America's Security Deficit: Addressing the Imbalance Between Strategy and Resources in a Turbulent World: Strategic Rethink

Ochmanek, David; Hoehn, Andrew R.; Quinlivan, James T.; Jones, Seth G.; Warner, Edward L.

doi:10.7249/rr1223

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…127-136. 38 For a fuller description of the direct defense approach and its applicability to deterring aggression by China, see Ochmanek, 2015. confidence in the ability of U.S. forces to defeat aggression. Potential adversaries could be correspondingly emboldened to resort to coercion or aggression to up-end the status quo in East Asia and SEA.…”

Section: Scenario: An Invasion Of Taiwan Circa 2020mentioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. Military Capabilities and Forces for a Dangerous World: Rethinking the U.S. Approach to Force Planning

Ochmanek¹,

Wilson²,

Allen³

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest.RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-0-8330-9742-2For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1782Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2017 RAND CorporationR® is a registered trademark.iii PrefaceResearch done at the RAND Corporation and elsewhere over the past several years has identified some serious shortcomings in the ability of programmed U.S. forces to meet emerging challenges. Prominent among these challenges are those posed by the growth of advanced anti-access/area denial threats in the arsenals of U.S. adversaries, Russia's use of military power against neighboring European states, North Korea's development of nuclear weapons, and the spread of violent Salafist-jihadi ideology with the emergence of the quasi-state Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Individually, each of these developments places stress on U.S. and allied military capabilities. Collectively, they represent the major elements of an international security environment that is more complex and more dangerous than that to which Americans have been accustomed since the end of the Cold War.These developments should be important factors in the Trump administration's review of National Defense Strategy. They should also prompt a reconsideration of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which became law before some of these threats became manifest. Clearly, the Trump administration will need to reassess the nation's defense strategy, posture, and program with an eye toward finding a better balance than exists today between the ambitions embodied in the strategy and the resources devoted to it. This report is offered as a contribution to that effort.This report should be of interest to defense policymakers, practitioners in the executive and legislative branches, analysts, the media, experts in nongovernmental organizations, and those concerned with defense planning and the role of the United States in international security affairs.Thi...

show abstract

Section: Scenario: An Invasion Of Taiwan Circa 2020mentioning

confidence: 99%

U.S. Military Capabilities and Forces for a Dangerous World: Rethinking the U.S. Approach to Force Planning

Ochmanek¹,

Wilson²,

Allen³

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, a security deficit can legitimately be analysed at the national level. For example, the United States is seen as having a security deficit in that allocated resources are not keeping up with changes in the strategic environment posed by Russia, China and upheaval in the Middle East (Ochmanek et al, 2015); as is Sweden which fears Russian expansionism (Anthony & Weintraub, 2018). However, the transnational nature of 21st century threats ensures a common ground for the quest for a more stable world order.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Security Deficit

Dellios¹

2019

The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A security deficit essentially refers to a threat. It can be on different scales from sub-national to national and global. Threats come in various forms, not only military, but also societal, economic, political and cultural. Further adding to the complexity of what is a threat -and hence what constitutes a security deficit -the scale and form of threats need not be distinct but can impact on, or overlap, one another. The impact of climate change, for example, may be analysed at global and local levels, as well as its economic and policy implications. Unlike traditional threats, where military force is used against an adversary, non-traditional security threats -like climate change, transnational crime, politically motivated violence or economic crises -are often depicted in human security terms.Human security itself is a broad term, the referent being the human rather than the state, and needs to be viewed within particular contexts. One context is that of non-state armed groups. These include terrorists, insurgents, militias, and criminal organizations. They not only pose a military threat to states and their neighbouring regions but, from the human security perspective, to local communities. Indeed, research suggests that "the most pervasive threat from non-state armed groups is to the human security of local civilians" (Englehart, 2016). This is illustrated by the activities of Islamic State (IS). Among other violations, its genocidal aggression against Iraq's Yazidi minority in 2014 has been well documented (UN, 2014). Englehart (2016) points out that non-state armed groups can even be a source of security, as exemplified by the Kurdish peshmerga militias having assisted Yazidis fleeing IS. This was enabled by state intervention in the form of US airstrikes against Islamic State, showing state and non-state actors have their distinctive and complementary roles to play.

show abstract

Security Deficit

Dellios

2023

The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

America's Security Deficit: Addressing the Imbalance Between Strategy and Resources in a Turbulent World: Strategic Rethink

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

U.S. Military Capabilities and Forces for a Dangerous World: Rethinking the U.S. Approach to Force Planning

U.S. Military Capabilities and Forces for a Dangerous World: Rethinking the U.S. Approach to Force Planning

Security Deficit

Security Deficit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About