DOCSLIB.ORG

Airsea Battle a Point-Of-Departure Operational Concept

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Airsea Battle a Point-Of-Departure Operational Concept C e n T e r f o r S T r a T e G i C a n d B u d G e T a r y a S S e ssm e n ts AirSea Battle A Point-of-Departure Operational Concept Jan van Tol with Mark Gunzinger, andrew Krepinevich, and Jim Thomas AirSeA BAttle: A Point-of-Departure OperAtionAl ConCePt Jan van Tol with Mark Gunzinger, Andrew Krepinevich, and Jim Thomas 2010 © 2010 Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. All rights reserved. About the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, security policy and resource allocation. CSBA provides timely, impartial and insightful analyses to senior decision mak- ers in the executive and legislative branches, as well as to the media and the broader national security community. CSBA encourages thoughtful participation in the de- velopment of national security strategy and policy, and in the allocation of scarce human and capital resources. CSBA’s analysis and outreach focus on key questions related to existing and emerging threats to US national security. Meeting these challenges will require transforming the national security establishment, and we are devoted to helping achieve this end. ABout the AuthorS Jan M. van Tol, Senior Fellow, is an expert on long-range strategic plan- ning, military innovation, and wargaming. Prior to his retirement from the Navy in 2007, Captain van Tol served as special adviser in the Office of the Vice-President. He was a military assistant to Andrew W. Marshall at the Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment from 1993–96 and again from 2001–2003. He commanded three warships, the last of which, USS Essex (LHD-2), was a major participant in post-tsunami relief efforts off Sumatra, Indonesia. He holds degrees in philosophy and logic from the University of Massachusetts and in operations research from the Naval Postgraduate School, and graduated with distinction from the Naval War College. Mark Gunzinger joined CSBA as a Senior Fellow in February 2010 after a distinguished career in public service. He is the principal author or co- author of five Defense Planning Guidance/Guidance for the Development of Forces directives, the key strategic planning guidance documents that shape DoD force planning. A retired Air Force Colonel and Command Pilot, he joined the Office of the Secretary of Defense in 2004, serving in sev- eral key positions until his appointment in 2006 to Director for Defense Transformation, Force Planning and Resources on the National Security Council. He most recently served as senior advisor to the Air Force for the 2010 QDR. Mr. Gunzinger holds a Master of Science degree in National Security Strategy from the National War College (1996), Master of Airpower Art and Science degree from the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies (1992), and Bachelor’s of Science in Chemistry from the United States Air Force Academy (1977). Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr., President, is an expert on US military strat- egy, policy and operations, military revolutions, and counterinsurgency. He gained extensive strategic planning experience on the personal staff of three secretaries of defense, in the Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment, and as a member of the Defense Policy Board, National Defense Panel, the Defense Science Board Task Force on Joint Experimentation, and the Joint Forces Command’s Transformation Advisory Board. He is the au- thor of numerous CSBA reports on such topics as the Quadrennial Defense Review, alliances, the war in Iraq, and transformation of the US military. He received the 1987 Furniss Award for his book, The Army and Vietnam, and is the author of 7 Deadly Scenarios. A graduate of West Point, he retired from the US Army in 1993. Dr. Krepinevich holds a Master of Public Affairs and Ph.D. from Harvard University. Jim Thomas, Vice President for Studies, joined CSBA in April 2009. He pre- viously served for thirteen years in a variety of policy, planning and resource analysis posts in the Department of Defense, culminating in his dual appoint- ment as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Resources and Plans, and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy. In these capacities, he was responsible for the development of the defense strategy, convention- al force planning, resource assessment, and the oversight of war plans. Mr. Thomas spearheaded the 2005–2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), and was the principal author of the QDR Report to Congress. Prior to joining CSBA, he held the position of Vice President of Applied Minds, Inc., a private research and development company specializing in rapid, interdisciplinary technology prototyping. A former Reserve Naval officer, Mr. Thomas attained the rank of lieutenant commander. