The Patriot Files Forums  

Go Back   The Patriot Files Forums > Military News > General

Post New Thread  Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-19-2018, 08:46 AM
Boats's Avatar
Boats Boats is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sauk Village, IL
Posts: 21,784
Arrow Mattis: Pentagon Shifting Focus to Great Power Competition — ‘Not Terrorism’

Mattis: Pentagon Shifting Focus to Great Power Competition — ‘Not Terrorism’
By; Kevin Baron - Exc Editor 1-19-18 10:20 AM
RE: http://www.defenseone.com/politics/2...rorism/145305/

The first national defense strategy in 10 years puts on paper what Mattis, McMaster have signaled for months: the U.S. is refocused on China and Russia.

The Trump administration’s long-awaited National Defense Strategy declares a decisive shift in America’s security priorities, away from the age of ISIS-level terrorism and toward a return to great-power competition with regional giants China and Russia. This shift, Pentagon planners say, will require a “more lethal, resilient, and rapidly innovating” military that can regain the overwhelming advantage the United States once held over those rivals and lesser adversaries such as Iran and North Korea.

The NDS is the military-specific follow-up to the White House’s National Security Strategy, released in December. The 11-page unclassified version released to reporters on Thursday lays out the world’s threats as the Trump administration sees them. Compared to previous administrations’ strategy documents, the new one focuses far more on reacting to those threats, and far less on what American defense leaders want the world to look like afterwards

“Today, America’s military reclaims an era of strategic purpose, alert to the realities of a changing world,” said Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, according to the prepared remarks of his speech on Friday morning. “We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists, but great power competition—not terrorism—is now the primary focus of U.S. national security,”

Anyone who has heard Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster speak in recent months will recognize the national security adviser’s voice in Mattis’s words and the NDS.

Mattis and his team broke down their vision into three bold subheads to show the Pentagon’s priorities: the strategic environment, strengthening alliances, and the never-ending effort to reform Pentagon’s technology and weapons development and buying processes.

The strategy’s attention to alliances will draw praise from foreign political and military leaders who still wonder about the American commitment to global security arrangements. Recall, as U.S. allies do, that Trump in his presidential campaign disparaged alliances and promised an “America First” foreign policy. For much of Trump’s first year, Mattis and leaders like Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joseph Dunford had to reassure NATO leaders that the U.S. would live up to its treaty obligations to defend the other alliance members.

The document lays out the world’s threats and challenges to the U.S., as military leaders see it. To wit: China’s rapidly modernized its force to beat U.S. weapons and challenge the U.S. economically. Russia wants “to shatter” NATO. The entire international order is “resilient, but weakening,” it warns. North Korea and other rogue states are causing mischief to destabilize their regions. There is a technology race the U.S. is not winning, or not leading as it used to, in many areas. And there is a strategic game the U.S. has not been playing as all this change occurred.

Notably, the document limns Russia’s use of technology to subvert elections in George, Crimea, and eastern Ukraine. It makes no mention of Russian interference in Trump’s own election.

What’s unclear is just how different these views are from the ones Pentagon leaders held last week or last year, before Trump’s team arrived. On Thursday, Pentagon officials called reporters in to speak with Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy & Force Development Elbridge Colby, but he declined to answer any questions about how the strategy would affect the budget; or what new weapons the new strategy would require; or what the shift means for operations across Africa, where the U.S. is involved in daily hot wars. Colby insisted that because Pentagon leaders had gone through the exercise to produce their strategy, it was “already bearing fruit.” He was asked if could provide examples.

“No, I don’t think so,” he replied.

Mattis, in his Friday speech, summarized the summary and noted the attention to big-power competition. He was notably quiet about the spread of violent extremism and terrorism, the things that have largely occupied the Pentagon since 2001. So now we have a strategy. Next, Washington — and its global military partners and the defense industry — will wait to see how this strategy translates into the one document that matters most: the president’s fiscal 2019 budget request.

Kevin Baron is the founding executive editor of Defense One. Baron has lived in Washington for 20 years, covering international affairs, the military, the Pentagon, Congress, and politics for Foreign Policy, National Journal, Stars and Stripes, and the Boston Globe, where he ran investigative.
__________________
Boats

O Almighty Lord God, who neither slumberest nor sleepest; Protect and assist, we beseech thee, all those who at home or abroad, by land, by sea, or in the air, are serving this country, that they, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore in all perils; and being filled with wisdom and girded with strength, may do their duty to thy honour and glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

"IN GOD WE TRUST"
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 01-19-2018, 02:41 PM
Boats's Avatar
Boats Boats is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sauk Village, IL
Posts: 21,784
Arrow The reviews are in: Here's what experts are saying about Jim Mattis' new strategy

The reviews are in: Here's what experts are saying about Jim Mattis' new strategy
by Jamie McIntyre | Jan 19, 2018, 5:13 PM
RE: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/th...rticle/2646506

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis released the new National Defense Strategy on Friday, a mostly classified document with a public portion that moves away from anti-terrorism as the top mission and focuses on peer competitors Russia and China.

