Military escalation is behind every war and crisis in the world. Destructively-waged conflicts are difficult to resolve, and often last a long time. Understanding the dynamics of escalation is crucial for strategic-level decisions and force design. Yet, national security professionals and uniformed officers almost reflexively dismiss the notion of taking escalatory actions in real-world and simulated crises and conflicts. This is partly due to the Defense Department’s Joint Professional Military Education system and its emphasis on avoiding risk-taking, but it is also because many believe that escalation is inherently bad.
Escalation is a dynamic process driven by a number of factors, including increasing the intensity of violence and geographic scope of conflict; mobilising domestic and international support; and weaponry and logistical capacity. The emergence of nuclear weapons in 1945 marked the greatest increase in destructive power and lethality, but there are other ways to escalate the intensity of violence and broaden the scope of conflict. The rise of non-state actor heavy weapons, for example, shifts the nature of warfare and entangles states in longer and more dangerous engagements. Significant external support for warring parties enables them to undertake operations beyond their capabilities, and focuses political stakes and commitment, further intensifying hostilities and complicating resolution efforts.
Conflict escalation also results from the strategic use of narrative framing by state elites, to mobilise support and suppression dissent, or to pursue ideological goals, further entrenching hostilities and undermining peacebuilding efforts. The convergence of several escalatory dynamics in the same conflict is common, and understanding how they operate helps to explain why wars become so devastating.