By Chethana Janith, Jadetimes News
A new report claims that the U.S. is not prepared for the possibility of a major, or global, war.
The authors, which include both Democrats and Republicans - state that the current threats to American security are the “most serious and most challenging since 1945.”
Among the report’s recommendations are boosting the size of the U.S. military and a large force structure of tanks, aircraft, ships, and more.
Is America sleepwalking into WWIII?
A commission tasked with investigating America’s national security outlook has concluded that the U.S. is not ready to fight and prevail in a major war. The Commission on the National Defense Strategy states that America is wholly unprepared for a future conflict, with armed forces that are too small in number to prevail in a major war and inadequate defense spending. The commission warns that the danger to the U.S. is so serious that it eclipses the entirety of the Cold War, as the collective power of adversaries such as China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea grows.
The World is Changing Fast - for the Worse
In 2022, the Pentagon released the National Defense Strategy, a document that describes how it will “meet growing threats to U.S. vital national security interests and to a stable and open international system.” The strategy addresses threats to the global order by China and Russia - as well as Iran, North Korea, and high profile terrorist groups, and how the Department of Defense plans to address them.
The strategy was released shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and warns that “in these times, business as usual at the Department is not acceptable.”
Congress mandated that a commission shadow the strategy and report on how it was working (or not working) in the real world. Their conclusion: just two years later, the strategy has been overtaken by real world events and the danger is the greatest it has been since World War II. This is a remarkable statement, considering World War II was followed by a 40-year-long Cold War and a nuclear standoff between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The commission believes that the period in which we find ourselves now is even more dangerous, with the possibility of a major war, or even a multi theater or global one, having become very real.
The report cites China’s growing military power, Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, and the propensity of both countries to intimidate and harass their neighbors in pursuit of territorial expansion. It cited the self-proclaimed “no limits'' friendship between the two countries, which includes Chinese support for Russia’s war in Ukraine. It also warned that growing ties between the two powers (along with Iran and North Korea‚ risk turning a war with one country into a war with two or more and resulting in a conflict of global proportions.
“Win-Hold-Win” Doesn't Work Anymore
During the Cold War, the U.S. Military was sized to deter-and, if necessary, win, a war with the Soviet Union. The end of the Cold War in 1991 also spelled the end of the Soviet Union and its military power, and the military was downsized to fight two smaller wars against smaller powers like North Korea and Iran at the same time. This was later further reduced to a “win-hold-win” plan, in which the U.S. would anticipate fighting two smaller powers at once, but hold the line with one power until the other is beaten. This plan has more or less persisted to this day.
The problem with the plan, according to the commission, is the anticipated cooperation between China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. The report cites a Chinese defense budget of $711 billion a year (a number approaching the U.S. defense budget), a rapidly growing People’s Liberation Army, and a growing Chinese nuclear arsenal. Russia is preoccupied in Ukraine, but the war demonstrates hostile intent against neighboring states- including members of NATO. North Korea has nuclearized since the two war plan, Iran is destabilizing the Middle East with covert operations, and both North Korea and Iran are growing militarily closer to Russia.
In other words, the United States could face a future conflict with one major power, or even a conflict with all four of them. The military is too small to fight and win a conflict with the larger powers. The armed forces, including the size of the force, the overall defense budget, and the amount of equipment, is not keeping pace with the threat.
A Larger, More Powerful Military
The Navy today stands at 297 ships, making it smaller (by number of hulls) than the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy. The report notes that the Navy plans to field a fleet of 377 ships, but that won’t happen until 2045. If the commission’s warning is heeded, we would see an accelerated buildup that ideally includes two new carriers, bringing the total number of carriers to thirteen. Increasing submarine production to three per year would generate 30 new submarines in ten years, while another three destroyers a year would help make up for the retirement of the Ticonderoga-class cruisers. The Navy could also use a boost in amphibious ships, especially to make up for the 2020 loss of USS Bonhomme Richard, and at least thirty new Constellation-class frigates.
In the event of a major war, the Air Force would be faced with the massive task of gaining air supremacy while destroying an enemy’s armed forces, industrial production capability, and access to the global economy. The service’s Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) fighter, slated to succeed the F-22 Raptor, would probably be built in greater numbers than the 1:1 replacement ratio the Air Force had in mind. It would also need about twice as many B-21 Raider bombers (200 in all) for a worst-case scenario in which it needed to perform conventional missions against both Russia and China at the same time while holding back a number of bombers for the nuclear deterrence mission. Finally, it would need to build KC-Zs, the service’s stealth refueling plane, to support friendly aircraft in contested areas.
The Army is the service struggling for relevance in the Pacific and Asia, where a war with China would be fought. Large mechanized forces, equipped with tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, would find few places to fight in a theater dominated by vast oceans. However, the service’s air and missile defense systems, such as Patriot and Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), and the service’s new Long Range Hypersonic Weapon System (LRHW) could both provide a protective bubble for all services from land and quickly strike time sensitive targets up to 1,800 miles away.
The commission report is unexpectedly dire, all the more striking because it was authored by a bipartisan team of both Democratic and Republican appointees. Is the United States sleepwalking into World War III? Perhaps not, but the report notes that the U.S. was also slow to respond to trends in global terrorism that culminated in 9/11. A global war, possibly one involving the use of nuclear weapons, would be so far-off-the-charts worse that it is impossible to predict how bad things could get for the average American, if they live to see the end of it.
