Overcoming the Legal and Structural Barriers to Irregular Warfare
Irregular warfare is already the defining arena of modern strategic competition — but the United States remains limited, not by a lack of authority, but by the structures and habits that slow its ability to act. IW authorities exist in abundance; what’s missing is the ability to integrate them at speed.
Rather than being constrained by legal gaps, IW is hindered by fragmented processes, risk averse culture, uneven authority literacy, and the persistent divide between Title 10, Title 50, and Title 18/28 activities. Adversaries routinely blend influence, intelligence, legal pressure, and economic coercion into a unified competitive approach. The U.S., by contrast, tends to employ these tools in isolation — forfeiting pace and strategic advantage.
A practical path to scale IW within the current system involves designing deliberate transitions between authorities, integrating law enforcement tools from the outset, accelerating approval mechanisms, and establishing an IW authorities playbook that places influence, legitimacy, and access at the center of campaign design. Frameworks like CAPIA and Positional Play Planning provide the scaffolding to align authorities, synchronize effects, and build positional advantage over time.
Authority is a competitive weapon — but only when employed deliberately, coherently, and at tempo.
Read the full whitepaper to learn how the U.S. can overcome structural inertia and compete effectively in the persistent, irregular competition that defines today’s strategic environment.
