No country yet has been able to develop precision-guided sanctions that achieve the desired affects without collateral damage and some fratricide. That imaginary debate that Mr. Freedman described in his book among military, financial and economic trade advisors continues in the government of the United States and continues in governments around the world to sort out what's effective, what works and what doesn't. Today, the vast majority of military communications ride on commercial circuits. As in the commercial sector, the armed forces that better exploit information technology are the ones that have the competitive edge. Now this trend of dual use technology will affect the way we think about technology transfer, and that's been a major issue in the United States, particularly since the publication last year of the Cox Report.
Many technologies now are dual use.
Knowledge content is becoming more and more important in the military and military systems as it is in commercial products. We need to update our thinking to reflect this reality, to figure out how to protect military technology while not needlessly restricting the spread of commercial technology, which is in the benefit of all. We have some thinking to do and some work to do on this subject in the United States and elsewhere. We are increasingly in an environment where both sides in an armed conflict are using the same systems to conduct their operations. Neither side can afford to degrade the other without thinking about degrading their own operations.