How does the National Defense Strategy define competition below armed conflict, and what are the implications for military planning?

• A. Competition is purely economic.
• B. Episodic competition across one domain.
• C. Persistent competition across domains shaping adversaries' choices; planning emphasizes scalable, persistent presence and adaptable forces.
• D. Competition is never considered in force development.

Answer: (C)

Competition below armed conflict is a sustained, multi-domain contest that shapes how adversaries decide to act and whether they escalate. The National Defense Strategy treats this environment as ongoing and pervasive across military, cyber, space, information, economic, and diplomatic domains, not a fleeting phase before war. Because competition unfolds over time and across instruments of power, military planning must assume it will persist even in peacetime or crisis, and deterrence must work across a range of scenarios and axes of competition.

Implications for planning flow from that understanding: forces and posture must be capable of scalable, persistent presence and rapid adaptation, with teams and capabilities that can be tailored to different theaters and threats. This means emphasizing forward presence and rotational deployments, modular and interoperable forces, and the ability to deter, contest, and respond across domains without always relying on full-scale war. Planning also requires strong alliances and unity of effort with other instruments of national power, robust intelligence and readiness to anticipate adversaries’ moves, and investment in enabling capabilities such as cyber, space, and electronic warfare. In short, military design and modernisation are oriented toward sustaining influence, denying advantages, and adapting quickly as competitors operate below the threshold of armed conflict.