The research concluded that Russia’s and China’s sophisticated long-range sensor and weapon networks along their borders and in occupied lands create a “strategic problem” for the United States, said Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments who participated in the wargame.

A great example comes from a 2011 report from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary [Assessments], which shows it wouldn’t take much strategic sophistication to beat U.S. missile defenses—just some basic math

Former Air Force pilot Mark Gunzinger and Bryan Clark of the Center of Strategic and Budgetary Assessment wrote in a 2015 report, “96% of all American Precision Guided Munitions (PGM) are direct attack weapons with ranges under 50 nm.” 

“It is unclear whether a high atmospheric nuclear explosion would cause a significant EMP effect at lower altitudes and whether North Korea could execute such an attack without also affecting their own capabilities.”

Mark “Gonzo” Gunzinger, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, discusses “Force Planning for the Era of Great Power Competition,” a new CSBA report he co-authored with Bryan Clark, David Johnson and Jesse Sloman, during an October 2017 interview with the Defense & Aerospace Report. The interview was conducted at the think tank’s Washington headquarters.

“Force Planning For The Era Of Great Power Competition,” Mark Gunzinger, Bryan Clark, David Johnson, Jesse Sloman, Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2017: The authors, researchers with the center, recommend that the U.S. Department of Defense, as part of a new National Defense Strategy, adopt force planning constructs (FPC) geared toward countering the changing military strategies of Russia and China. “DOD’s planning scenarios should address long-term competitions with China and Russia that include gray zone operations and other actions in peacetime that are intended to undermine U.S. influence in their regions,” the authors write.