U.S. President Joe Biden’s recent approval of a major shift in U.S. nuclear weapons strategy highlights the attention the country’s national security officials are paying to Chinese ambitions for influence in the world.
As changes emerge in the types of threats facing the U.S., the American military adjusts its strategic focus, budgets and planning. For instance, after 9/11, the U.S. military refocused away from its Cold War emphasis on preparing for combat against a powerful nation – the Soviet Union – and toward fighting small terrorist and insurgent groups instead.
Over the past decade, the Pentagon’s efforts have shifted back to preparing for what officials call “great power competition” among the U.S., Russia and China.
The most important strategic shift that’s evident in planning for great power competition is a focus on deterrence. In classic military strategy, deterrence focuses on making an adversary believe they can never achieve their goals by military force, because the response would be overwhelming and decisive. The National Defense Strategy released in October 2022 – the document that articulates the nation’s goals, objectives and resource allocation for the next two years – explicitly recognizes the potential risk of tensions and open conflict with Russia or China, and it calls for “integrated deterrence” to prevent it. That means combined efforts from the military, intelligence and diplomatic agencies across the U.S. government.
The National Military Strategy – the military’s section of the overarching National Defense Strategy – lays out how the U.S. armed forces will contribute to that effort. As a former assistant secretary of defense and Pentagon chief of staff, I see that the military is focusing on three main goals to achieve integrated deterrence and prevent a conflict with Russia or China.
New operational plans
For the military, integrated deterrence means the armed forces will depend both on where forces are located and what they can do once they’re in action to influence adversaries’ decisions about when, where, how – and whether – to use military force against the U.S. or its interests.
In the shift away from counterterrorism toward preparation for a great power conflict, the Defense Department has developed new ways to deal with the fact that Russia and China, unlike small terrorist groups, can fight in the air, on land and at sea anywhere around the world – and online and in space, too.
First among those methods is what the Pentagon calls “dynamic force employment,” in which U.S. military forces are deployed rapidly around the world, without predictable rotation schedules. This approach can reassure allies facing threats from Russia or China.
For example, the U.S. has, at times, deployed as many as 10,000 troops to Poland. The troops are not permanently stationed there, but a continuous presence of U.S. forces keeps Russia guessing about the size and capabilities of the force and demonstrates a commitment to support nervous NATO allies in Eastern Europe.
Second is a shift of personnel and capabilities to what is called “multi-domain operations,” in which units with different missions across air, land, sea, space and cyberspace plan and train together. That way, they can be prepared to work closely together in actual conflicts.
This level of collaboration allows the nation to respond to threats in a variety of ways. For instance, challenges to American naval power on the high seas do not have to be met directly with corresponding naval action, but instead could be answered with cyberattacks or from space.
This approach might make the Chinese People’s Liberation Army think twice about launching military operations against Taiwan. Not only would the Chinese potentially face a fierce direct conflict, but U.S. cyber and space operations could also disrupt or destroy Chinese military communications, hindering their attack.
Investments in modernization
Recent research has shown that China’s investments in its military personnel and capabilities – particularly in air, naval and nuclear forces – have grown exponentially over the past two decades, to a level estimated at near parity with the United States. This has prompted the U.S. to modernize its own military’s corresponding capabilities. For the 2024 budget, the Department of Defense allocated a whopping US$234.9 billion for programs to support integrated deterrence, which likely represents a 10% increase over previous spending plans.
Some of this money will go to developing and acquiring F-35 fighter jets and building Columbia-class, nuclear-powered submarines. When the U.S. and its allies in the Pacific region, such as Japan, South Korea and Australia, deploy these planes and submarines, they will remind potential adversaries of American military power – which is itself a deterrent against foreign aggression.
