U.S. media reported Feb. 17 that the Biden administration faces a dilemma in rethinking the deployment of global military forces: how to focus more on Communist China and Russia without retreating from long-standing Middle East threats. That question and to make that shift with a potentially leaner Pentagon budget, the paper said.
Within days of taking office, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin ordered a month-long “global posture” review, the paper said. It will assess how the United States can best organize and support its long-range network of forces, weapons, bases and alliances in support of President Biden’s foreign policy.
The audit is said to be part of an administration effort to chart a path for a military that remains mired in decades of conflict in the Middle East, faces flat or declining budgets and grapples with internal issues such as racism and extremism. The result could have long-term implications for the U.S. military’s top priority: ensuring the military is prepared for war in an era of uncertain arms control. In addition, the U.S. relationship with allies and partners after experiencing the Trump administration is also being counted.
The Austin-led review is closely tied to the White House’s pending decision on whether to fulfill the previous administration’s commitment to fully withdraw troops from Afghanistan this spring. And it is advancing separately from the big dollar question about modernizing strategic nuclear forces. The report said that, like the Trump Administration, Biden’s national security team views the Chinese Communist Party, not militant extremists such as al Qaeda or the Islamic State group, as the number one long-term security challenge. But unlike his predecessors, Biden sees great value in the U.S. commitment to European nations in the NATO alliance. The outcome of the audit could lead to a major shift in U.S. military deployments in the Middle East, Europe and the Asia-Pacific, although previous U.S. administrations have attempted such changes with limited success.
For example, the Trump administration feels compelled to send thousands of additional air and naval forces to the Persian Gulf region in 2019 to deter its alleged threat to regional stability. Biden has seen reminders of this problem in recent days in the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan. It could also signal Biden’s embrace of recent efforts by military commanders to seek innovative ways to deploy troops unencumbered by permanent bases that have political, financial and security costs. One recent example, the report mentions, was the visit of a U.S. aircraft carrier to a Vietnamese port. Commanders see value in deploying forces on a smaller scale with fewer predictable cycles to keep China off balance. Meanwhile, the first signs of change emerged even before Biden took office.
Last December, Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke out about his view that changes in technology and geopolitics require rethinking old models for organizing and deploying forces. Milley said the survival of the U.S. military will depend on its ability to adapt to the rise of the Chinese Communist Party, the spread of technologies such as artificial intelligence and robotics, and the emergence of unconventional threats such as a Communist virus pandemic and climate change. The smaller the future, the better,” he said. A small, almost invisible, untouchable force that is in a constant state of movement and widely distributed will be a force that can survive.” He stressed, “If you die, you can’t accomplish any of your goals.”
Austin offered a similar, narrower view last month on positioning U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific region, the paper said. “There is no question that we need a more resilient and distributed force posture in the Indo-Pacific region to counter Communist counter-intervention capabilities and approaches, supported by a new concept of warfare,” he said during his Senate confirmation hearings. Austin also noted concerns about competing with Russia in the Arctic. “This is rapidly becoming an area of geopolitical competition, and I have serious concerns about the Russian military buildup and aggression in the Arctic, and around the world,” he said. He said, “Likewise, I am deeply concerned about the intentions of the Chinese Communist Party in the region.”
The report said this does not advocate abandoning large overseas bases for the U.S. military. But it suggests a greater emphasis on deploying smaller groups of troops in shorter rotations to non-traditional destinations. That shift is already underway. The U.S. Army, for example, is developing a so-called “Arctic Capability Brigade” of soldiers as part of an increased focus on the northern highlands. The region is seen as a potential flashpoint as major powers compete for natural resources that will become more readily available as the ice recedes. Similarly, the U.S. Air Force is sending B-1 long-range bombers for the first Time to Norway, a NATO ally and neighbor of Russia.
The report also mentioned a report this month by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a New York think tank, that Taiwan is the most likely trigger for a U.S.-China war, a prospect with dire human consequences that “should concern the Biden team. “Millions of Americans could die in the first war in human history between two nuclear-armed states,” the report said. Washington also expressed concern about the Communist Party’s efforts to modernize and potentially expand its nuclear arsenal while refusing to participate in any international nuclear arms control negotiations. The report said the sharpening of U.S. concerns about the Chinese Communist Party on security issues began under the Obama administration. The Trump administration has gone further, formally declaring the Chinese Communist Party and Russia, rather than global terrorism, the top threats to U.S. national security.
In response to voices questioning whether this shift goes too far, Christopher Miller, who served as acting defense secretary at the end of the Trump presidency, said in an interview that he agrees that the Chinese Communist Party is a key national security threat. But he said U.S. commanders elsewhere in the world have told him that the focus on China is costing them needed resources. “So I think it’s time to revisit this and make sure we’re not causing any unintended consequences,” Miller said.
Recent Comments