Petroplex News

WASHINGTON, DC —Friday, Representatives August Pfluger (TX-11) and Ami Bera, M.D. (CA-06) introduced the Gray Zone Defense Assessment Act along with Representatives Darrell Issa (CA-48) and Dean Phillips (MN-03). This bipartisan legislation directs the United States to develop a playbook to properly counter gray zone aggression and strengthen U.S. national security.

“The future of warfare is evolving,” said Rep. August Pfluger. “We risk falling behind the curve if our nation fails to adapt and identify unconventional threats like information warfare, coercive investments and bribery, malign industrial policies, and more. The Gray Zone Defense Actis a critical first step in ensuring that the United States is prepared to assess and counter all threats to our national security.”

“International conflicts in the 21stcentury have transcended traditional warfare boundaries, as demonstrated by Russia’s persistent disinformation campaigns and the PRC’s use of economic coercion to advance its political objectives,” said Rep. Ami Bera, M.D. “Yet, the United States lacks a unified strategy to counter these threats, resulting in diminished influence and incentivizing our rivals to continue utilizing such tactics. I’m proud to help introduce the bipartisan Gray Zone Defense Act to equip the United States with the necessary tools to evaluate and deter future nonconventional methods.”

“Our adversaries routinely exploit the gray zone between statecraft and war to achieve their objectives without provoking an overwhelming military response from the United States and our allies. From China’s island building in the South China Sea to Iran’s proxy forces destabilizing the Middle East, the U.S. must strategically plan and execute effective, coordinated responses that span the range of our capabilities,” said Rep. Darrell Issa. “This legislation does just that by focusing new attention to shoring up our process and capabilities, particularly within the interagency and the State Department. That’s why I’m supporting this important bipartisan effort to enhance our national security.”

“The nature of warfare is changing,” said Rep. Dean Phillips. “We’ve entered the era of great power competition, and we must ensure the United States is adequately prepared to identify and counter unconventional threats. The Gray Zone Defense Act provides crucial provisions to help the United States coordinate and counter malicious gray zone tactics.”

Background

The Gray Zone Defense Act requires the Department of Defense, the State Department, and the Director of National Intelligence to coordinate and evaluate our nation’s capacity to respond to gray zone aggression. In addition, the bill requires the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence to conduct an annual assessment of the gray zone threats posed by the People’s Republic of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and Syria pose to the United States.

For two decades, U.S. warfighters have primarily been engaged in countering the threats posed by violent extremists. Asymmetric tactics utilized by these extremist groups have shown our near-peer adversaries in the great-power competition that our nation is susceptible to threats that fall outside of the traditional means of conflict.

Since the shift from countering violent extremism to the great power competition, Russia has used private military companies to illegally seize territories, the People’s Republic of China is employing coercive economic practices through their Belt and Road Initiatives, and Iran is using proxies throughout the world to export terrorism and launder money for the regime. All these actions are used as an attempt to secure national objectives in what is now known as the “Gray Zone.”

Although the definition of the gray zone is fluid, it is widely described as geopolitical, economic, military actions and cyber and information operations that go beyond regular diplomatic and economic activities but fall below the use of kinetic military force. Gray zone aggression has become the preferred method of adversarial governments because it exploits the weaknesses of Western nations and provides plausible deniability to the hostile actor. Tactics utilized in the gray zone include but are not limited to:

• Information warfare;
• Encouraging internal strife within targeted countries;
• Subversive economic practices;
• Support for domestic and international proxies;
• Coercive investment and bribery for political aims;
• Industrial policy designed to monopolize a strategic industry or to destroy such an industry in other nations;
• Military and paramilitary provocations and operations short of war;
• Hostage diplomacy;
• Changes in internationally recognized borders;

Original source can be found here.