... US forces can prevail over the conventional forces of any nation, provided the full pan-oply ... more ... US forces can prevail over the conventional forces of any nation, provided the full pan-oply ... daunting challenges ema-nating from states and nonstate adversaries, will impose new demands on ... These demands will stress our forces both quali-tatively (by creating needs for new ...
This collection of essays celebrates more than four decades of international relations research b... more This collection of essays celebrates more than four decades of international relations research by the distinguished scholar and practitioner Richard H. Ullman. The book demonstrates the dilemma faced by the organizers of a Festschrift for a prolific author with wide-ranging interests: Should the chapters focus on, and collectively do justice to, one topic alone; or should the book take a wide-ranging approach that is more representative of the broad spectrum of subjects analyzed by the honoree? The editors of this volume have some success in following both routes simultaneously, albeit with some necessary trade-offs.
The Department of Defense (DoD) has embarked on a new initiative-the Third Offset Strategyin orde... more The Department of Defense (DoD) has embarked on a new initiative-the Third Offset Strategyin order to "sustain and advance America's military dominance for the 21 st century." The initiative is necessitated in part by the fact that "DoD no longer holds exclusive access to some of the most cutting-edge technology the way [it] once did." For this reason, DoD will intensify its efforts to "explore and develop new operational concepts, and new approaches to warfighting, war-gaming and professional military education." 3 This initiative, and the resources required to make it a reality, are urgently needed. As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey observed in DoD's report of the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, he expects. .. the risk of interstate conflict in East Asia to rise, the vulnerability of our platforms and basing to increase, our technology edge to erode, instability to persist in the Middle East, and threats posed by violent extremist organizations to endure. Nearly any potential future conflict will occur on a much faster pace and on a more technically challenging battlefield. And, in the case of U.S. involvement in conflicts overseas, the homeland will no longer be a sanctuary either for our forces or for our citizens. 4 Present trends, in short, are not favorable. Of particular concern for future U.S. power projection operations is the accelerating proliferation of systems and concepts aimed at impeding U.S. forces' access to key regions in Eurasia and dramatically raising the risks and suppressing the 1 The opinions and conclusions expressed in this testimony are the author's alone and should not be interpreted as representing those of RAND or any of the sponsors of its research. This product is part of the RAND Corporation testimony series. RAND testimonies record testimony presented by RAND associates to federal, state, or local legislative committees; government-appointed commissions and panels; and private review and oversight bodies. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.
The challenges of the future demand effective and coordinated action by nations with common inter... more The challenges of the future demand effective and coordinated action by nations with common interests. For the United States and its allies, NATO is by far the best vehicle available for organizing such action. NATO has made impressive strides toward adapting itself to the demands of a changed and changing world, but its members should recognize that neither the Alliance nor their own military establishments are yet perfectly suited to these demands. Fielding the requisite military capabilities will not come cheaply, nor will further institutional changes within NATO be cost-free. But it is well worth the effort.
: For U.S. defense planners, these are the best of times and the worst of times. On the one hand,... more : For U.S. defense planners, these are the best of times and the worst of times. On the one hand, with the collapse of our erstwhile Cold War adversary, basic questions of national security strategy are once again in play. In light of this change, there has never been greater scope for reviewing U.S. national objectives and threats to them, creatively weighing these against resources available, and crafting a strategy suitable to new and emerging conditions. At the same time, extraordinary developments emerging from the technology base are opening up possibilities for radically new ways of conducting military operations. Taken together, these trends should spark a wide-ranging set of debates about the best way for this nation to go about protecting and advancing its interests in the future, the roles that military power should play in U.S. national security strategy, and the appropriate size and mix of U.S. military forces. Yet, to date, these debates have seemed constricted, if not...
Edward L. (Ted) Warner has had a long career as an educator, mentor, analyst, treaty negotiator, ... more Edward L. (Ted) Warner has had a long career as an educator, mentor, analyst, treaty negotiator, and more. This Festschrift is a tribute from those who have worked with him over the decades. Among his many notable accomplishments, perhaps the most important has been the opportunity to mentor a substantial number of exceptionally talented men and women regarding various aspects of U.S. and Russian defense and arms control policy.
: Glenn Altran Kent was a uniquely acute player in American defense policy in the second half of ... more : Glenn Altran Kent was a uniquely acute player in American defense policy in the second half of the 20th century. From 1957, when he joined the Weapons Plans Division of the Air Staff in the Pentagon, until his retirement from active duty in 1974, he was among the most perceptive and influential officers in the United States Air Force. For the next two decades, from his perch at the RAND Corporation, he published analyses on a broad range of topics that both shaped and raised the level of debates regarding the nation's security. A selected list of the issues in which General Kent played a decisive role is sufficient to give a sense of the scope of his influence: the inception of the single integrated operational plan (SIOP) governing the wartime employment of U.S. strategic nuclear forces, the acknowledgement, in the early 1960s, of the dominance of strategic offensive nuclear forces and the subsequent abandonment by the mid-1960s of major efforts to field strategic defenses, t...
