This chapter discusses the strategic context in which neuroweapons may be employed in the future by looking at the current spectrum of conflict. During the Cold War, the US military defined the spectrum of conflict in a straightforward way according to risk and cost involved for engaging in conflict from very low intensity conflict (terrorism) to very high intensity conflict (strategic NBC war), with guerrilla war, civil war, conventional war and theatre NBC war in the middle to high intensity range (US DoD, 1986: 4). The idea of a spectrum of conflict has undergone notable changes after the end of the Cold War. A paper by the Heritage Foundation divides the new spectrum of conflict as follows from ‘Gray Zone/ Ambiguous’ to ‘Irregular/ Terrorism’ to ‘Hybrid’ to ‘Limited Conventional’ to ‘Theater Conventional’ at the high end (Hoffman, 2015: 29).