Over the past 10 years, China’s rapid expansion of its nuclear weapon supply has alarmed senior policymakers in the U.S. Although then-President Barack Obama pushed countries to envision a world free of nuclear weapons, he approved the most expensive and significant upgrade ever to the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In 2022, the Biden administration renewed a financial commitment to “field a modern, resilient nuclear triad” consisting of intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched missiles and long-range nuclear bombers.
Advancing technology
In 2019, the Space Force was established as a separate branch of the armed forces and tasked with defending American space-based assets and upholding international law. Because of the importance of satellite communications to military operations and civilian life – including internet connectivity – the Space Force works closely with Cyber Command, the military organization charged with defending the nation against cyberattacks, to prevent malicious hackers from disrupting systems vital to the world, such as the Global Positioning System, widely known as GPS.
Recent intelligence indicates that China plans to conduct destructive cyberattacks against U.S. domestic critical infrastructure, including the electric grid, during any conflict. To counter those plans, Cyber Command continues to enhance its abilities to defend U.S. systems and companies against cyberattacks, as well as to conduct attacks against systems in other countries.
The Pentagon is also seeking to counterbalance China’s rapidly expanding military forces by using artificial intelligence software in a program called the Replicator Initiative. The effort seeks to build thousands of low-cost, AI-directed autonomous aircraft and boats that can be used in combat to “counter the (Chinese military)’s mass with mass of our own,” in the words of Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks.
Integration with allies and partners
The U.S. military has also sought to strengthen alliances with other countries, especially over the past four years of the Biden administration.
Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine led NATO to expand its membership as well as the numbers and capabilities of troops available to the organization. The U.S. has reinforced its commitment to NATO, increasing troop deployments in Eastern Europe and support for European defense initiatives by committing nearly $3 billion in funding for additional fighter aircraft, air-defense batteries and munitions.
In Asia, around the Indian Ocean and across the Pacific Ocean, a vast region that the government often calls “the Indo-Pacific,” the U.S. has strengthened alliances with Japan, South Korea and the Philippines by conducting numerous military exercises and increasing military assistance. Efforts like the annual Marine Aviation Support exercise are aimed at countering Chinese military and political influence.
The U.S. has also sought to strengthen its alliances with the U.K. and Australia, with a commitment to sell up to five conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines to the Australian navy by 2030.
Collectively, the U.S. has combined all of these efforts into a coordinated approach seeking to avoid open conflict with China and Russia. But the work is not yet done: The global political and military landscape is ever-changing, and new security challenges are always emerging.
Grace Jones, a master’s student in public policy and research assistant at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, contributed research to this article.
Eric Rosenbach is Senior Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School.
The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.
© The Conversation
16 Comments
Login to comment
TaiwanIsNotChina
It should never have been focused exclusively on terrorism in the first place. Same goes with the CIA and NSA.
Cephus
“The global political and military landscape is ever-changing, and new security challenges are always emerging.”
Well, Joe knows that but for the last three and half years he was busy implementing DEI in the military. I hope we will never have open wars because the current regime and the military are not battle ready.
Hello Kitty 321
Hadn't anybody told them that the Soviet Union had ceased to exist ten years earlier?
bass4funk
A little too late, but better late than ever, more needs to be done.
wallace
Terrorism now happens online with election interferences, fake news and videos, DOS, and hack attacks.
Moonraker
All in jeopardy if Trump gets in and sells out to his Russian master.
Mocheake
True, but he swears he is more patriotic and a lot believe him. Dodged military service by claiming he had painful bone spurs, sold out Ukraine and turned his back to NATO, supports an authoritarian and is best friends with Kim Jong-un. He will also get millions voting for him in the pillar of democracy. Pretty telling. America is screwed if he wins.
Desert Tortoise
Three comments. Number one the US military began focusing on a growing Chinese military towards the end of the 2000s, 2008-2009 ish.
