Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Defence and security / / Articles
Factors the political and military transformation of the armed forces of the United States
Material posted: Publication date: 13-03-2020

By the end of the second decade of the XXI century United States of America as a whole has retained the capacity of its armed forces. However, it is not surprising that for several decades, "calming" and slowing down the dynamics of the process of rearmament has accumulated a number of problems. At the same time, has seriously changed the world situation, broken down made by Washington at the beginning of the XXI century the balance of power, new methods of warfare, and the readiness of the American army has fallen markedly over three decades.

However, the military-political leadership of the United States represented the real possibility of us forces to compete to deter and defeat almost all environments. A Foundation technology in several areas and a large military budget allow you to keep your existing benefits. Another thing is that in many declarations, messages, official documents of the us administration covertly recognizes the insufficiency of the forces available, in spite of their innovation and power.

It should be emphasized that in the NSS and SSS military power is directly linked American experts with free access to the markets. Otherwise, one of the important sources of funding U.S. Department of defense will be lost. In the first it is this need motivates the American side to start serious upgrade troops. These and other factors contributed to the beginning of the process political and military transformation of the armed forces of the United States.

It is worth noting that none of these factors individually would not be able to withdraw Washington from the state of "strategic atrophy". Only need to compete on a long term basis with strong powers revealed weaknesses in the defense system of the country. This is one of the key factors. Now China and Russia and not terrorism is the main challenge for U.S. national security. This challenge is complex[1]: Beijing is trying to achieve economic and military superiority in important for Americans regions – Europe and Asia-Pacific; Russia wants a political and military preponderance in Europe and Central Asia.

It is noteworthy that, in its national defense Strategy, Washington has designated the Indo-Pacific region as one of the key. China, according to American political and military experts, plans to use its growing military power and trade relations with the aim to rebuild the region itself and its economy, which the United States can not avoid. After all, it will show the world the failure of the policy of rebalancing forces to the Asia-Pacific region[2]. Moreover, Americans are less interested in further strengthening of economic cooperation between the oil monarchies of the Arabian (long-standing allies of the US) and China. In this context, it is also becoming clear sense of political flirting of Washington who need new allies, new Delhi. The Americans got a serious challenge to re-convince the world that the power of their country, this time really unattainable. After all, as China will continue to strengthen its economic and military dominance[3], it will continue to implement a program of modernization of the PLA[4], which will be able to create in the Asia Pacific region the zone of prohibition of access. A similar policy, according to American experts, conducts and Russia. The only difference is that our country will seek to weaken the US position in several regions, with less resources compared to Whales.

In addition, the "unlawful" conduct and "reckless" rhetoric of North Korea, Iran's nuclear program and its regional ambitions, too, are a challenge, because it serves a "bad example" to other countries who would like to lead more independent from their patrons policy. Therefore, countries applying for a degree of independence resorted to the creation of zones of prohibition of access (A2AD, A2/AD, anti-access and area denial). The purpose of this zone is to create the maximum risk for dislocation or movement of enemy forces into the protected area[5]. The term has become particularly widely used in connection with the adoption by Russia and China operational-tactical missile systems, air defense systems and anti-ship missiles of distant radius of action, which create a "protective sphere" around a protected object, where American troops can't enter without the risk of incurring serious losses.

China and Russia are using technology to prevent access (A2/AD) to avoid conflicts on the coast and in mainland area, which has important implications for the United States. Perhaps the only effective way of dealing with the areas of anti-access and area denial (except nuclear weapons) is the creation of a similar zone which will either enable a zone of prohibition of access of the opponent or to be inside it, ie will block it.[6] it is Worth noting that the existence of inaccessible to the Washington territory annoying the us leadership. It is not used to access any region. These changes require a clear assessment of the Pentagon, which he could not yet articulate.

The ability of individual countries to create such zones reveals another factor of transformation of the armed forces of the United States: Washington can no longer be completely confident that the war will go for a given plan and will lead to a decisive victory, experts from the RAND Corporation[7]. In this case, according to experts RAND modern war is, above all, intense. The key to winning is mobility and adaptability of units.

Alexander Petrichuk

 

[1] Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America. – P. 3-4. URL: https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018-National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf

[2] the American strategy of "rebalancing" of forces in the Asia-Pacific and the national security interests of Russia. // Problems of national strategy. No. 4 (31). – Pp. 12-13. URL: https://riss.ru/images/pdf/journal/2015/4/04_.pdf

[3] Cashin V. modernization of the PLA is a reason for concern? // RIAC. URL: http://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/analytics/modernizatsiya-noak-povod-dlya-bespokoystva/?sphrase_id=472741

[4] XI Jinping: Full modernization of the PLA will be completed by 2035. // URL: https://regnum.ru/news/2335948.html

[5] A. Fedyakina Beijing took on the fly. // The center Voyenno-political researches. URL: http://eurasian-defence.ru/?q=analitika/pekin-vzyali-mushku

[6] What Is A2/AD and Why Does It Matter to the United States? // Charles Koch Institute. URL: https://www.charleskochinstitute.org/blog/what-is-a2ad-and-why-does-it-matter-to-the-united-states/

[7] the Echo of the cold war. Why in the United States offered to return the nuclear missiles to Europe. // URL: https://ria.ru/defense_safety/20171023/1507402560.html


RELATED MATERIALS: Defence and security
Возрастное ограничение