Air University Review: March-April 1977, Volume XXVIII, No. 3
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Professional Journal of the United States A ir Force the editors aerie Dr. Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., in our lead article, "Emerging Major Power Relationships," reflects on the shifting great power triangle of the United States, the Soviet Union, and the Peop!e's Republic of China. The cover, by Art Editor/lllustrator Bill DePaola, depicts an American eagle warily observing this triangle in a graphic elaboration of an abstract theme. For the first time in the experience of this editor, the Awards Committee members were unanimous in their first place votes for Major Don Alberts's "A Call from the Wilderness'' in the November-December 1976 issue. Aspiring authors who want to gain insight into subject matter that receives a very receptive reading by our editorial panei may want to re-examine that article. To the 50 percent of Air Force officers who necessarily receive an efficiency rating of three or below, it may be of more than passing interest to learn that the pseudonymous author of "I Am a Three" was recently promoted. You won't find Major Mark Wynn's name on the lieutenant colonel's promotion list, but we have it on good authority that the author who appeared under that nom de plume in the September-October 1976 issue is a living example that "threes" are promotable. Congratulations would seem to be appropriate, but how does one congratulate the anonymous? In this issue we find ourselves in the slightly embarrassed position of publishing an article by a member of the Air University Review Awards Committee. Wing Commander Peter M. Papworth, Royal Air Force, appears here as the author of "The Integrity of the Warsaw Pact, Part I." We value his judgment and regret that Fler Majesty's representative must be temporarily absent from our deliberations. From the Editor s Aerie............................................................................................................. Facing Page Emerging Major Power Relationships: Implications for the American Military in the Late Twentieth Century............................................................... 2 Dr. Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr. The Integrity of the Warsaw Pact, Part I .............................................................................................. 16 Wing Commander Peter M. Papworth, RAF Correlation of Forces: Revolutionary Legacy........................................................................................ 24 Maj. Richard E. Porter, USAF Soviet Civil Defense: Preparations for Industrial-Base War Survival ........................................... 33 Capt. John W. Dorough, Jr., USAF The Oil Weapon and American Foreign Policy................................................................................... 41 Dr. Joseph S. Szyliowicz Maj. Bard E. 0 ’Neill, USAF Fuel Supplies in Time of War.................................................................................................................. 53 Dr. Arthur Akers Variable Budgets: Application and Theory............................................................................................ 66 Leland G. Jordan Military Affairs Abroad The Royal Australian Air Force...................................................................................................... 73 Lt. Col. David N. Burt, USAF In My Opinion Commitment to Integrity.................................................................................................................. 86 Maj. Gen. Henry J. Meade, USAF A Case for Equality in H ousing..................................................................................................... 91 Maj. Gary W. Matthes, USAF Books and Ideas Myths and Vietnam............................................................................................................................ 100 Raymond E. Bell, Jr. Question of Honor .............................................................................................................................. 104 Lt. Col. Jon A. Reynolds, USAF Potpourri.............................................................................................................................................. 111 Books Received.................................................................................................................................... 115 The Contributors.......................................................................................................................................... 118 ATTENTION 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 and stimulate dialogue 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 Uni versity. Rather, the contente reflect the authors' ideas and do not necessarily bear official sanction. Thoughtful and informed contributions are always welcomed. E are at the threshold of an era in both the adequacy of existing leveis of de- which power, military and economic, fense and the allocation of resources be- will be far more diffused than at any tween strategic and general purpose forces. W earlier time in the twentieth century. In ad- Both superpowers, but especially the Soviet dition to the superpowers and China, the in- Union, will be engaged in large-scale re- ternational system of the last quarter of this search and development (R&D) efforts de- century will contain a series of regional pow- signed to achieve breakthroughs that might ers, as well as smaller actors, in possession of prove decisive in altering the existing strate- destructive capabilities of unprecedented le- gic-military relationship. Among the likely thality and accuracy, nuclear and nonnu- emphases of Soviet R&D will be ballistic mis- clear. Patterns of interaction among actors, sile defense and antisubmarine warfare. The major and lesser powers, will be far more United States and the Soviet Union will re- variegated and complex than at any earlier main adversaries, although their relationship time in the twentieth century. Thus the will be punctuated by periods of détente, world of the next generation, the focal point whether for tactical or other reasons. of this analysis of emerging major power re- The Soviet Union will be in an “imperial” lationships, is likely to hold for the United phase with global interests and a propensity States and its allies even greater danger than to seek to extract political advantage by vir- the recent past. tue of the possession of vast military power. As they have been in the past, relations Nevertheless, the Soviet Union will probably among major powers will be the product of face increasing problems internally as a re- many factors—foreign policy objectives and sult of the demands of intellectuals, nationali- capabilities, domestic stability or instability ties, and other dissident groups, and and political will, leveis of economic and externally in its relations with emergent re- technological development, to mention but gional actors and even smaller States whose the most obvious. It is possible, of course, to interests diverge from those of Moscow. For- postulate a variety of scenarios in the U.S.- midable economic problems will continue to Soviet relationship, based on the Soviet beset the Soviet Union as a result of the ineffi- Union in an “imperial phase” and the United ciencies of Soviet economic planning, declin- States in decline, both in relative military ing per capita productivity, persistent power and in political will. The assumption difficulties in agriculture, including climatic of this analysis, however, is that the United variations and changes, and the continued States and the Soviet Union will remain in a concentration of Soviet technology and other condition of general parity in defense resources in the defense sector. capabilities, although the Soviet leadership In the period ahead the United States, will continue to strive for overall military su- while endeavoring to reconstitute its domes- periority and the United States, in the years tic consensus on foreign policy in support of just ahead, will face major decisions about allies and interests abroad, will make an 2 EMERGING MAJOR POWER RELATIONSHIPS Implications the American M in the Late Twentieth Century Dr . Robert L. Pfaltzcraff, Jr . D 4 AIR UN1VERSITYREVIEW effort to redress the military imbalance that, American relationship became central to in the mid-1970s, appeared to be emerging U.S. diplomacy with the Soviet Union. The with the Soviet Union.1 Nevertheless, the United States sought to evolve both with Pe- United States will have lost, perhaps irre- king and Moscow a better relationship than trievably, many of the major qualitative ad- either could maintain with the other. vantages in strategic nuclear systems that it The essence of the triangular relationship enjoyed until the present decade, even and major power interaction within it was though U.S. forces, at leveis below the strate- competition by each of the powers to pre- gic, will be based upon the substitution of clude a major improvement in relations be- quality for quantity, firepower for manpow- tween the other two. From the U.S. er. In comparison with the rest of the world, perspective, if not necessarily from that of the United States and the Soviet Union will Moscow or Peking, a condition of neither remain in defense technologies the most