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree with high honors from the College of William and Mary, a Masters degree from the University of Virginia, and a Masters degree from Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. Acknowledgments The authors give special thanks to Chris Dougherty and Eric Lindsey for their research support, to Charlotte Brock and Eric Lindsey for their editorial and production support, and to Cutting Edge for their design. The analysis and findings presented here are solely the responsibility of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments and the authors. conTenTs ix executive summary 1 Introduction 9 chapter 1. What should an Airsea Battle concept Do? 17 chapter 2. operational Problems Posed by Robust A2/AD systems 49 chapter 3. The substance of an Airsea Battle concept 81 chapter 4. candidate Airsea Battle “Piece-Parts” 95 chapter 5. A Point-of-Departure concept 99 Glossary 103 Tab A. Memorandum of Agreement on U.s. Army-U.s. Air Force Joint Development Process 111 Tab B. Implementing an Airsea Battle concept Figures 12 Figure 1. Illustrative Distances in the Pacific Theater 13 Figure 2. The Two Island chains and Major Us Bases in the Western Pacific 18 Figure 3. Range of PLA Missiles and strike Aircraft 22 Figure 4. notional “Keep-out” Zone 24 Figure 5. contrasting Us and PLA Approaches 37 Figure 6. estimated PLA Ballistic Missile Totals (2010) 59 Figure 7. chinese Long-Range Radar and space Facilities and Air Defenses (2010) 65 Figure 8. PLA Ballistic Missile Brigades and Air Defenses (2010) 72 Figure 9. Primary Areas of Us submarine and Anti-submarine operations 77 Figure 10. shipping Routes to china 84 Figure 11. current (and Prospective) Us Long-Range strike systems exeCutive SummAry The US military today faces an emerging major operational challenge, particu- larly in the Western Pacific Theater of Operations (WPTO). The Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) ongoing efforts to field robust anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities are threatening to make US power projection increasingly risky and, in some cases and contexts, prohibitively costly. If this occurs, the United States will find itself effectively locked out of a region that has been de- clared a vital security interest by every administration in the last sixty years. It will also leave longstanding US allies and partners vulnerable to aggression or, more likely, subtle forms of coercion. Consequently, the United States confronts a strategic choice: either accept this ongoing negative shift in the military bal- ance, or explore options for offsetting it. This paper does just that. It offers a point-of-departure concept designed to maintain a stable military balance in the WPTO, one that offsets the PLA’s rapidly improving A2/AD capabilities. We have titled this concept “AirSea Battle,” in recognition that this theater of operations is dominated by naval and air forces, and the domains of space and cyberspace. the unprovoked ChAllenge For well over half a century, the United States has been a global power with global interests. These interests include (but are not limited to) extending and defend- ing democratic rule, maintaining access to key trading partners and resources, and reassuring those allies and partners who cooperate with the United States in defending common interests. The United States’ ability to project and sustain military power on a large scale has been, and remains, essential to this endeavor. During much of the Cold War the Soviet Union posed a serious military challenge to US power-projection capabilities. Fortunately, the two superpow- ers managed to avoid a major war. Nonetheless, the US military’s unsurpassed x center for strategic and Budgetary Assessments ability to project and sustain large forces overseas was demonstrated in limited wars in Korea, Vietnam and the Persian Gulf, as well as in numerous other, small- er contingencies. In the decade or so following the Soviet Union’s collapse the US military’s power-projection capabilities in defense of the nation’s interests were effectively unchallenged. This state of affairs is almost certainly ending, with significant consequences for US security. With the spread of advanced military technologies and their exploitation by other militaries, especially China’s PLA, the US military’s abil- ity to operate in an area of vital interest, the Western Pacific, is being increas- ingly challenged. While Beijing professes benign intentions, it is an old military maxim that since intentions can change overnight — especially in authoritarian regimes — one must focus on the military capabilities of other states. Currently there is little indication that China intends to alter its efforts to cre- ate “no-go zones” out to the second island chain, which extends as far as Guam and New Guinea. Unless Beijing diverts from its current course of action, or Washington undertakes actions to offset or counterbalance the effects of the PLA’s military buildup, the cost incurred by the US military to operate in the Western Pacific will likely rise sharply, perhaps to prohibitive levels, and much sooner than many expect.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Blitzkrieg: the Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht's
