing predictability. Hybrid warfare is not a phase, but a worldview: war without declaration, conflict without clarity, victory through confusion. For the West, understanding this logic is not optional—it is the first line of defence.

9. Principles of Strategic Defence in the Age of Intelligence

In this era of accelerating complexity—where information is weaponized, borders are digital, and the pace of change outstrips institutional memory—strategic defence must evolve from static military dominance to dynamic, intelligent systems of resilience. The following principles distill the core lessons of modern defence policy into a framework suitable for the 21st century and beyond.

9.1 Multidimensional Deterrence

Defence is no longer confined to land, sea, and air. Strategic deterrence now operates across at least six active domains:

Land, Sea, Air – Conventional military forces remain essential
Cyber – Defence of critical infrastructure, communications, and identity
Space – Satellite protection, navigation, missile tracking, and orbital dominance
Information – Narrative integrity, disinformation resilience, psychological security
Economics – Financial systems, trade routes, and sanctions as levers of power
Biological and Environmental – Pandemic response, biosecurity, and climate stability

Multidimensional deterrence requires not just coordination—but anticipatory synthesis.

9.2 Infrastructure Resilience and Civil Preparedness

The strongest military force is useless if the society it protects is brittle. Resilience is now a strategic asset:

Hardened energy grids, water systems, and supply chains
Stockpiles of critical materials, medical supplies, and digital backups
National drills, psychological readiness, and public trust mechanisms

The home front is no longer just a support zone—it is a potential battlespace.

9.3 Technological Sovereignty and Cyber Integrity

Autonomy in critical technologies is now a core defence imperative:

Secure AI models, quantum communication, and encrypted cloud infrastructure
Domestic semiconductor fabrication and secure supply chains
Ability to disconnect from or dominate hostile digital ecosystems

This is not technological nationalism—but the recognition that foreign dependency in a hostile world can become a national vulnerability.

9.4 Human Security as Strategic Security

The ultimate measure of defence is the flourishing of the people:

Protection of health, education, and psychological well-being
Ethical governance, social cohesion, and inclusion as buffers against extremism
Environmental sustainability and disaster preparedness as deterrents to chaos

Human-centric security recognizes that demoralized, sick, or divided populations are easy prey—no matter how advanced their weapons.

9.5 Interoperability and Global Alliances

Modern defence cannot be pursued in isolation. In a world of distributed threats:

Alliances like NATO, QUAD, AUKUS, and regional pacts provide critical redundancy
Interoperability—technical, logistical, and ethical—must be built into all systems
Science diplomacy, joint R&D, and shared satellite/AI platforms are force multipliers

Strategic solidarity is not weakness—it is wisdom.

9.6 Alliances and Strategic Partnerships in the 21st Century

In a world where threats span continents and data flows faster than missiles, no nation—however powerful—can secure itself alone. Strategic alliances have become the skeletal structure of modern defence, enabling interoperability, intelligence sharing, logistical support, and moral legitimacy in a fragmented geopolitical landscape. Today’s most important alliances are no longer just military—they are technological, informational, and civilizational.

NATO – The Atlantic Backbone

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) remains the most advanced and cohesive military alliance in history:

Comprising 32 member states in Europe and North America
Operates on the principle of collective defence (Article 5)
Expanding focus on cybersecurity, hybrid warfare, and space capabilities
As of 2025, discussions on raising member defence spending to 5% of GDP are transforming the alliance into a renewed deterrent force

NATO is also actively collaborating with Indo-Pacific democracies through its “Partners Across the Globe” framework, extending its geopolitical reach.

AUKUS – Military Technology and Deterrence

AUKUS—an alliance between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States—represents a forward-leaning pact focused on:

Nuclear-powered submarine development for Australia
Advanced technology sharing, including AI, cyber, hypersonics, and undersea capabilities
Deterring China’s maritime expansion and ensuring Indo-Pacific stability

More than a defence deal, AUKUS is a trust-based techno-strategic ecosystem for the 21st century.

QUAD – Strategic Dialogue and Maritime Security

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD)—India, Japan, Australia, and the U.S.—is a flexible strategic framework addressing:

Maritime freedom, particularly in the South China Sea and Indo-Pacific
Cybersecurity, critical technology standards, supply chain security
Humanitarian assistance and disaster response (HADR)

Though not a formal military alliance, the QUAD is a diplomatic counterweight to authoritarian expansion and a champion of democratic resilience in Asia.

ASEAN – Regional Stability through Consensus

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) serves as a vital stabilizing forum in a strategically crowded region:

Promotes non-alignment, economic cooperation, and dialogue
Hosts regional forums like ADMM-Plus and EAS for defence consultation
Plays a balancing role between China, the U.S., India, and Japan

While ASEAN lacks hard power, its centrality in Indo-Pacific diplomacy remains crucial to avoiding escalatory conflict.

The “Five Eyes” – Intelligence Sharing Among Democracies

The Five Eyes Alliance (United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) is the world’s most advanced intelligence-sharing network, coordinating:

Signals intelligence (SIGINT), surveillance, and cyber monitoring
Joint operations on counterterrorism, strategic threats, and digital espionage
Standardization of cyber norms and counterintelligence against authoritarian actors

Five Eyes represents not only intelligence coordination but a shared epistemological foundation—a common language of threat perception.