“We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists that we are engaged in today, but great power competition — not terrorism — is now the primary focus of U.S. national security,” Mattis said while pointing out declines during the previous administration. “Our competitive edge in every domain of warfare — air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace — is eroding."

Top national security experts offered their initial takes on the strategy Friday afternoon.

Tom Spoehr

“The National Defense Strategy released today by Secretary Mattis is extraordinarily significant in a number of ways, and there is much to like in it. It is candid in describing the potential adversaries the U.S. faces, as well as the current state of the U.S. military. It presents new, refreshing ways of thinking, such as the concept of presenting potential adversaries with challenges and dilemmas coming from unexpected directions, and reforming a broken acquisition and modernization apparatus. It is clearly the product of substantive discussion and difficult decisions. The document is not perfect, however. It fails to embrace a strategy which calls for the United States to simultaneously engage in two major conflicts successfully, and does not heavily emphasize the need to rebuild the size of the military.”

— Spoehr is director of the Center for National Defense at the Heritage Foundation.

Anthony Cordesman

“The good news is that the document stresses real threats and the value of real alliances and strategic partners. The bad news is that it is filled with buzzwords and vague goals, has no specifics, no plans, and no costs. The earlier National Security Strategy at least has priorities. This document stops at good intentions, and we will have to wait for the FY2019 budget submission to get any idea of what is actually going to be done — if anything — even one year in the future.

— Cordesman is the Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Mackenzie Eaglen

“It is both a departure from previous administrations, including President Obama, and strikingly similar. The departure is mostly through the ‘ends,’ and the similarities are the ‘ways’ of the new strategy. The last administration did not explicitly prioritize among the five challenges of China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and terrorism. The new strategy clearly puts China as first among equals in the threat prioritization list. In reality, however, I suspect this team — like the last with its pivot to Asia — will attempt to break out of the 'tyranny of the now' but will wind up spending the majority of time on current operations, including Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and North Korea.”

— Eaglen is a resident fellow at the Marilyn Ware Center for Security Studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

Dave Deptula

“It’s a refreshingly honest appraisal of military ends, ways, and means — and the need to match all three. I offer a couple of thoughts that hopefully will refine it during execution. First, ‘Lethality’ is not the goal — effectiveness is. Lethality is an ‘input’ measure — 'effectiveness' is an output measure, and may be significantly enhanced by means other than lethality. Second, missing is the explicit mention of the need to be equipped, modernized, and ready to fight and win more than one major theater war simultaneously. In order to be able to: deter conflict; dissuade destabilizing adventurism by potential adversaries; and accomplish all the other valid objectives laid out in the document, our military requires clear and specific resource objectives that are explicit. Otherwise, regardless of the fine prose and rhetoric on recouping strength in the face of expanding threats, Congress will continue down the road of allowing arbitrary defense budgets drive the defense strategy vice the other way around.”

— Deptula is dean of the Mitchell Institute of Aerospace Power Studies.

Todd Harrison

“It’s great to see talent management and personnel reform highlighted as a priority in the strategy, but the key will be to empower the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to pursue aggressive reform, and then back him up when the bureaucracy objects. It is a bit disappointing not to see any quantitative statements about force levels and budget requirements, but it’s not surprising.”

— Harrison is the director of Defense Budget Analysis at Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Lawrence Korb

"Three things. One, the United States is not losing the technological ace. We are still way ahead of China and Russia. Two, the fact of the matter is this administration has undermined the liberal international order by not being as involved as we used to be, so to the extent it’s not working, I think it's our own fault. Number three, they ought to take a look at what Gen. David Petraeus and Michael O’Hanlon wrote in Foreign Affairs. The state of our military is awesome.

— Korb is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.

Mark Cancian

“It charts a clear direction and reflects Mattis’ personal views, so it will have real effect. The challenge will be getting the money to implement such an ambitious strategy and enough relief from day-to-day commitments to focus forces and programs on the long-term threat from China and Russia.”

Cancian is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies' International Security Program
__________________
Boats

O Almighty Lord God, who neither slumberest nor sleepest; Protect and assist, we beseech thee, all those who at home or abroad, by land, by sea, or in the air, are serving this country, that they, being armed with thy defence, may be preserved evermore in all perils; and being filled with wisdom and girded with strength, may do their duty to thy honour and glory; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

"IN GOD WE TRUST"
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.