    East Tennessee State University Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University Electronic Theses and Dissertations Student Works 8-2021 Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era Briggs Evans East Tennessee State University Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.etsu.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Evans, Briggs, "Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era" (2021). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 3927. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/3927 This Thesis - unrestricted is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Works at Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era ________________________ A thesis presented to the faculty of the Department of History East Tennessee State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in History ______________________ by Briggs Evans August 2021 _____________________ Dr. Stephen Fritz, Chair Dr. Henry Antkiewicz Dr. Steve Nash Keywords: Blitzkrieg, doctrine, operational warfare, American military, Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe, World War II, Cold War, Soviet Union, Operation Desert Storm, AirLand Battle, Combined Arms Theory, mobile warfare, maneuver warfare. ABSTRACT Blitzkrieg: The Evolution of Modern Warfare and the Wehrmacht’s Impact on American Military Doctrine during the Cold War Era by Briggs Evans The evolution of United States military doctrine was heavily influenced by the Wehrmacht and their early Blitzkrieg campaigns during World War II.
    [Show full text]
  • From Airland Battle to Airsea Battle: the Image of War in the United States Army and Air Force from 1980 to 2012
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2016 From AirLand Battle to AirSea Battle: the image of war in the United States Army and Air Force from 1980 to 2012 Fuhrer, Daniel Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-204544 Dissertation Published Version Originally published at: Fuhrer, Daniel. From AirLand Battle to AirSea Battle: the image of war in the United States Army and Air Force from 1980 to 2012. 2016, University of Zurich, Faculty of Arts. From AirLand Battle to AirSea Battle: The image of war in the United States Army and Air Force from 1980 to 2012 Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of the University of Zurich for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Daniel Fuhrer Accepted in the fall semester 2015 on the recommendation of the Doctoral Committee: Prof. Dr. Rudolf Jaun (main advisor) Prof. Dr. Sven Trakulhun Zurich, 2016 Index Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 7 Topic .............................................................................................................................................. 7 Question and limitation ............................................................................................................... 11 State of research ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Synchronizing Airpower and Firepower in the Deep Battle
    After you have read the research report, please give us your frank opinion on the contents. All comments—large or small, complimentary or caustic—will be gratefully appreciated. Mail them to CADRE/AR, Building 1400, 401 Chennault Circle, Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6428. Synchronizing Airpower and Laughbaum Firepower in the Deep Battle Thank you for your assistance COLLEGE OF AEROSPACE DOCTRINE, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATION AIR UNIVERSITY Synchronizing Airpower and Firepower in the Deep Battle R. KENT LAUGHBAUM Lt Col, USAF CADRE Paper Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112-6610 January 1999 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. ii CADRE Papers CADRE Papers are occasional publications sponsored by the Airpower Research Institute of Air University’s College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research, and Education (CADRE). Dedicated to promoting understanding of air and space power theory and application, these studies are published by the Air University Press and broadly distributed to the US Air Force, the Department of Defense and other governmental organizations, leading scholars, selected institutions of higher learning, public policy institutes, and the media. All military members and civilian employees assigned to Air University are invited to contribute unclassified manuscripts. Manuscripts should deal with air and/or space power history, theory, doctrine or strategy, or with joint or combined service matters bearing on the application of air and/or space power.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyber Warfare a “Nuclear Option”?
