We must study historical examples from history, especially during the Cold War period, in order to prepare for current and future international security challenges. First, the Cuban Missile Crisis (CMC) presents a few lessons on the strategic use of violence. Former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev chose to assemble nuclear weapons in Cuba as an indirect use of force against the United States, to deter them from taking action against the USSR, and to increase Cuba’s security by deterring the United States from invading Cuba again (after the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961). Even though violence was never used during the CMC, the threat of nuclear weapons in Cuba was received by Washington D.C., demonstrating that the indirect use of force is sufficient enough to prompt an adversary’s reaction. Former U.S. President Kennedy’s response to missile construction, a naval blockade on Cuba, sent a clear message to the USSR to compel them to remove missiles from the island. This prompted the countries to negotiate a solution to end that phase of the conflict: the United States would remove its missiles from Italy and Turkey, and the USSR would deconstruct the missiles in Cuba.

The historic example of the Cuban Missile Crisis is relevant today, as we learned that violence only needs to be threatened, and not used, to influence the decisions of an adversary. In order to use violence held in reserve in an effective manner, the threat must be credible―demonstrating willingness and capability―to dissuade your opponent from crossing your red line. Furthermore, the threat of mutually assured destruction with nuclear weapons works. Additionally, we see that international cooperation is necessary and possible, even amongst adversaries, to take actions that are beneficial for the international security of both adversaries. Cooperation and compromise will be the key to solving many future security challenges. Still today, the threat of nuclear weapons looms large and is a prominent concern of American military strategy today. Therefore, studying past nuclear conflicts can provide helpful information that can be used for future conflicts, such as nuclear conflicts with Syria, North Korea, or Iran.

Second, lessons from Vietnam War, and Just War Theory, reiterate the importance of domestic support when engaged in military engagements. Just War Theory, as described by Michael Walzer, recognizes that fighting morally and for just causes is strategically advantageous: it helps maintain domestic support while also protecting the civilians in the war zone. Specifically, the United States likely lost the Vietnam War because of the immoral ways in which civilians were treated in Vietnam, and how that impacted domestic support for the war. On page 931 Walzer says that after Vietnam, “justice has become a military necessity.”¹

The prevalence of technology, specifically, makes just war theory even more important. Unjust acts can be published widely through the media to diverse audiences, which can impact domestic support for military action.² Therefore, it is even more strategically advantageous today, as technology and the media have an even more prominent presence in our lives than they did during the Cold War, to ensure that actions taken on behalf of international security align with Just war theory.

Finally, the Stuxnet cyber attack discovered in 2010 highlights the risks and complexities of cyber warfare, and helps us understand the new types of threats that the international community will likely face with increasing frequency in the coming years. Specifically, cyber warfare is a weapon of the weak, and is used by actors that would otherwise not be able to compete in a conventional arena.³ Furthermore, the United States, and other conventionally strong actors, are more vulnerable to cyber attacks because of their reliance on technology. Therefore, it is even more vital for us to study the more-recent example of Stuxnet to be prepared for future cyber conflicts.

Stuxnet highlights the “attribution dilemma” and how it is often difficult to identify the origins of cyber attacks because attackers are able to pose the attack from a location other than their own.⁴ Therefore, when attempting to place blame on the perpetrator, or threaten retaliation, it is difficult to do so. If a non-state actor is responsible for the attack, do you threaten the state or the actor responsible? Additionally, a response to a cyber attack requires new critical thought about proportionality.⁵ How do you respond in a way that ensures “that the suffering and devastation that you cause, especially collateral damage to unintended targets, [doesn’t] outweigh whatever harm prompted the conflict,” when it comes to cyber warfare?²⁸ This is something that security experts had to start thinking about with Stuxnet, and will have to consider for future conflicts as well.

In short, there are multiple historical events that are necessary to understand in order to be prepared for events in the future. Even though global conditions have changed since the Cold War and technology and the types of conflict facing the world have evolved, there are still relevant lessons that we can learn. We must study the past so as not to repeat the same mistakes in the future. In fact, this learning is vital to our ability to be prepared to fight any and all actors to protect national and international security.

1. Walzer, Michael. “The Triumph of Just War Theory (and the Dangers of Success),” Social Research 69:4 (Winter 2002): 931.
2. Elias, Barbara. “Humanitarian Intervention and R2P.” International Security. November 11, 2020. Lecture.
3. Elias, Barbara. “Cyber.” International Security. November 18, 2020. Lecture.
4.  Singer, W.P. and Allen Friedman. Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know, (Oxford University Press, 2014), 76.
5. Singer and Friedman. Cybersecurity and Cyberwar. 118-119.
6.  Singer and Friedman. Cybersecurity and Cyberwar. 118.

Image Sources:

1. Michelle Mark, “What Happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis — the 13-Day Standoff That Almost Ended the World,” Business Insider, accessed December 19, 2020, https://www.businessinsider.com/what-was-cuban-missile-crisis-13-day-standoff-that-almost-ended-the-world-2017-8.
2. Eric A. Gordon, “Today in History: The Vietnam War Is Over!,” People’s World (blog), April 30, 2015, https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/today-in-history-the-vietnam-war-is-over/.
3. Nicole Pasulka, “A Virus Altered the Face of Security in Iran | TakePart,” July 25, 2016, http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/07/25/zero-days-stuxnet-iran/.