Regional and Thematic Pacts

Additional layers of strategic cooperation include:

The European Union’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and initiatives like PESCO
Franco-German defence industry collaborations (SCAF, MGCS)
India-France-Japan trilaterals, building bridges across Indo-Pacific and Europe
African Union security frameworks, combating terrorism and organized crime
Arctic Council and NORAD for northern security cooperation

These networks ensure regional specificity and functional depth, complementing broader alliances.

The 21st-century alliance system is not one bloc, but a web of resilient interdependencies—each one reinforcing the others. In the Age of Intelligence, alliances must evolve from static treaties to living systems of trust, innovation, and ethical defence.

In the Age of Intelligence, national defence is no longer about domination but about coordination, agility, and foresight. It is about seeing the invisible battles—of minds, machines, ecosystems, and narratives—and preparing to defend what makes life worth living.

10. The Integrated Humanist Perspective on Security

In an age where national defence spans satellites, cyberspace, biospheres, and the human mind itself, the core question is no longer just how to defend—but what is worth defending. An Integrated Humanist approach to security begins with the premise that the ultimate goal of any strategic doctrine is not the preservation of state power, but the protection and flourishing of human life in all its dimensions.

10.1 Defence as Moral Responsibility

Traditional security models emphasize deterrence through force. Integrated Humanism reorients this focus:

Defence is not merely the prevention of invasion—it is the protection of rights, dignity, and life opportunities
Ethical strategy demands just means and just ends: proportionality, transparency, and long-term human development
States are morally obligated to ensure that defence investments uplift citizens, rather than impoverish them or suppress dissent

A security system that guards territory but not conscience is already lost.

10.2 Science, Truth, and the Ethics of Intelligence

Information is the new weapon—and the new sanctuary. An Integrated Humanist security policy champions:

Truthful intelligence practices: not just surveillance, but epistemic integrity
The development of AI, cyber systems, and biometric surveillance within strict ethical frameworks—open, accountable, reversible
Transparency between science and state: scientists must not become tools of war, but guardians of peace

“Intelligence” must once again mean wisdom.

10.3 Open-Source Diplomacy and Global Trust

Security is strengthened not only by secrecy, but by honest cooperation:

Open-source security frameworks, where public verification replaces blind trust
Science diplomacy—shared laboratories, climate missions, and space research as bridges between adversaries
The cultivation of civilizational trust: cultural, scientific, and humanistic ties that resist propaganda and demonization

This is not naïveté—it is strategic optimism. Peace, like war, can be engineered.

10.4 Liberty in the Surveillance Age

As authoritarian regimes leverage AI and biometrics for control, democratic societies face a profound challenge:

How to harness security technologies without dismantling civil liberties
How to defend against totalitarian systems without becoming like them

Integrated Humanism insists:

No defence without consent
No surveillance without due process
No power without humility

The highest form of national security is a free and informed people.

10.5 The Human Spirit as a Strategic Asset

In the end, resilience is not found in drones or databases, but in human character:

Civic education, critical thinking, and moral courage are tools of long-term peace
Mental health, social cohesion, and democratic participation are strategic advantages
A security doctrine grounded in wisdom, empathy, and truth resists both external enemies and internal decay

Integrated Humanism does not reject military strength—but places it within a larger framework of conscience, community, and cosmic perspective. It defends not only borders, but meaning.

11. Conclusion – Defending the Future

The world has entered a new strategic epoch. Gone are the days when defence could be defined by borders, battalions, or bombs alone. In the Age of Intelligence, national security means resilience across systems—technological, ecological, psychological, and ethical. Power is no longer measured merely in megatons or troop counts, but in adaptive coherence, moral legitimacy, and the ability to anticipate rather than react.

Each of the nations examined—be it Britain with its integrated review, the United States with its global deterrent force, China’s fusion of tech and ambition, or India’s self-directed rise—offers a unique model of how to prepare for an uncertain future. Some emphasize autonomy, others alliance. Some prioritize deterrence; others, influence. But none can escape the realities of a world where a single cyberattack can cripple, a single lie can destabilize, and a single spark can escalate into catastrophe.

To truly defend the future, the following imperatives must be embraced:

Wisdom must guide power: Strategic decisions must serve the common good, not only national advantage.
Technology must be humanized: Autonomous weapons, surveillance systems, and AI defence must be governed by ethics, not expedience.
Cooperation must be strategic: The challenges of climate, cyberwarfare, pandemics, and misinformation require global, not tribal, responses.
Security must mean life: Not merely survival, but the ability for people to live in dignity, peace, and possibility.

Integrated Humanism offers not a utopia, but a compass—a way to navigate defence in a way that aligns strategic intelligence with moral clarity. It is not enough to avoid war. We must actively defend trust, truth, and the fragile miracle of civilization itself.

Let this be the true legacy of 21st-century defence: not just strength, but meaning.

2025 Military Strength Ranking

Table of Contents