{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029787234042553193, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00425531914893617, 'mean_word_length': 4.9714285714285715, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
State Actor Threats in 2025

Abstract : To properly evaluate the utility of a proposed technology, especially one developed for military purposes, one must also understand the context in which the developer will employ that technology. This is because the enemy is always trying to counter one's capabilities and render them ineffective. In addition, the military never operates freely -- certain political considerations always govern (and restrain) the use of military force. As a result, when trying to determine the technologies in which the U.S. Air Force should invest, the context in which they will be employed becomes paramount. To that end, this paper develops four scenarios surrounding state actor threats in the year 2025. The "Wishful Thinking" scenario describes a state whose military is materials-based and who fights the U.S. military in a large-scale, force-on-force conflict. The "Information Immobilization" adversary also will attempt to fight the United States on the regular battlefield, but will do so using information-based systems to counter U.S. Air Force capabilities. The "David and Goliath" scenario postulates a threat in which a materials-based military attempts to fight the United States using irregular tactics. And, finally, The "Phantom Menace" state is one whose information-based forces will take on the United States in an irregular manner. The analysis indicates that the "Phantom Menace" scenario provides the highest potential for a state actor to inflict catastrophic damage to the United States. However, experience has shown that, to be properly prepared for any future contingency, the U.S. Air Force cannot focus its acquisition efforts solely on meeting the requirements of any one or two scenarios. The best return on investment will come from developing capabilities that provide an advantage across the entire threat spectrum.