What is a "will to fight?"
A country’s “will to fight” stems not solely from its military capabilities but from its people. Ukrainian defense against Russia has continually demonstrated how a smaller population can resisit a larger adversary through its “will to fight.” But what is “will” made of? A key part of whether a population continues to engage in a conflict or support another country in conflict is whether its people have both the means and desire to continue - and whether the economy can withstand the war itself.
In “The Dollars in the Fight: The Security Risks of Economic Compellence during a Conflict,” I discussed the risk of economic compellence during conflict. Yet, the foundations for economic compellence during a conflict begins well before the conflict itself. According to the Joint Chiefs of Staff JP 5-0, an adversary may seek to “shape” the operational environment prior to kinetic action. In other words, the preparation for fighting and winning an armed conflict begins well before the conflict itself.
Economic shaping occurs pre-conflict. Examples of economic shaping before a conflict include developing a state’s defense capabilities and creating essential goods supply chains independent of an adversary, thereby decreasing economic reliance. For example, prior to World War II, Germany was deeply concerned about its reliance on foreign iron ore, leading to forced expansion of domestic mining. The goal of economic shaping is to ensure a country has the necessary financial conditions and supplies before a conflict. If the conflict causes shortages of either defense materials or essential goods, a population’s will to fight may decrease.
In addition to contributing to preparation for a conflict, economic shaping can be a key element of deterrence. While discussing applying Cold War logic to modern-day challenges, former INDOPACOM Commander Admiral (ret.) Phillip Davidson said, “Deterrence is only effective if the adversary believes a combat credible opponent force exists, with the capability,…capacity,…and will to fight and win.” Strategic calculations of another countries’ economic ability and willpower to engage in protracted conflict are part of deterrence. Therefore, high economic fortitude can help ensure that a conflict never happens in the first place.
Economic fortitude vs. economic resiliency
“Economic fortitude” is the ability to withstand economic pressures during a conflict. I differentiate “economic fortitutde” from “economic resiliency” as the difference between the ability to “withstand” ongoing economic pressure vs recover from a disruptive event. These two concepts are often conflated but deal with different time frames (e.g., a multiyear war vs a hurricane). The concern for economic fortitude is simple: during a conflict, an adversary could economically compel other countries to either capitulate or cease supporting allies and partners. Japan’s attack of Pearl Harbor after the US instituted its oil embargo is a classic example of this.
There are several ways to measure economic fortitude. First, it would include reliance on imports for essential and defense industry commodities (weighted by allies and partners) and a population’s ability to withstand loss of goods. A second metric would be the ability to withstand potential supply chain disruptions for key industries. These tiered levels of suppliers refer to the supplier itself (Tier 1), suppliers’ supplier (Tier 2) and the suppliers’ suppliers’ supplier (Tier 3).
For example, in 2024, Hurricane Helene severely damaged a saline solution plant in the United States, which led to a national shortage. This caused a national IV solution shortage (Tier 1) and medications relying upon saline (Tier 2). In this event, US medical community demonstrated a lack of economic fortitude.
For the US, building economic fortitude at home means ensuring the vitality of supply chains, ranging from access to rare earth minerals to consumer goods. In some ways, the US is already aggressively pursuing increasing its economic fortitude through the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of Commerce (DOC). The DOD Office of Strategic Capital’s (OSC) mission is to develop and implement “strategies and partnerships to accelerate and scale private investment in critical supply chain technologies needed for national security.” Recent Executive Orders have also focused on modernizing and expanding the capacity of the US defense industrial base and accelerating drone research and production. Most of these initiatives focus on how to grow and support the US defense industrial base. However, properly measuring economic fortitude would require analysis beyond the defense sphere to examining supply chain connections to allies and partners.
For allies and partners, economic fortitude could include increasing domestic production – spurring domestic reserves or ensuring access to friendly supply chains – allowing for disentanglement with an adversary.
As the US strives to revitalize its economy, the development of economic fortitude should start now. The US and its allies and partners need to ensure they have sufficient means to avoid adversary economic compellence. By focusing on increasing trade in key industries beyond national security and developing both domestic and international friendly trading blocs, the US can shape the operational environment and build economic fortitude.
Emma Campell-Mohn
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, the US Department of Defense, or the US government.