Independent Task Force Of Former Military Officers And Defense
Experts Calls For New Defense Strategy That Addresses 21st Century
Threats
Says Changes to Improve U.S. Security are Possible Even
Within Budget Constraints
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The
changing global security landscape and worsening fiscal outlook
demand significant adjustments to national security strategy and
budgeting, according to an extensive, year-long study released
today by The Stimson Center: A New US Defense Strategy for a New
Era.
The report is the work of an independent task force of experts –
the "Defense Advisory Committee" – convened by the Stimson Center
to explore the question of US defense planning and spending in
light of looming defense cuts that are part of the Fiscal Cliff.
The diverse committee, which draws on the expertise of 15 former
military officers, defense strategists, and international affairs
experts, including General James
Cartwright, Leslie Gelb, and
Anne-Marie Slaughter, came to a
consensus on how best to approach today's military threats and
priorities (the full committee can be found at stimson.org). In
addition to setting out ten key operating principles that emphasize
greater efficiency and effectiveness throughout the Defense
Department, the report concludes that a successful defense strategy
could be achieved at budget levels significantly lower than
present.
Dr. Barry Blechman, Chairman of
the Committee and Co-Founder of the Stimson Center, explains "The
vast experience and perspectives this committee brought to the
table helped shape a promising new defense strategy, which we call
'Strategic Agility.' It does not dictate a particular force
structure but demonstrates how the US can achieve a better defense
strategy to meet our security needs, while acknowledging the fiscal
crisis facing the country."
The study was funded by a grant from the non-partisan Peter G.
Peterson Foundation, which supports work aimed at addressing the
nation's most pressing long-term budget challenges.
"I am extremely impressed with the level of consensus reached by
this highly experienced and diverse group," said Pete Peterson, Chairman of the Peter G. Peterson
Foundation. "America faces great fiscal challenges, and everything
- even defense - must be on the table as we consider how to get the
nation on a fiscally sustainable path. I'm hopeful that the Defense
Advisory Committee's report can be useful to the President and
Congress as they make critical decisions about defense strategy and
spending."
The Landscape
Before developing its recommendations, the Advisory Committee
examined the current international and domestic environments as
they pertain to defense planning.
International
Threats to US interests are changing rapidly. Russia does not pose, and is unlikely to pose,
the threat it once did. China, though growing in economic and military
might, has a complex relationship with the United States, which offers as much reason
for hope as fear. The US is also ending a decade of
involvement in the Middle East and
South Asia, wars that cost
trillions of dollars and more than 7,000 American lives. At the
same time, civil wars and unstable political situations remain in
the Middle East, Africa, and South
Asia. Terrorist attacks also continue to unsettle these
regions. Still, these threats of instability are ones to be managed
rather than solved through prolonged military engagement.
Operational
US military involvement since the end of the Cold War has
highlighted the nation's comparative military strengths and
weaknesses. The US is unrivaled in its global flexibility and
reach. Its intelligence and reconnaissance assets as well as air,
naval, and ground forces can reach anywhere in the world with
unparalleled speed and power. At the same time, US capabilities to
fight unconventional wars on the ground, to defeat insurgencies, to
stabilize governance, and to ensure security for societies in
distant regions are limited, at best. This is not because of
any deficiencies in, nor malpractices by, the US armed
forces. The task of imposing order, providing good
governance, and inculcating democratic values in foreign,
undeveloped societies riven by internal conflicts is simply too
hard a task, and not one for which military forces are particularly
well-suited.
Fiscal
The US currently faces an unprecedented fiscal crisis driving
reductions in government spending, including defense spending.
These pressures are most clearly visible in the sequester provision
of the Budget Control Act which, if implemented at the start of
2013, would cut the defense budget by ten percent overnight. This
cut would constitute one of the most dramatic defense budget
reductions in history.