    CYBER WARFARE A “NUCLEAR OPTION”? ANDREW F. KREPINEVICH CYBER WARFARE: A “NUCLEAR OPTION”? BY ANDREW KREPINEVICH 2012 © 2012 Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. All rights reserved. About the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) is an independent, nonpartisan policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking and debate about national security strategy and investment options. CSBA’s goal is to enable policymakers to make informed decisions on matters of strategy, secu- rity policy and resource allocation. CSBA provides timely, impartial, and insight- ful analyses to senior decision makers in the executive and legislative branches, as well as to the media and the broader national security community. CSBA encour- ages thoughtful participation in the development of national security strategy and policy, and in the allocation of scarce human and capital resources. CSBA’s analysis and outreach focus on key questions related to existing and emerging threats to US national security. Meeting these challenges will require transforming the national security establishment, and we are devoted to helping achieve this end. About the Author Dr. Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr. is the President of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, which he joined following a 21-year career in the U.S. Army. He has served in the Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment, on the personal staff of three secretaries of defense, the National Defense Panel, the Defense Science Board Task Force on Joint Experimentation, and the Defense Policy Board. He is the author of 7 Deadly Scenarios: A Military Futurist Explores War in the 21st Century and The Army and Vietnam.
    [Show full text]
  • The Revolution in Military Affairs: Prospects and Cautions
    THE REVOLUTION IN MILITARY AFFAIRS: PROSPECTS AND CAUTIONS Earl H. Tilford, Jr. June 23, 1995 ******* The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. ******* Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded to: Director, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013-5050. Comments also may be conveyed directly to the author by calling commercial (717) 245-4086 or DSN 242-4086. LL FOREWORD The current Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) is taking place against the background of a larger historical watershed involving the end of the Cold War and the advent of what Alvin and Heidi Toffler have termed "the Information Age." In this essay, Dr. Earl Tilford argues that RMAs are driven by more than breakthrough technologies, and that while the technological component is important, a true revolution in the way military institutions organize, equip and train for war, and in the way war is itself conducted, depends on the confluence of political, social, and technological factors. After an overview of the dynamics of the RMA, Dr. Tilford makes the case that interservice rivalry and a reintroduction of the managerial ethos, this time under the guise of total quality management (TQM), may be the consequences of this revolution. In the final analysis, warfare is quintessentially a human endeavor. Technology and technologically sophisticated weapons are only means to an end.
    [Show full text]
  • The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare
    No. 109 JUNE 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare Michael B. Kim The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of ILW’s editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER No. 109, June 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim Major Michael B. Kim currently serves as the Squadron Executive Officer for the 8th Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 2d Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2d Infantry Division. Prior to his current position, he graduated from the Command and General Staff College (CGSC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and completed the Art of War Scholars Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Airland Battle and Modern Warfare
    AirLand Battle and Modern Warfare Carter Malkasian This paper is about AirLand battle and its application in modern warfare. The topic of AirLand battle has lain dormant for over a decade, as the United States has been immersed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, the theory is again under consideration. This is happening for three reasons. First, the rise of competitors for the United States means that future wars will not simply be irregular. How to fight a conventional war is again a major question. Second, in this context, the US Army is reconsidering its role in US defense and reassessing its doctrines. Third, AirLand Battle has received increased attention because of the introduction of a sister doctrine—AirSea Battle—which attempts to use some aspects of AirLand Battle. This paper will explain AirLand Battle and its applicability to the current strategic environment. It will also discuss whether amphibious warfare fits the current strategic environment, specifically because certain forms of amphibious warfare are similar to AirLand Battle and AirSea battle raises the possibility of amphibious operations. After this section, the paper will discuss the possible uses of AirLand battle and amphibious operations in East Asia. Finally, the paper will discuss AirSea Battle. The main points of the paper are: 1) AirLand Battle is unsuited to the modern strategic environment 2) Amphibious operations will be used in a very limited fashion in the future 3) In East Asia, both AirLand Battle and amphibious operations are suited for very limited or defensive operations. 4) AirSea Battle makes sense as a means of degrading the systems of an enemy on the offensive.
