Future defense challenges in the geographic focus areas of today’s defense strategy–U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)and U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM)–are likely to require the option of large-scale ground forces as an option for policymakers, according to a report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
“An overarching conclusion is that responses to violent disorder, natural catastrophes, and consequential third-party conflict, as well as major enabling and ‘theater-setting’ actions, are among the likeliest large-scale ground force demands over the next two decades,” the report, “Beyond the Last War,” said.
That conclusion applies to CENTCOM and PACOM, but likely holds across all COCOMS, said CSIS Senior Fellow and Project Director Nathan Freier, during the report rollout May 1.
Of the four major findings from the Army-backed study, the most important was that the United States “faces future regional contingencies where policymakers will want to consider large-scale ground force options.”
By large-scale, the report means size commitments larger than an Army division, Marine expeditionary force, or some combination of general purpose force and Special Operations Forces.
The report said there are five “pacing archetypes” that would demand large-scale ground forces: humanitarian support, distributed security, enabling and support actions, peace operations and limited conventional campaigns.
“Classic major combat operations–like those over the last 12 years–are less likely,” said Freier.
More likely, and another key finding, he said, is that regional shaping will dominate the peacetime ground force agenda.
Current Defense Department and service priorities, the report found, “do not align well with the likeliest and most disruptive future large-scale ground force demands.”
Some concerns and assumptions that existed before the report was done were confirmed over the course of the study. That includes the assumption that wars between nations and people will continue to be important to U.S. strategy and policy going forward. That contradicts the notion some have that wars are on the wane, and will continue to taper off, he said.
Threats to access for U.S. forces are real and migrating across regions. For example, chemical, biological, radioactive and nuclear threats will continue to be an issue in the future, with concerns over their control, proliferation and development. So will the problem of access during contingency, a concern rising higher on the agenda.
Certain global trends will act as accelerants, Freier said, such as internal challenges to governments, environmental degradation and competition for strategic resources.
The United States will continue to have strong partnerships, but Freier said the resources of many partners are declining, leaving the United States as the most capable and able to respond. However, the study said that the strategic warning for the most traditional challenges is not likely to be available for increasing challenges of “disorder,” or the failure of authority to control territory, people, resources and capability.
The “real threat we face is ourselves and our ability to deny what we need and choose instead, what we prefer,” said Barry Pavel, director, Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security, The Atlantic Council, in discussing the report.
People prefer to consider short, clean and easy wars, said James Dubik, senior fellow at the Institute for the Study of War. Indications are that war in the future will be “brutish, hard, ambiguous and long,” said the retired Army lieutenant general.
The report was clear in that surprise will continue to feature in future ground force demand. Limited notice and a greater potential for more than one conflict at a time especially in CENTCOM are risks that need consideration, the report said.
The report concludes that with a complex future background, ground forces need to be more “tailorable, scalable, and expeditionary.” Additionally, that “shaping and understanding the strategic and operational environments are foundational to future success.”