The Joint Force of tomorrow must be capable of defending against rapidly developing and highly lethal security trends of unprecedented scale. Chief among these trends are cyber integration, diffusion of power, and proliferation of lethal technology, which collectively will challenge our force development significantly. Unfortunately, these threats come at a time of unprecedented fiscal austerity requiring extreme measures to restore economic wellbeing. Joint Force 2025 must effectively embrace technology and capitalize on global integration to defeat emerging threats while contracting to abide within mandated budget reductions. National strategic leaders have outlined the current security assessment and established a framework of capabilities that must reside in Joint Force 2025 to meet projected threats. These capabilities include the application of cyberspace technology that recognizes both its enhanced capabilities and inherent risks. Global integration across services and a network of partner nations and non-state entities will serve as both a force multiplier and ensure credibility. Finally, Joint Force 2025 must contain an indisputable force projection capability that adds tooth to all elements of national power. However, this complete transformation must occur in a way that maximizes budget …show more content…
In the post Afghanistan period, the Army will focus on regaining readiness to support the full range of combat operations and would be a key part of any large scale offensive or security requirement. A rebalance within the active and reserve components will achieve significant cost savings by placing a large percentage of the forces only necessary for extended ground campaigns in the reserves. The Army is essential to any large-scale force projection operation and functions as an integrated force with partners and allies
Furthermore, in a few years there will be ten times the amount of internet connected devices as there are humans on the planet. This means that anywhere where you are, you are going to be observable (AUSA 2016, 13). In the future, leaders will not need to be flexible because higher headquarters can always monitor and give guidance for every tactical move. Thus, leaders will not need to think critically which will hinder their adaptability. General Milley counters his argument through his statement that in the future, “there is a high probability, a certainty really, that anything electronic will come under cyber or EW attack, and that we will be operating routinely in a partially or significantly degraded environment” (AUSA 2016, 17). As technology progresses, internet connected devices will become ISR platforms but the technology to counter that will also exist. If this happens, it will remain critical that units in the future remain extremely flexible and able to adapt to their operational
The ability to disable an enemy force without ever having to fire a single shot – that is the new direction of warfare. Bruce Berkowitz’s The New Face of War: How War Will Be Fought in the 21st Century is yet another book that examines future warfare, not what causes countries will be fighting over or even who will be fighting, but the form of the conflict. Reading his work cover to cover, the message is clear: “To win wars today, you must first win the information war. ” This book is a must-read for anyone working in intelligence or in a position of power that influences our government spending on national security or military operations, because it articulates the importance of information technology on warfare, presents examples of how information has shaped conflicts throughout history, and provides invaluable lessons to leaders at all levels.
...ccomplishments. As the years progress, just as they have in the past, so will military technology. Not more 80 years ago, the United States was just learning how to se machine guns. Not more than 60 years ago, the United States was just learning how to use tanks and artillery. Nowadays, the US military has become the leading war machine in all aspects of warfare including weapons, computer technology and biological as well as chemical warfare. God only knows what advancements are to come our way.
The 2015 National Security Strategy (NSS), the 2015 National Defense Strategy (NDS), and the Army Operating Concept (AOC) collectively agree that the United States cannot solve strategic problems alone. All of these documents discuss, in their opening paragraphs, the importance
In addition to strategic deployment, the defense budget should be reformed to allocate more money towards specialized, agile units and counterterrorism efforts. By doing so, the United States would be more efficient in fighting the small terrorist groups that pose such a large threat today. In his article supporting defense reform, Berger points out, “many analysts have pointed out in the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks, future threats to the United States are likely to come from relatively small terrorist organizations and not from state entities which could not realistically defeat us.” The most prevalent danger regarding military within the continental U.S. is not an invasion by another nation, but rather unexpected acts of terror.
1. The positive outcomes of having a total force far outweigh the negative impacts. This paper will talk about the effectiveness and efficiency of the total force, the overuse of the reserve component and its effects on members of the force, and how civilian trained reserve personnel add diversity and a well-rounded force.
