下面是小编为大家整理的建立现代军队:部队符合地缘政,治现实,供大家参考。
Contents
Preface
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
1 Ex ecutive
Summary
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
2 Introduction
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
3
Threat
Inflation
and
Its
Consequences
���������������������������������������������������������������������������
5
A
R estraint-Focused
S trategy �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
6 Budget
Pathologies
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
9
Overseas
Contingency
Operations �������������������������������������������������������������������������������
10 R eprogramming
Funds
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �
11
Building
a Modern
Military
for
R estraint ��������������������������������������������������������������������������
12 Modernizing
the
Joint
Force
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
12 Making
Innovation
a
Priority
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
14 The
Air
Force
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �
15 The
Army ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �
16 The
Navy
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
18 The
Marine
Corps �
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �
21 The
Future
of
S trategic
Deterrence
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������
22
Conclusion:
Building
for
the Future
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������
25 Appendix
I:
Glossary
of
T erms
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
26 Appendix
II:
Summary
of
K ey
Assumptions
and
R ecommendations
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
27 Notes � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
28
Preface
W
hen
we
began
draf ting
this
study of
U .S.
milit ar y
spending
and
force posture,
we
had
no
way
of
kno w - ing
the
tremendous
challenge that
CO VID-19
w ould
pose.
It has
clearest
threats
to
public
safety
and
political
st ability
in
the U nited
St ates
are
v er y
much
evident
and
all
around
us.
Just ho w
demonstrations
of
force
or
foreign
st ability
operations contribute
to
U .S.
national
security
is
par ticularly
question - able
at
a
time
when
a
microscopic
enem y
has
brought
the
wreak ed
hav oc
on
the
econom y .
It has
disrupted
ever y
facet of
American
life.
The
im pact
will
reverberate
for generations. The
global
pandemic—and
the
U .S.
go vernment’s
response to
it—has
threatened
the
liv es
and
liber ties
of
Americans
as well
as
the
U nited
States’
st anding
in
the
w orld.
This
disaster
is
a
call
to
action.
The
threat
posed
by nontraditional
security
challenges,
including
pandemics, climate
change,
and
malicious
disinformation,
should prompt
a
thoroughgoing
reex amination
of
the
strategies, t actics,
and
tools
needed
to
k eep
the
U nited
St ates
safe and
prosperous.
As
of
this
writing
in
late
April
2020,
and
well
before
the full
im pact
of
CO VID-19
is
kno wn,
it
seems
obvious
to
us that
the
U nited
St ates
can
no
longer
justify
spending
mas - siv e
amounts
of
mone y
on
quickly
outdated
and
vulnerable weapons
sy stems,
equipment
that
is
mostly
geared
to
ftght an
enem y
that
might
nev er
materialize.
Mean while,
the
entire
w orld
to
a
st andstill.
This
analy sis
mostly
ex amines
where
the
U .S.
milit ar y was
as
of
December
31 ,
2019,
with
a
few
obser vations from
early
2020.
Where
it
will
be
on
December
31 ,
2020, will
be
guided
by
a
critical
set
of
questions.
The
author s, and
the
entire
team
of
scholar s
in
the
Cato
Institute’s Defense
and
F oreign
Policy
Studies
Depar tment,
intend to
help
frame
those
questions—and
to
answer
as
man y
as possible—o v er
the
coming
year .
Security
politics
will
be
dif ferent
in
the
future,
but
the goal
of
security
policy
hasn’t
changed
and
is
clearly
outlined in
this
repor t :
to
identify
the
most
ef fectiv e
and
ef ftcient means
for advancing
Americans’
safety
and
prosperity .
That ent ails
ending
the
forev er
war s,
terminating
needless
mili - t ar y
spending,
rethinking
the
fundament als
of
strategic
de - terrence,
and
focusing
the
entire
defense
est ablishment
on inno vation
and
adapt ation.
B
Ex ecutive
Summary
udget ar y
and
strategic
inertia
has
im peded the
dev elopment
of
a
U .S.
milit ar y
best
suit - ed
to
deal
with
future
challenges.
Ov er
the past
sev eral
decades,
the
milit ar y
has
repeat - edly
answered
the
call
to
arms
as
American
foreign
policy
privileges
the
use
of
force
o v er
other
instru - ments
of
po wer
and
influence.
The
era
of
near
endless
war has
no w
stretched
into
its
third
decade.
Going
for ward, W ashington
should
realign
national
security
objec tiv es and
motivate
allies
and
par tner s
to
become
more
capable as
America’s
relativ e
milit ar y
advantage
wanes
and
the
fo - cus
inevit ably
turns
to
domestic
priorities,
including
pub - lic
health.
As
policymak er s
transition
from
primacy
and
unilat - eral
milit ar y
dominance,
and
be yond
the
post-9/11
war s in
the
greater
Middle
East,
the
force
must
also
be
reori - ented.
The
defense
est ablishment’s
most
urgent
require - ment
is
prioritization.
The
nation’s
resource
constraints are
real,
and
hard
choices
cannot
be
postponed.
In
par tic - ular ,
all
milit ar y
branches
should
em phasize
inno vation o v er
the
preser vation
of
legacy
sy stems
and
practices. This
will
require
cooperation
from
Congress,
which
must
address
the
budget
pathologies
that
stifle
new
thinking and
k eep
the
P ent agon
lock ed
into
old
way s
of
doing business.