: Amid the seemingly unrelenting welter of security-related crises U.S. and allied leaders have f... more : Amid the seemingly unrelenting welter of security-related crises U.S. and allied leaders have faced in recent years, it has not gone unnoticed that trends in the capabilities of conventional military forces have, from the perspective of the United States, been moving in an unfavorable direction over the past decade or more. This realization has not been the result of any failed military operations at the hands of a regional state adversary. Indeed, in 2011, U.S. and allied forces were able to decisively tip the balance against Muammar Gaddafi s Libyan forces without really breaking a sweat. Rather, observers have been impressed by other indicators of growing threats to U.S. military dominance. The steady, impressive growth of China s military capabilities, coupled with its development of strategies for counterintervention, has been the leading source of concern in this regard. But other states, including Russia, Iran, and North Korea and even some nonstate actors, such as Hezbolla...
: The military forces of the United States are on the threshold of fielding new capabilities that... more : The military forces of the United States are on the threshold of fielding new capabilities that, in concert, represent a revolutionary transformation in the ability to prosecute large scale theater warfare. These capabilities, if fully exploited, can allow comparatively small numbers of forces to observe, assess, engage, and effectively attack enemy assets especially moving land, sea, and air forces over a large area. These new capabilities are thus well suited to meeting the needs of a demanding U.S. defense strategy that calls for forces that can rapidly project military power over long distances, apply that power in a discriminate fashion, and achieve highly asymmetric, favorable outcomes. This report does not argue that the nation should be spending more on defense. It does argue that the Department of Defense should reexamine its force mix and investment priorities in order to exploit more fully and more rapidly important opportunities that exist to enhance U.S. capabilities ...
Deterrence of nuclear use through the threat of retaliation could be highly problematic in many p... more Deterrence of nuclear use through the threat of retaliation could be highly problematic in many plausible conflict scenarios with nuclear-armed regional adversaries. This could compel U.S. leaders to temper their military and political objectives if they come into conflict with these states. This book examines the reasons behind this important shift in the international security environment and its strategic and force planning implications.Deterring nuclear use by regional adversaries such as North Korea could be problematic in some situations. This book examines the strategic and force planning implications of this shift in the international security environment.
... US forces can prevail over the conventional forces of any nation, provided the full pan-oply ... more ... US forces can prevail over the conventional forces of any nation, provided the full pan-oply ... daunting challenges ema-nating from states and nonstate adversaries, will impose new demands on ... These demands will stress our forces both quali-tatively (by creating needs for new ...
This collection of essays celebrates more than four decades of international relations research b... more This collection of essays celebrates more than four decades of international relations research by the distinguished scholar and practitioner Richard H. Ullman. The book demonstrates the dilemma faced by the organizers of a Festschrift for a prolific author with wide-ranging interests: Should the chapters focus on, and collectively do justice to, one topic alone; or should the book take a wide-ranging approach that is more representative of the broad spectrum of subjects analyzed by the honoree? The editors of this volume have some success in following both routes simultaneously, albeit with some necessary trade-offs.
The Department of Defense (DoD) has embarked on a new initiative-the Third Offset Strategyin orde... more The Department of Defense (DoD) has embarked on a new initiative-the Third Offset Strategyin order to "sustain and advance America's military dominance for the 21 st century." The initiative is necessitated in part by the fact that "DoD no longer holds exclusive access to some of the most cutting-edge technology the way [it] once did." For this reason, DoD will intensify its efforts to "explore and develop new operational concepts, and new approaches to warfighting, war-gaming and professional military education." 3 This initiative, and the resources required to make it a reality, are urgently needed. As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey observed in DoD's report of the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, he expects. .. the risk of interstate conflict in East Asia to rise, the vulnerability of our platforms and basing to increase, our technology edge to erode, instability to persist in the Middle East, and threats posed by violent extremist organizations to endure. Nearly any potential future conflict will occur on a much faster pace and on a more technically challenging battlefield. And, in the case of U.S. involvement in conflicts overseas, the homeland will no longer be a sanctuary either for our forces or for our citizens. 4 Present trends, in short, are not favorable. Of particular concern for future U.S. power projection operations is the accelerating proliferation of systems and concepts aimed at impeding U.S. forces' access to key regions in Eurasia and dramatically raising the risks and suppressing the 1 The opinions and conclusions expressed in this testimony are the author's alone and should not be interpreted as representing those of RAND or any of the sponsors of its research. This product is part of the RAND Corporation testimony series. RAND testimonies record testimony presented by RAND associates to federal, state, or local legislative committees; government-appointed commissions and panels; and private review and oversight bodies. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.