Second, the DEI you complain about has been a feature of the US military going back to the Reagan years when I was on active duty. We very much promoted equal opportunity and had a formal organization to do so. You will find this ingrained in the military leadership. Why? We need anybody willing to train hard, learn how to fight and is willing to risk their lives in combat. What your skin color, ethnic heritage or sex is is completely immaterial. We don't discriminate for the simple reason doing so hurts morale and unit cohesion. WE had gay members in the 1980s when it was a punishable offense but even then nothing was said unless it somehow became a discipline problem because very often those gay members were leaders, both officer and enlisted. It was not uncommon for a gay service member to be someone you looked up to. What they did in their personal lives didn't matter.
Third you know nothing about the battle readiness of the US military. The deadly secret of the US military is the training and motivation of the enlisted force. They are the members who make things happen. It is the career enlisted trying hard to promote and make retirement who accept leadership responsibility early and do their jobs without an officer having to look over their shoulder and direct them every minute. They come to the officers with new ideas to do things and a good officer lets them try. That is how we innovate. The Chinese and Russian military's do not have that cadre of career enlisted troops who make things happen. In the Russian or Chinese military an officer would have to tell the troops how to do everything. In the US Navy I would ask my division 1st class or my Chief "hey, I need this or that done, can you do it?" They invariably say "yes sir" and promptly make it happen, unless it is something stupid in which case they will say something like "not a good idea sir" and explain why. A good officer listens to his troops.
Cephus
Second, the DEI you complain about has been a feature of the US military going back to the Reagan years when I was on active duty. We very much promoted equal opportunity and had a formal organization to do so. You will find this ingrained in the military leadership. Why? We need anybody willing to train hard, learn how to fight and is willing to risk their lives in combat. What your skin color, ethnic heritage or sex is is completely immaterial.@Desert tortoise
Above is what I call a "self defeating argument." If you can train hard and get promotion due to your own initiative why do we need DEI? About battle readiness have you seen what's going on on the Middle East Lately? Since 2023, Iran backed militias have coordinated more than 170 attacks on U.S military bases and assets in Syria, Iraq and Jordan? This cant or could not happen under President DJT are real Commander in Chief.
bass4funk
And because of what you say is the reason why we don't need DEI. You want the best and you want to be judged by your merit and not by the color of your skin. DEI needs to Die, it is racist and it doesn't bring out the best in any person.
Pukey2
Fighting a made-up bogeyman to keep the war machine going and hence stealing more tax-payers' money (which should have been spent helping American citizens).
deanzaZZR
Getting all meta here this is why China has never been a fan of the Russia/Ukraine situation as it allows the USA to lump China together with Russia in the geopolitical context.
The sooner a peaceful solution is found to that conflict the better for all concerned.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Russia's barbarism and China's backing are on full display. Nothing made up about it.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Maybe don't assist war criminals?
No peace without respecting Ukraine's territorial integrity. China wouldn't stand for it and neither should Ukraine.
Ken
@Cephus
Because DEI in this day and age means differences in color, religion, sexual origin etc. DEI was intended to give the "qualified" members of other groups that have less of a chance for the same opportunity. Blame your boy Elon for using his social media to attempt to "rewrite" what the definition of DEI is. Millions of his and Trumps followers took Elon's phony definition of a term that was never comprehended in their vocabulary and ran to tell all their friends. Misinformation is dangerous but so are the ones who believe it without doing any research
Desert Tortoise
To attract qualified people from racial, ethnic and other groups that whites historically have discriminated against, and then make them feel like they belong. Minority groups are not going to join if they sense the military is hostile to their presence. Manpower is hard to come by. Smart leaders, and we have lots of them in the military, look for ways to make service attractive so people stay around for a career. That's our secret sauce. That is how we get trained people to grow into leaders and why our enlisted ranks are so motivated and competent. It is how we accumulate that cadre of skilled people who know what needs to be done and does it without having to have an officer tell them want to do all the time. They have been around long enough to know their job and do it well. Very few other military's in the world have that quality and it is one of the great advantages the US has over its adversaries.