Senior
defense
of ftcials
must
orient
the
future force
around
a
dif ferent
approach
to
po wer
projection, one
less
dependent
on
permanent
for ward
bases,
and
to - ward
a
renewed
focus
on
the
requirements
for strategic deterrence.
The
ser vices
must
also
think
anew
about
ho w to
best
capture
and
use
information.
Despite
recent
challenges
and
setbacks,
most
impor - t antly
the
CO VID-19
outbreak
and
response,
the
U nited St ates
still
enjo y s
man y
advant ages,
including
a
dynamic econom y ,
political
st ability ,
and
fav orable
geograph y . Securing
the
U nited
St ates
from
future
threats
should sust ain
and
build
on
those
advant ages.
R estraining
the im pulse
to
use
force,
im posing
limits
on
milit ar y
spend - ing,
and
relying
more
heavily
on
diplomacy ,
trade,
and cultural
ex change
w ould
reliev e
the
burdens
on
our o v er stressed
milit ar y .
The
ultimate
objectiv e
should be
to
build
an
agile
and
adaptable
milit ar y
that
can
ad - dress
a
range
of
future
challenges
but
is
used
more
judi - ciously
in
the
ser vice
of
vit al
U .S.
interests
and
to
deter att acks
against
the
homeland.
Eric
Gomez
is
director
of
defense
policy
studies;
Christopher
Preble
is
vice
president
for defense
and
foreign
policy
studies;
L auren Sander
is
external
relations
manager
for defense
and
foreign
polic y
studies;
and
Brandon
V aleriano
is
a
senior
fellow
at the
Cato
Institute .
B
“
”
Introduction
uilding
a
modern
milit ar y
requires
a
clear conceptualization
of
the
realities
of
inter - national
conflict
and
tight
alignment with
a
countr y’s
foreign
policy .
Strategic planner s
must
hav e
a
clear-e yed
view
of
both
the
threats
facing
the
countr y
and
the
tools
neces - sary
to
defend
its
vit al
interests.
Planner s
in
the
U nited St ates
should
t ak e
account
of
the
countr y’s
for tunate
cir - cumst ances,
including
its
geograph y ,
dynamic
econom y , and
political
st ability ,
and
recognize
that
maint aining these
advant ages
does
not
require
a
massiv e
milit ar y
ap - paratus
that
is
const antly
activ e
in
nearly
ever y
par t
of the
w orld.
F or
decades,
ho wev er ,
U .S.
national
security
policy has
been
oriented
around
a
milit ar y -centric
approach, variously
called
primacy ,
liberal
hegemon y ,
or
deep
en - gagement.
Primacy
is
based
on
the
idea
that
U .S.
milit ar y po wer
explains
the
absence
of
a
major-po wer
war
since the
end
of
W orld
W ar
II
and
the
attendant
rise
in
pro - ductivity
and
living
st andards.
Har vard
political
scientist Samuel
Huntington
predicted
in
1993,
for ex am ple,
that “a
w orld
without
U .S.
primacy
will
be
a
w orld
with
more violence
and
disorder
and
less
democracy
and
economic gro wth.” 1
F ormer
secretar y
of
st ate
George
Shultz
put
it ev en
more
succinctly
in
the
2016
document ar y
American U m pire :
“If
the
U nited
St ates
steps
back
from
the
histor - ic
role
[it
has]
played
since
W orld
W ar
II,
the
w orld
will come
apar t
at
the
seams.” 2
Such
sentiments
reflect
wh y ,
despite
the
fact
that
the
U nited
St ates
enjo y s
relativ e
safety ,
U .S.
of ftcials
see
only grav e
and
urgent
danger s.
The y
see
an y
challenge
to
U .S. milit ar y
dominance
as
a
threat
to
global
liber ty
and
peace. The
2018
N ational Defense
S tr ategy
(NDS),
for ex am ple,
notes that
the
“central
challenge
to
U .S.
prosperity
and
security is
the
reemergence
of
long-term,
str ategic
com petition
by
.
.
.
revi - sionist
po wers.”
The
goal
then,
according
to
the
NDS,
is to
“remain
the
preeminent
milit ar y
po wer
in
the
w orld.” 3 The
2017
N ational Security
S tr ategy
(NSS)
goes
fur ther ,
not - ing
that
the
“U nited
St ates
must
ret ain
o v ermatch—the
combination
of
capabilities
in
suf ftcient
scale
to
prevent enem y
success
and
to
ensure
America’s
sons
and
daughter s will
nev er
be
in
a
fair
ftght.” 4
And
while
the
U nited
St ates
is
pur por tedly
orient - ing
around
great
po wer
competition
against
China
and Russia,
the
post-9/11
conflicts
grind
on.
The
N ational Defense
A uthorization
Act
(ND AA)
for Fiscal
Y ear
2020 mak es
clear
that
the
P ent agon
en visions
those
conflicts continuing
indeftnitely . 5
T oday’s
U .S.
milit ar y
budget, af ter
adjusti...
推荐访问:建立现代军队:部队符合地缘政 治现实 地缘 军队 部队