The Pursuit of Full Spectrum Dominance
In the post below, Johan Lau Munkholm reflects on his article, “The Pursuit of Full Spectrum Dominance: The Archives of the NSA,” which appeared in a recent issue of Surveillance & Society.
///
In late May, US Secretary of Defense, Mark T. Esper, emphatically encouraged the mobilization of the National Guard to “dominate the battlespace.” The battlespace in question was the numerous cities in the US where protests materialized following the murder of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and countless other black Americans by local law enforcement. The federal government’s numerous references to protesters as terrorists further reinforces a rhetoric that establishes US territory as a war zone that justifies military intervention and dominance of US citizens. As harrowing as the prospect of violent military intervention against political demonstrations is, it is not at all surprising that the federal government would utilize such means to quell protests that interrupt the oppressive state of normality and offer a different political course. Instead, it reflects a military logic that has been cultivated within the national security apparatus for decades.
As harrowing as the prospect of violent military intervention against political demonstrations is, it is not at all surprising that the federal government would utilize such means to quell protests that interrupt the oppressive state of normality and offer a different political course.
In my recent contribution to Surveillance & Society, I describe the significance of global military dominance according to the logic of full spectrum dominance, which is a goal articulated by the US Department of Defense for the 21st century. Full spectrum dominance was presented in the document Joint Vision 2020 which outlines a readjustment of the armed forces in order to sustain US hegemony in a new global power structure. By unfolding how state power is exercised according to this overarching military logic, which is always in operation, it becomes apparent how vigilantly the entirety of the global territory must be patrolled. This requires the assistance of the US surveillance apparatus represented here by the National Security Agency (NSA) whose incessant information collection and processing is meant to advance an informational edge in the elimination of developing threats.
A key component in the NSA’s surveillance operations is the data center. To offer an understanding of the data center operated by the NSA and what it pertains to, I suggest an interpretation that considers the data center as a novel form of the archive. Insofar as the NSA’s work has to do with monitoring and snuffing out possible future threats to eliminate them in advance, representatives of the organization have consistently reiterated the need to collect and process an overwhelming volume of information to pre-empt future threats. The belief that this is even possible is sustained by the promises of new digital technology that reconfigures the archive and what it can be used for in terms of informational superiority. By stressing the importance of certain fantasies that surround the archive, I indicate a logic of governance that works to manage any and all unpredictable emergences of the future.
[N]othing suggests that the military logic of dominance is reserved for the world outside US borders…
As is becoming plainly obvious, nothing suggests that the military logic of dominance is reserved for the world outside US borders where the US has operated with impunity for decades. To maintain an increasingly fragile status quo based in white supremacy, the US government has reportedly activated the Drug Enforcement Agency and the US Marshals Service to operate digital surveillance technologies called Stingrays to indiscriminately collect information on Black Lives Matter protesters without due process. This reflects that military dominance is sustained by vigilant surveillance. The recent deployment of paramilitary officers from the Department of Homeland Security in Portland, Oregon serves to further illustrate that the extent of possible military dominance knows no formally actionable boundaries in or outside the US. It does, however, remain improbable that the fantasy of full spectrum dominance can be realized. That is a good thing.
