Military escalation is the process of increasing the intensity or geographic scope of a conflict. It is a key component of deterrence, and understanding it helps military planners and staff officers control their options in times of tension.
Military escalation consists of both immediate and long-term actions. The immediate actions typically affect the battle immediately, such as injecting more troops or weapons into a fighting engagement. But the longer-term escalatory actions are usually more remote in time and space, such as initiating a blockade or unrestricted submarine warfare. They can be even more challenging to evaluate and predict, especially as weapons develop.
Escalation is also complicated by the aims and values societies strive for, as well as the degree of commitment they will make to achieve them. This is a fundamental part of any means-ends calculus, and it makes it particularly important to avoid threats that are both disproportionate and risky to the adversary. Achieving this balance is not easy, and it requires a certain amount of art.
National security policymakers often express concerns about military escalation, and they frequently call for restraint from their counterparts. But these calls may have dangerous unintended consequences. By overemphasizing the importance of restraint, policymakers may be putting the United States at greater strategic risk. It is far better to view escalation as a tool—useful at some points, dangerous at others—in a broader set of tools for addressing potential threats. In this way, our country can more effectively employ the full range of its military power without exposing itself to unnecessary risk.