Lykke 3 Legged Stool Summary

Lykke advocates a 3-Legged stool approach to determine whether a national strategy has balance. The three legs of the stool are objectives, concepts, and resources. These three legs support a seat, on which our national strategy rests. If the legs are equal, our national security strategy balances comfortably on the stool; however, our national strategy slides off if the legs are unequal. Lykke describes the degree to which the stool leans as “risk” that potentially undermines our nation’s security. President Reagan’s remarks at the 750th Anniversary of Berlin ceremony provide an ideal model for a balanced national security strategy that mitigates risk through decisive application of instruments of power.
Presidents Reagan’s 1987 address

laid out two clearly defined objectives: (1) a peaceful and secure Europe, and (2) a Unified and Free Europe. Objectives, or ends, represent the first leg of the stool. JP 5-0 also requires objectives to demonstrate effective unified action through expression of instruments of national power (DIME). Both of these objectives support the end state of a “Europe free of fear and division,” and require nested unified action to succeed. To support these objectives, Reagan outlined several concepts (ways), and resources (means) to accomplish the objectives. First, to help create a peaceful and secure Europe, the US will limit the growth of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and deter Soviet aggression through US power projection in Europe. Further, to enable a unified and free Europe, the US plans to develop greater economic ties between East and West Germany by expanding trade and travel opportunities, while calling for tariff reductions. Simultaneously, the US intends to promote and foster the concept of a unified Germany to the international community. Yet, none of this can happen without the resources, or means, to execute the strategy. To limit WMD growth and deter Russian aggression, the US plans to reduce nuclear and chemical weapons arsenals, while introducing additional Pershing II missiles and B1 Bombers to Europe. Economically, the US will promote unification by providing funds for an international airport, and US sponsorship to numerous athletic programs, leading to a future Berlin Olympic Games.
Nevertheless, to discern the true balance of a strategy, we must identify inherent risks threatening to tip Lykke’s stool; and, whether the strategy mitigates said risk through other instruments of power. Although decisive, Reagan’s speech does identify some areas of concern. First, the amount of military resources moving into the European theater could initiate a reciprocating response from the Russians. Additionally, the infringing nature of the STI could signal US intentions to militarize space, and consequentially reduce the effects of Soviet nuclear power. Economically, the enormous cost of the STI could limit spending on US power projection throughout the theater. Finally, from an information perspective, the provocative language and tone used in the speech could actually strengthen Russian resolve against removing the Berlin Wall.
Generally, the US strategy mitigates several of these possible risks by offering continued emphasis and commitment to reducing weapons stockpiles. Furthermore, we assure our NATO allies of our steadfast protection through participation with Allied Multinational Force (AMF) Land, and encouraging economic and friendly partnerships. Conspicuously, the speech reveals little about any new or direct diplomatic efforts between Russian and US leaders of state. President Reagan’s tendency toward diplomacy through strength likely led to this omission, with hopes that Russia would return to the negotiating table as a means to survive.
In Conclusion, the Brandenburg Gate speech showed a balanced approach to a strong and decisive US strategy. Although not without risk, especially in the area of diplomacy, the US strategy contained adequate mitigation through measured application of concepts and resources. The combination of US power projection, strength, and informational prowess reassured our allies, and set conditions for a Europe free of fear and division.