The challenges of the future demand effective and coordinated action by nations with common inter... more The challenges of the future demand effective and coordinated action by nations with common interests. For the United States and its allies, NATO is by far the best vehicle available for organizing such action. NATO has made impressive strides toward adapting itself to the demands of a changed and changing world, but its members should recognize that neither the Alliance nor their own military establishments are yet perfectly suited to these demands. Fielding the requisite military capabilities will not come cheaply, nor will further institutional changes within NATO be cost-free. But it is well worth the effort.
: For U.S. defense planners, these are the best of times and the worst of times. On the one hand,... more : For U.S. defense planners, these are the best of times and the worst of times. On the one hand, with the collapse of our erstwhile Cold War adversary, basic questions of national security strategy are once again in play. In light of this change, there has never been greater scope for reviewing U.S. national objectives and threats to them, creatively weighing these against resources available, and crafting a strategy suitable to new and emerging conditions. At the same time, extraordinary developments emerging from the technology base are opening up possibilities for radically new ways of conducting military operations. Taken together, these trends should spark a wide-ranging set of debates about the best way for this nation to go about protecting and advancing its interests in the future, the roles that military power should play in U.S. national security strategy, and the appropriate size and mix of U.S. military forces. Yet, to date, these debates have seemed constricted, if not...
Edward L. (Ted) Warner has had a long career as an educator, mentor, analyst, treaty negotiator, ... more Edward L. (Ted) Warner has had a long career as an educator, mentor, analyst, treaty negotiator, and more. This Festschrift is a tribute from those who have worked with him over the decades. Among his many notable accomplishments, perhaps the most important has been the opportunity to mentor a substantial number of exceptionally talented men and women regarding various aspects of U.S. and Russian defense and arms control policy.
: Glenn Altran Kent was a uniquely acute player in American defense policy in the second half of ... more : Glenn Altran Kent was a uniquely acute player in American defense policy in the second half of the 20th century. From 1957, when he joined the Weapons Plans Division of the Air Staff in the Pentagon, until his retirement from active duty in 1974, he was among the most perceptive and influential officers in the United States Air Force. For the next two decades, from his perch at the RAND Corporation, he published analyses on a broad range of topics that both shaped and raised the level of debates regarding the nation's security. A selected list of the issues in which General Kent played a decisive role is sufficient to give a sense of the scope of his influence: the inception of the single integrated operational plan (SIOP) governing the wartime employment of U.S. strategic nuclear forces, the acknowledgement, in the early 1960s, of the dominance of strategic offensive nuclear forces and the subsequent abandonment by the mid-1960s of major efforts to field strategic defenses, t...
: Amid the seemingly unrelenting welter of security-related crises U.S. and allied leaders have f... more : Amid the seemingly unrelenting welter of security-related crises U.S. and allied leaders have faced in recent years, it has not gone unnoticed that trends in the capabilities of conventional military forces have, from the perspective of the United States, been moving in an unfavorable direction over the past decade or more. This realization has not been the result of any failed military operations at the hands of a regional state adversary. Indeed, in 2011, U.S. and allied forces were able to decisively tip the balance against Muammar Gaddafi s Libyan forces without really breaking a sweat. Rather, observers have been impressed by other indicators of growing threats to U.S. military dominance. The steady, impressive growth of China s military capabilities, coupled with its development of strategies for counterintervention, has been the leading source of concern in this regard. But other states, including Russia, Iran, and North Korea and even some nonstate actors, such as Hezbolla...
: The military forces of the United States are on the threshold of fielding new capabilities that... more : The military forces of the United States are on the threshold of fielding new capabilities that, in concert, represent a revolutionary transformation in the ability to prosecute large scale theater warfare. These capabilities, if fully exploited, can allow comparatively small numbers of forces to observe, assess, engage, and effectively attack enemy assets especially moving land, sea, and air forces over a large area. These new capabilities are thus well suited to meeting the needs of a demanding U.S. defense strategy that calls for forces that can rapidly project military power over long distances, apply that power in a discriminate fashion, and achieve highly asymmetric, favorable outcomes. This report does not argue that the nation should be spending more on defense. It does argue that the Department of Defense should reexamine its force mix and investment priorities in order to exploit more fully and more rapidly important opportunities that exist to enhance U.S. capabilities ...
Deterrence of nuclear use through the threat of retaliation could be highly problematic in many p... more Deterrence of nuclear use through the threat of retaliation could be highly problematic in many plausible conflict scenarios with nuclear-armed regional adversaries. This could compel U.S. leaders to temper their military and political objectives if they come into conflict with these states. This book examines the reasons behind this important shift in the international security environment and its strategic and force planning implications.Deterring nuclear use by regional adversaries such as North Korea could be problematic in some situations. This book examines the strategic and force planning implications of this shift in the international security environment.
Uploads
Papers by David Ochmanek