Let’s start with the positives. It is perfectly fair game, for example, to point out that the Pentagon’s “defense forward” doctrine may increase escalation risk and to question whether that increased risk is worth the candle.
Lyu writes that “defending forward should be understood as something more proactive and potentially escalatory than active cyber defense,” adding that this appears to include activity below the threshold of armed conflict. All that is correct. As I argued in September, defense forward is best read to encompass