Episode 152 of the Irregular Warfare Podcast grapples with the many definitions of irregular warfare used across the community of interest.

In this episode, our guests discuss why the concept of irregular warfare has resisted a stable definition across decades of changing doctrine, and what that persistent confusion has cost operationally and strategically. We walk through three competing definitional approaches— the maximal, the traditional, and the competition-disruption model — weighing the strengths and weaknesses of each. We close by asking what irregular warfare actually is at its core, and why getting that answer right matters, not just for writers of doctrine, but for practitioners.

The article is here: Fragmented Frontiers: Three Approaches to Understanding Irregular Warfare

Dr. Chris Tripodi is Reader in Irregular Warfare at the Defence Studies Department, King's College London. His research focuses on the forms of knowledge Western militaries use to understand their operational environments, and the complex relationship between counterinsurgency theory and practice.

Eric Robinson is an Associate Director of the Data Science and Technology Group at the RAND Corporation, where his research focuses on special operations, irregular warfare, and gray zone challenges. He is the lead author of RAND's 2023 report Strategic Disruption by Special Operations Forces, which we touch on in today’s episode.

Lieutenant General (ret.) Mike Nagata served for 38 years in the US Army, with 34 years in special operations. Among his many positions of leadership, he served as Commander of US Special Operations Command-Central from 2013 to 2015, and was heavily involved in the first two years of combat operations against the Islamic State.

Alisa Laufer hosts this episode. Please reach out to the Irregular Warfare Podcast team with any questions about the episode or the broader mission of the show.

The Irregular Warfare Podcast is a production of the Irregular Warfare Initiative (IWI). We are a team of volunteers dedicated to bridging the gap between scholars and practitioners to support the community of irregular warfare professionals. IWI generates written and audio content, coordinates events for the IW community, and hosts critical thinkers in the field of irregular warfare as IWI fellows. You can follow and engage with us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, or LinkedIn.

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter for (always free!) access to our written content, upcoming community events, and other resources.

All views expressed in this episode are the personal views of the participants and do not represent those of any government agency or of the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project.

Intro music: “Unsilenced” by Ketsa

Outro music: “Launch” by Ketsa

Episode 151 of the Irregular Warfare Podcast explores how the United States wields power not only through military force, but through dollars, sanctions, export controls, and supply chains. Anchored in Eddie Fishman’s book Chokepoints: American Power in the Age of Economic Warfare, this episode examines the rise of economic statecraft as a central feature of great power competition.

Drawing on the firsthand experiences of former Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and former Deputy National Security Advisor Daleep Singh, the conversation unpacks key concepts such as dollar dominance, sanctions design, and the hidden “chokepoints” embedded within global finance and technology that give the United States asymmetric leverage.

Through case studies on Iran, Russia, and China, the guests assess both the power and the limits of economic warfare. Sanctions can bring adversaries to the negotiating table—but only when aligned with clear political objectives, coalition support, and careful calibration to avoid self-inflicted harm. In the strategic competition with China, export controls on foundational technologies reflect a shift from coercing behavior to preserving relative advantage. The episode ultimately argues that economic tools must be treated with the same rigor as military force: grounded in legitimacy, disciplined in execution, and guided by a coherent doctrine for an era of geo-economic rivalry.