National Security Journal Article: America’s One-War Military Is No Match for Reality
For years, bipartisan defense strategy commissions have sounded the alarm over the readiness of America's armed forces. Their dire warnings have been echoed by the National Defense Strategy Commission, which starkly declared that the U.S. military "lacks both the capabilities and the capacity" to confidently deter and prevail in combat.
The threats the United States faces today are unparalleled since World War II, with a potential for a near-term major war involving global powers like China and Russia.
The Growing Threat from China and Russia
The report emphasizes that China has "outpaced" the U.S., especially in the Western Pacific, while Russia continues its aggressive military investments, particularly highlighted by its ongoing invasion of Ukraine. These developments are not isolated; they are compounded by increasing political and military alignment between China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. This coalition against democracy increases the likelihood of a multi-theater or global war, presenting a scenario where the U.S. might need to defend itself on multiple fronts simultaneously.
A Call to Abandon the One-War Force Sizing Construct
One of the commission's most critical recommendations is to discard the outdated one-war force sizing construct. Instead, it advocates for a "Multiple Theater Force Construct" that can simultaneously address threats in the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East. This recommendation builds upon similar proposals from a decade ago, stressing that the U.S. must maintain a military presence in these regions to deter aggression from powers like Russia and China.
However, the U.S. military has lost valuable time. The Army's active-duty force is the smallest it has been since World War II, the Navy's fleet is half the size it was during the Cold War, and the Air Force's combat aircraft inventory continues to shrink. The report makes it clear that the current military balance, which has maintained peace across these theaters, is no longer sustainable with the smaller, less ready force available today.
The Indo-Pacific: A Region in Peril
Nowhere is the decline in U.S. military readiness more evident than in the Indo-Pacific. Despite a declared "pivot to Asia," the U.S. has done little to increase its combat power in the region, even as China continues to bolster its military capabilities. The absence of a more robust, growing military presence means that any shifting of combat power between theaters will inherently weaken deterrence in other regions, making the U.S. and its allies more vulnerable.
Consensus in Washington: A Three-Theater Force is Necessary
There is a growing consensus in Washington that a three-theater force structure is essential for the U.S. to meet its global security obligations. Prominent figures, including the late Senator John McCain and Senator Roger Wicker, have stressed the need for a military that can simultaneously provide deterrence across multiple theaters. However, this requires a restructuring of military strategy and significant budgetary increases to expand active-duty forces and modernize equipment.
Investing in Deterrence: The Cheapest War is the One We Don’t Fight
The commission's report underscores that strengthening the U.S. military should be seen as an investment in deterrence, not an expense. The myth of a short, decisive war has been shattered by the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Israel, which demonstrate the reality of protracted, high-intensity warfare. The U.S. Navy's operations in the Red Sea, under high operational tempo and strained munitions stocks, further illustrate the challenges of maintaining readiness across multiple theaters.
The urgency to rebuild a three-theater force structure cannot be overstated. The world is not as Washington wishes it were; regional powers are preparing for one war, while the United States, as a global power, must be ready to address challenges across multiple fronts without compromising its global security commitments.
Conclusion: The Path Forward
As the global security environment becomes increasingly volatile, the United States must take decisive action to rebuild its military capabilities. The findings of the National Defense Strategy Commission serve as a stark reminder that the U.S. can no longer afford to delay this crucial task. The nation's ability to deter and, if necessary, prevail in conflict across multiple theaters is at stake.
How should the U.S. prioritize its defense spending to address the growing threats across multiple global theaters effectively?
Comments