Advisory Committee Recommendation: Shift to 'Strategic
Agility'
In light of a rapidly changing global security environment and
rising concern about long-term US debt and deficits, the Defense
Advisory Committee met over the course of a year to examine and
discuss US defense strategy. The result is a new national security
strategy that it calls "Strategic Agility" – designed to strengthen
US military superiority while meeting realistic budgetary
expectations.
The report highlights ten operating principles that emphasize
relying on smaller military units that can be based in the United States and rotated quickly to more
austere bases around the world; rebalancing US forces to focus on
Asia rather than Europe; and strengthening technological and
scientific assets to ensure that the
United States maintains its technological edge against all
other nations. Key recommendations in the report include:
- The US should maintain space, air, and naval forces superior to
those of any potential adversary.
- The US should maintain robust and technologically advanced
special operations forces to counter terrorists and criminal
enterprises, protect US citizens overseas, and for other
contingencies.
- The US should strongly resist being drawn into protracted land
wars. The United States must
maintain competent ground forces as a deterrent, and ground force
deployments may be necessary to fulfill commitments to allies, but
such deployments should be conducted only as part of joint
operations to achieve the rapid defeat of the enemy's forces and
the equally rapid withdrawal of US forces, as was done in the first
Gulf War.
- The United States must
prioritize funding in research and development budgets, especially
basic research in science and technology in pursuit of advanced
military capabilities.
- The US should revise the Cold War nuclear planning assumptions
it still uses, which would allow reductions in the size of nuclear
forces, preferably through a new treaty with Russia. Such
cuts would free resources for the conventional forces actually used
to defend American security.
- The US should implement long-standing proposals to utilize
manpower more efficiently, to reform personnel compensation
systems, and to streamline the system used to acquire equipment,
goods and services.
By taking these steps—obvious steps to most—the United States can free up resources to devote
to defense capabilities that better contribute to US national
security. The US owes a huge debt to all those who have
served in the nation's wars, and particularly to the men and women
who have served repeatedly in Iraq
and Afghanistan. This sacred debt can be honored by
implementing more effective policies that better care for our
service members, even while freeing needed resources.
To read the full report, please visit www.stimson.org
About Stimson
The Stimson Center, a nonprofit institution, has worked to
combine research and analysis with a commitment to fostering
dialogue on improved, pragmatic, and nonpartisan policies. Stimson
researches a variety of issues that focus on reducing the threat of
weapons of mass destruction, building regional security, and
strengthening institutions for international peace and
security. For more information about Stimson and its work,
please visit www.stimson.org.
Members of the Defense Advisory Committee:
- Dr. Barry M. Blechman,
Chair. Co-Founder and Distinguished Fellow,
Stimson
- Gordon Adams, Professor of
International Relations, School of
International Service, American University
- Graham Allison, Douglas Dillon
Professor of Government, Harvard Kennedy
School and Director, Belfer Center for Science and
International Affairs
- Michael J. Bayer, President and
CEO, Dumbarton Strategies
- General B.B. Bell, USA (Ret.), Former Commander UNC / CFC / USFK,
Republic of Korea
- Richard K. Betts, Director,
Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies, Columbia University
- Ambassador Lincoln P. Bloomfield,
Jr., Chairman, Stimson
- Ambassador Richard Burt,
Managing Director, McLarty Associates, Co-Chairman, Global
Zero
- General James Cartwright, USMC
(Ret.), Harold Brown Chair in Defense Policy Studies, Center for
Strategic and International Studies
- Lieutenant General Daniel W.
Christman, USA (Ret.),
Senior Counselor, US Chamber of Commerce
- Lieutenant General David A.
Deptula, USAF (Ret.), Senior Military Scholar, Center for
Character & Leadership Development, United
States Air Force Academy
- Leslie H. Gelb, President
Emeritus and Board Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations
- Jessica T. Mathews, President,
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Admiral Bill Owens, USN (Ret.),
Prometheus Partners
- Anne-Marie Slaughter,
Bert G. Kerstetter '66 University
Professor of Politics and International Affairs, Princeton University
SOURCE Stimson Center