    [Show full text]
  • For Immediate Release
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE WEST POINT ASSOCIATION OF GRADUATES ANNOUNCES 2020 DISTINGUISHED GRADUATE AWARD RECIPIENTS WEST POINT, NY: March 5, 2020 – The West Point Association of Graduates (WPAOG) has named the 2020 recipients of the Distinguished Graduate Award. This annual award has been bestowed upon those West Point graduates whose character, distinguished service and stature draw wholesome comparison to the qualities for which West Point strives, in keeping with its motto: “Duty, Honor, Country.” The awards will be presented in a ceremony at West Point on May 19, 2020. The 2020 Distinguished Graduate Award Recipients are: Richard A. Nowak ’64 – Many know Richard “Dick” Nowak as an All-American two-way Army football player, a two-time Hammond Award winner (team’s top lineman), and the captain of the 1963 squad. But, as Scott Beaty ’73, President of the West Point Society of North Texas, says, “After his distinguished athletic career, his passion for excellence has been evident in everything he has done.” Nowak completed Ranger School, served in combat in Vietnam with the 1st Infantry Division, and completed his service on the USMA staff and faculty. After leaving the Army in 1971 as a captain, Nowak went to work as a personnel manager for Martin Marietta Co. and later completed an MBA at the University of Denver. He then rose through the corporate ranks, currently serving as Chief Operating Officer of Standard Industries, the largest roofing materials and waterproofing manufacturer in the world, innovating industry changes during his tenure. Throughout this time, Nowak never forgot his local West Point Society (North Texas), the West Point Association of Graduates, or his class.
    [Show full text]
  • Air University Review: May-June 1984, Volume XXXV, No. 4
    The Professional Journal of the United States Hovv lhe Army got its AirLand Batile Who should conirol air assets in the Clausewitz, Jomini, Douhet, concept—page 4 AirLand Batile?—page 16 and Brodie—How are they linked to our curreni nuclear posture? Should vve move now to ballistic missile defense?— page 54 Attendon The Air University Review is the professional journal of the United States Air Force and serves as an open forum for exploratory discussion. Its purpose is to present innovative thinking concerning Air Force doctrine, strategy, tactics, and related national defense matters. The Review should not be construed as representing policies of the Department of Defense, the Air Force, or Air University. Rather, the contents reflect the authors’ ideas and do not necessarily bear official sanction. Thought- ful and informed contributions are always welcomed. Al R UNIVERSITYrcuicw May-June 1984 Vol XXXV, No 4 2 T he Next War Editorial 4 T he Evoli tion of the Air L and Battle Concept John L. Romjue 16 T acair Si ppo r t for Air L and Battle Maj. James A. Machos, USAF 25 T he Q i est for Unitv of Comma nd Col. Thomas A. Cardvvell 111, USAF 30 I ra C. Eaker Essav Competition Second-Prize Win n er L eaüer ship to Match O i r T echnologv Lt. Col. Harry R. Borowski, USAF 35 EQL ALITV IN THE COCKPIT Li. Col. Nancy B. Samuelson, USAF 47 T he Air Forc:e Wif e— H er Per spect ive Maj. Mark M. Warner, USAF Differing views and provocaiive 54 C lassical Mil it a r v Stratecy and quesuons on the nuclear issues oí Ballistic Miss il e Defense lhe 1980s—page 81 Maj.
