Industry Studies Group Papers

The Industry Studies Group Paper provides a current analysis of the domestic and international industry capability to support the 2022 NSS and NDS, and government-private sector interactions that impact the national innovation and defense industrial base. Students demonstrate the ability to evaluate international industry that supports the national innovation and defense industrial bases; derive fact-based, analytical, and resource-informed policy recommendations; and communicate them in a compelling fashion. Students develop actionable and resource-informed policy recommendations to strengthen the national innovation and defense industrial bases.

The Antonelli Award

Major General Theodore Antonelli Award for Research & Writing Excellence, was established in 1993 by the ICAF/Eisenhower School Alumni Association. Major General Antonelli served in North Africa and Italy during World War II as well as later in Vietnam. He later became the highly regarded 13th commandant of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, from 1975 to 1978. This award recognizes the Industry Study Group Report that best reflects the standards of analytical excellence expected of the Industry Study Program and all Eisenhower School graduates. Apply the filter "Antonelli Award" to see each year's winning papers at the bottom of this page.

Featured Papers

Antonelli Award | Oct. 28, 2025

All Ahead Full: Revitalizing the U.S. Maritime Industrial Base

2025 Antonelli Award Winner-The United States has long depended on maritime power to safeguard national interests, drive economic growth, and maintain global influence. Central to this capability is the Maritime Industrial Base, a complex ecosystem

Antonelli Award | May 31, 2024

America Can Afford Survival A Capable U.S. Nuclear Security Enterprise i...

2024 Antonelli Award Winner: Great Power Competition (GPC) with two nuclear peers/near-peers is driving the United States to confront the realities of an aging nuclear weapons stockpile and production infrastructure, shrinking manufacturing base, and

Antonelli Award | May 30, 2023

Transforming the Defense Space Architecture with the Tools of the U.S. F...

2023 Antonelli Award Winner: The asymmetric advantage the United States has long enjoyed in space diminishes as adversaries threaten the space system architecture underlying that advantage. The U.S. space system architecture depends on large,

Filtered Returns

Results:
Archive: 2021

Aircraft (Formerly Air Domain) Aug. 15, 2021

Modernizing the 2030 Future Force For Great Power Combat

The dawn of the 21st century presented America with a unipolar world free from large-scale competition with great powers. September 11, 2001, forever changed the world and shifted America's focus, significantly impacting the United States’ National Defense Strategy. This dramatic shift in focus embroiled America into a decades-long counter-insurgency regional conflict in the Middle East and Central Asia. The post 9/11 emphasis on non-state actors and unconventional warfare drove new requirements centered on small-scale regional conflict, reducing resourcing and acquisitions programs needed to compete in Great Power Combat. Twenty years later, the United States is experiencing a global shift in strategic competition as Russia and China grapple with expanding their spheres of influence. It is now clear the world is entering an era of multipolar Great Power Competition. America is facing a different world, containing multiple peer competitors striving to gain a worldwide strategic advantage. Moreover, Russia and China's advanced military modernization programs are rapidly reducing the technical and military superiority the U.S. has enjoyed over the past several decades. As a result, America must refocus on Great Power Competition to ensure the military is ready and resourced to fight tonight while developing a future force for 2030. The 2030 force drives new resourcing requirements to meet the challenges of this complex global security environment.1 The return to Great Power Competition presents the United States with an increasingly lethal and disruptive battlefield, across multiple domains with ever-increasing speed and reach of forces that render long-standing forward “sanctuary” bases vulnerable.2 This new paradigm obliges America to preserve its “fight tonight” force while modernizing and resourcing a future 2030 force capable of high-end, near-peer conflict and long-range strike in a contested and degraded operational battlespace.

Electromagnetic Warfare (Formerly Electronic Warfare) Aug. 10, 2021

Electronic Warfare

The U.S. military faces an inflection point in how it will develop, resource and field the capabilities it needs to effectively control electromagnetic spectrum operations (EMSO) in this era of great power competition (GPC). Notwithstanding the September 2020 release of its Electromagnetic Spectrum Superiority Strategy (ESSS) and other guidance, the U.S. remains challenged in integrating government, industry, academic, and foreign partner electromagnetic warfare (EW) efforts to achieve its national security objectives.1 Disparate approaches have yielded significant EW advances among the military services, which have capitalized on research and development (R&D) within the field. However, to maximize its capabilities and counter adversaries’ ability to use the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS) to the nation’s detriment, the Department of Defense (DoD) must empower and resource a strategically positioned change agent to implement and integrate EW efforts. This agent must address doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities and policy (DOTMLPF-P), leveraging and building upon its strengths, and those of its strategic stakeholders and partners.

Strategic Materials May 31, 2021

Securing Minerals Critical to National Security

2021 Antonelli Award Winner: The fragility of today’s critical minerals global value chain poses an untenable risk to the national security and economic prosperity of the United States. With domestic supply lagging after decades of underinvestment and inattention, the United States relies heavily upon foreign sources for dozens of mineral products that form the fabric of the U.S. economy and defense industrial base. While some of these foreign sources are steadfast U.S. allies, other less dependable foreign suppliers like China or politically unstable states represent serious supply vulnerabilities and risks. Exacerbating the situation, global trends in manufacturing and green technology portend higher future demand and heated competition for these vital materials. On its current path, the United States is not well-positioned to compete successfully for these essential components.