Establishing a Dedicated Cyber Force: A Strategic Initiative

Introduction of the Commission

The U.S. military is taking significant steps toward the establishment of an independent Cyber Force, evidenced by the formation of a new commission aimed at shaping this vision. This initiative, spearheaded by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in collaboration with the Cyber Solarium Commission 2.0 at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, seeks to address critical gaps in the nation’s cyber readiness.

Historical Context and Congressional Action

Historically, discussions surrounding the creation of a dedicated cyber service have emerged periodically. However, recent years have seen intensified calls for action. In response, Congress has begun to tackle identified deficiencies in military cyber capabilities through various analyses and proposals. For instance, the fiscal year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) initially required a study to explore alternative organizational structures for military cyber operations, including a Cyber Force. Notably, this requirement represented a diluted approach compared to previous drafts that suggested more substantive changes.

Commission Objectives

Diverging from congressional mandates to assess the effectiveness of a Cyber Force, this new commission will focus on foundational constructs necessary for establishing such an entity. Key areas of examination will include:

• Organizational Structure: Defining how a Cyber Force would be integrated within the existing military framework.
• Core Functions: Identifying essential missions and operations that this specialized force would undertake.
• Roles and Responsibilities: Clarifying command and operational authorities to facilitate effective execution of cyber missions.

Currently, U.S. Cyber Command (Cybercom) relies on service branches to deliver cyber mission force teams, creating challenges related to force generation and operational readiness. Concerns have been raised regarding the prioritization of cyber forces by these branches, as they are ultimately subsumed under Cybercom’s command.

Readiness Issues and Workforce Implications

The military’s approach to cyber operations has resulted in persistent effectiveness challenges. Each service branch operates with distinct cultures, rotation systems, and compensation structures, leading to inconsistency in how personnel within joint cyber roles are managed and valued.

• Key Concerns:
  • Inadequate prioritization of cyber missions within service branches.
  • Disparities in training and support for cyber personnel.
  • Sustained readiness problems exacerbated by the evolving threat landscape.

As articulated in a commission press release, “Given the well-documented shortcomings in current force generation and readiness models, momentum is building for a dedicated Cyber Force.”

Composition of the Commission

The commission comprises a diverse group of experts, including former military cyber commanders, service chiefs responsible for manpower and training, academic scholars, congressional staff, and civilian cyber authorities. The leadership team features notable figures such as:

• Josh Stiefel: Former professional staffer on the House Armed Services Committee.
• Ed Cardon: Former commander of Army Cyber Command, guiding the commission’s focus on implementation strategies.

Additional distinguished members include Michael Sulmeyer, the initial Assistant Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, and Mike Gilday, the former Chief of Naval Operations. Their collective expertise positions the commission to effectively navigate the complexities of establishing a Cyber Force.

Strategic Implementation Planning

The commission aims to proactively address potential decisions to create a Cyber Force, emphasizing the importance of thoughtful implementation planning. As Cardon noted, “The most consequential phase begins after a decision is made—implementation. This project invests in planning upfront to reduce downstream risk.”

Cybercom has embarked on modernization efforts to enhance its command capabilities. Recently granted service-like authorities, Cybercom now possesses oversight of offensive and defensive budgets, acquisition authorities, and training requirements. Critics, however, argue that the command requires additional time to fully leverage these new capabilities.

Looking Ahead

The Cybercom 2.0 initiative, recently introduced, aims to strategically reposition the command for contemporary challenges. This holistic examination will serve as a critical update, ensuring that the military is equipped to mitigate sophisticated cyber threats that have evolved since Cybercom’s inception over a decade ago.

Proponents of a dedicated Cyber Force contend that existing reforms may not sufficiently address the operational shortfalls. The commission, set to officially launch on September 16, is tasked with delivering actionable recommendations to policymakers, setting the stage for significant advancements in military cyber capabilities.

In summary, this initiative marks a pivotal moment in U.S. cyber defense strategy, reflecting growing recognition of the need for a dedicated force capable of addressing the unique challenges of the cyber domain. As the commission progresses, its outcomes will play a crucial role in shaping the future of military cyber operations.