{"workstream_independence":[{"id":"SE","title":"National Strategy Evaluation","type":"evaluation","focus":"How current U.S.-anchored and PRC-centered strategies select, deliver, combine, and adapt the four instruments for declared objectives","intent":"Evaluate strategic coherence, implementation, cross-instrument interaction, response, outcome, cost, durability, and adaptation","question":"Given a predeclared objective, target or recipient, geography, time window, counterfactual, acceptable cost, and persistence threshold, how coherently and effectively did the system combine its available instruments, and what explains the observed result?","unit":"A bounded national strategy, strategic objective, campaign, or phase","imports":"Instrument evidence plus strategy records, authorities, resources, delivered actions, partner and target response, outcomes, cost, and adaptation","outputs":"Objective-bounded strategy, campaign, mechanism, implementation, outcome, and comparative-pathway findings","prohibited_inference":"A strategy-document claim, simultaneous activity, domain position, or capability inventory cannot establish integration or strategic success.","charter_file":"strategy-evaluation.md","analysis_status":"eighteen_cases_fourteen_pathways_and_red_team_complete_private"},{"id":"CCV","title":"Critical Capabilities & Vulnerabilities","type":"international_power_and_strategic_risk","focus":"Which resources, capabilities, relationships, and network positions can be converted into internationally usable state power or leverage, and which dependencies can external actors or exogenous events exploit to constrain state action, options, or stability","intent":"Identify what must be built, accessed, controlled, protected, substituted, restored, or responsibly employed to preserve freedom of action and produce bounded international effects independently of current strategy","question":"What gives a state usable power or leverage in international affairs; through what authority, delivery, and response mechanism is it converted; where can an adversary or exogenous shock disrupt that chain; and when would the resulting loss materially narrow external options, operational performance, coercion resistance, or state stability?","unit":"A source-of-power and conversion chain under a declared international objective, target or recipient, geography, time horizon, and adversarial or exogenous stress","imports":"Instrument evidence plus resource, authority, taskability, conversion, target and partner response, network position, dependency, external control, adversarial access, shock, substitution, recovery, adaptation, and strategic-effect evidence","outputs":"Power-source, conversion, strategic-dependency, vulnerability, advantage, mitigation, bounded-leverage, self-harm, recovery, and warning-indicator findings","prohibited_inference":"Domestic importance, sector size, resource possession, ownership, concentration, technical sophistication, or current strategy emphasis cannot establish internationally usable power, leverage, or strategic vulnerability. A domestic condition enters only through an evidenced mechanism that constrains external action, strategic choice, coercion resistance, or state stability.","charter_file":"critical-capabilities-vulnerabilities.md","analysis_status":"eighteen_cases_ten_focus_findings_twelve_responses_and_red_team_complete_private","architecture_directory":"critical-capabilities"}],"gap_rule":"Neither workstream can establish or strengthen the other's finding; the layer operates only after both inputs are independently supported and retain separate evidence identities.","objective_contract":["actor","declared_objective","target_or_recipient","geography","observation_window","baseline","counterfactual","success_threshold","failure_threshold","acceptable_cost","persistence_checkpoint"],"power_vulnerability_contract":["international_state_option_or_effect","source_of_power_or_leverage","state_access_authority_and_practical_control","conversion_pathway_scale_quality_place_and_time","external_target_partner_recipient_or_system_response","state_option_gain_or_loss_threshold","dependencies_control_hidden_tiers_and_common_mode","adversarial_exploitability_or_exogenous_shock","substitution_within_required_time_and_cost","strategic_functional_recovery","mobilization_throughput_and_persistence","target_partner_firm_market_and_competitor_adaptation","state_stability_mechanism_when_domestic_conditions_are_invoked","own_partner_network_legal_legitimacy_escalation_market_innovation_and_distributional_effects","evidence_rivals_observability_confidence_and_revision"],"aggregation_prohibitions":["A domain position cannot be copied into a cross-instrument conclusion.","Several simultaneous instrument actions do not establish integration without an observed connection mechanism.","An upstream resource, activity, output, commitment, reach measure, or posture cannot inherit a downstream strategic outcome.","A favorable outcome cannot be attributed to statecraft without testing target agency, partner agency, opponent adaptation, background conditions, and rival causes.","Possession of resources, production, technology, relationships, access, centrality, or audiences does not establish internationally usable power without observed state access, conversion, and external effect.","Domestic importance or disruption does not establish strategic vulnerability unless the consequence materially constrains external action, strategic choice, coercion resistance, or state stability.","A deficit on one side cannot establish the other side's advantage.","Missing or classified evidence remains unknown rather than zero.","The absence of war does not by itself establish deterrence, and the end of fighting does not by itself establish conflict termination or durable settlement."],"disclosure":"Independent, internally red-teamed public-source research; not an intelligence assessment, government validation, external peer review, operational target package, or national strategy."}