    [Show full text]
  • The Army and Multi- Domain Operations: Moving Beyond Airland Battle
    October 2019 The Army and Multi- Domain Operations: Moving Beyond AirLand Battle COL Dennis Wille Last edited on September 23, 2019 at 1:59 p.m. EDT Acknowledgments The author would like to thank the leadership, program directors, and staff of New America for their guidance and support throughout this inaugural Army fellowship opportunity. I am especially grateful for the mentorship of Peter Singer, Peter Bergen, and Sharon Burke as they shaped my overall experience. Thanks are also owed to two extraordinary members of New America’s International Security Program, Melissa Salyk-Virk and David Sterman, who provided constant administrative support and editorial review for this and other projects during the fellowship. Additional thanks to Phil Evans, Kelly Ivanoff, and the entire U.S. Army War College team for providing me with excellent support throughout the fellowship year. This paper, and the entire fellowship experience, would not be what it is without the extensive advice and help of so many people. All errors of fact or interpretation are, of course, the author’s alone. newamerica.org/international-security/reports/army-and-multi-domain-operations-moving-beyond-airland- 2 battle/ About the Author(s) Colonel Dennis Wille was a U.S. Army Fellow at New America. He has been an active duty member of the United States Army for more than 23 years. About New America We are dedicated to renewing America by continuing the quest to realize our nation’s highest ideals, honestly confronting the challenges caused by rapid technological and social change, and seizing the opportunities those changes create.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    5 ft 10 ft 15 ft 20 ft 2016 ANNUAL REPORT 1667 K Street NW | Suite 900 | Washington, DC 20006 | (202) 331-7990 | Fax: (202) 331-8019 www.csbaonline.org STRATEGY | POLICY | BUDGET 5 ft 10 ft 15 ft 20 ft MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD authoritative analyses that the General Counsel for Evercore, informed the decisions of a premier independent investment this country’s senior leaders banking advisory firm in New York in both the executive and City. Ms. Barbara Humpton serves legislative branches. One as the President and Chief Executive example reaffirming CSBA’s Officer of Siemens Government important contributions is Technologies, Inc., a leading inte- that Secretary of Defense grator of Siemens’ innovative prod- Mattis read Preserving the ucts, technologies, and services Balance: A U.S. Eurasia for programs and requirements at Defense Strategy on the federal government agencies and first official trip of his departments. These individuals tenure. We continue to be have such a varied background and involved both at home and a reputation for making signifi- abroad in informing the cant contributions to securing this policy discussion, framing country’s national interests. There alternative policy directions is no doubt that their interests and and providing expert assessments of involvement will help strengthen LAST YEAR PRESENTED A VERY the current situation. This is CSBA’s CSBA’s reputation as a leading dynamic national security environ- core competency, and our growth in center for national security thought. ment. China challenged regional the past year has added depth to our security with their controver- extraordinary team.
    [Show full text]
  • New Thinking on Persistent Security Challenges in the Asia Pacific an NCAFP Edited Volume
    New Thinking on Persistent Security Challenges in the Asia Pacific An NCAFP Edited Volume Introduction by Susan A. Thornton Cho Byung-jae | Richard J. Heydarian | Jimbo Ken Kim Jina | Keith Luse | Oba Mie | Xin Qiang Zhang Tuosheng | James P. Zumwalt April 2021 Diplomacy in Action Since 1974 Our Mission he National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP) was founded in 1974 by Professor Hans J. Morgenthau and others. It is a nonprofit policy organization dedicated to T the resolution of conflicts that threaten US interests. Toward that end, the NCAFP identifies, articulates, and helps advance American foreign policy interests from a nonpartisan perspective within the framework of political realism. American foreign policy interests include: • Preserving and strengthening national security; • Supporting the values and the practice of political, religious, and cultural pluralism; • Advancing human rights; • Addressing non-traditional security challenges such as terrorism, cyber security and climate change; • Curbing the proliferation of nuclear and other unconventional weapons; and • Promoting an open and global economy. The NCAFP fulfills its mission through Track I 1⁄2 and Track II diplomacy. These closed-door and off-the-record conferences provide opportunities for senior US and foreign officials, subject experts, and scholars to engage in discussions designed to defuse conflict, build confidence, and resolve problems. Believing that an informed public is vital to a democratic society, the National Committee offers educational programs and issues a variety of publications that address security challenges facing the United States. Critical assistance for this volume was provided by Ms. Rorry Daniels, Deputy Project Director of the NCAFP’s Forum on Asia-Pacific Security (FAPS); Ms.
    [Show full text]