The U.S. defense budget is already quite large. In 2015, the U.S. spent $610 billion on the military, making its defense budget the largest in the world by a wide margin. The U.S. spent more on defense than the $601 billion that China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, France, Britain, and India—the countries with the next seven largest military budgets—spent combined. If we limit our comparison to America’s NATO allies, the numbers still look quite stark. The U.S. alone accounts for a whopping 75 percent of the military spending by all of NATO’s 28 current members. Under the two-year budget agreement that the Obama administration hammered out with the Republican leadership in Congress, baseline defense spending will be $548 billion while spending on Overseas Contingency Operations will be $59 billion, for a grand total of $607 billion. That’s hardly chump change. But it’s not
The United States of America is one of the most powerful countries in the world. This power is a direct result of the careful planning of policies that will govern the direction that the country goes. An effective defense policy is very important in assuring the safety of the citizens in the country and assuring a commanding position within the international community. In accordance, it is important that the United States should adopt a defense policy, so that they seek to form a coalition of strong allies in which they are the sole superpower so that in essence, they may control the whole international community. Before being able to actively pursue this defense policy and act powerful, we must make ourselves powerful. In the process of making ourselves powerful, we must carefully examine the existing threats to the country and this power that we want to have.
The strategy of the United States concentrates on the next five to ten years in order to protect the national interests around the global. With the increase in globalization, the ability to have a presence in all regions becomes important to national security and the United States accomplishes this by building and strengthening alliances. This promotes stability and security in the region as well. Defending the home front is the most important objective of the NSS and in order to accomplish that, continued global power projection is necessary. The NDS and NMS both seek to accomplish this through a thorough assessment of the strategic environment and applying either diplomatic or military power as necessary. The military serves as a major deterrent to potential adversaries, because of the United States’ military capability.
As we transition from subjective training to objective, it is critical to understand the emphasis on training has not changed, just the language. Commander will continue to focus on battle focus training developed by long- range, short- range and near- term planning. The Sustainable Readiness Model (SRM) is the Army’s newest system for prioritizing resources for units on a 5-year cycle based on the level of readiness they must achieve. Each year of the cycle has established Personnel (P), Sustain (S) and Readiness (R) Aim Points on the Unit Status Report (USR). The SRM seeks to stabilize units in a “band of excellence,” even following their READY year, maintaining the highest readiness level instead of automatically downgrading their readiness to a C4 level regardless of whether they deployed. Guidelines in the Prepare Year (PY) found in the SRM will assist Commanders at every level on key training events they will need to focus on for that particular
USCYBERCOM unifies the command of the cyberspace efforts and units of the United States military. The United States Department of Defense also has outlined the principles that form its cyber defense strategy, building and maintaining ready forces and capabilities to conduct cyberspace operations, defend the DoD information network, secure DoD data, and mitigate risks to DoD missions. Be prepared to defend the U.S. homeland and U.S. vital interests from disruptive or destructive cyberattacks of significant consequence. Build and maintain viable cyber options and plan to use those options to control conflict escalation and to shape the conflict environments at all stages. Build and maintain robust international alliances and partnerships to deter shared threats and increase international security and stability. The five pillars of cyber security, confidentiality, integrity, availability, non-repudiation, and authentication. Protecting information from disclosure to unauthorized individuals, systems or entities, Protect information, systems, and services from unauthorized modification or destruction, Timely, reliable access to data and information services by authorized users, the ability to correlate a recorded action with its originating individual or entity, and the ability to verify the identity of an individual or entity
Obviously when talking about global security, there needs to actually be the security aspect of it. Such aspect comes from the military itself. The military’s role is to protect both the people of the public and private sectors. Due to this, the military can play the most important role of the three. With being the most important of the three, there also comes the time that needs to be put within it to make sure that this part can function at its maximum potential. Allowing the military to function at its maximum potential allows the public and private to feel at ease with their safety. This does not only constitute for the United States, but all over the entire
Clausewitz defines war as an “act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” The nature of war is enduring yet the character of war changes over time. Current US strategic guidance is advancing the point of view that since the character of war has changed to focus on irregular wars then the US military should prepare for a future of irregular wars. This shift in focus forgets that the nature of war is enduring and in order to be successful, we must prepare for all types of conflict. This paper will define the types of conflict and the likelihood of each followed by a discussion of US strategic guidance and ending with an analysis of the training resources and force structure requirements needed to achieve success for all types of conflict.
Unequivocally speaking, the threat of a cyber-attack has become one of the most critical domestic and national security challenges we face as a nation today. Infrastructures supporting government operations are ...