Strategic Forums

Follow

• 

  Revising the Two-Major Theater War Standard

  Hans Binnendijk and Richard L. Kugler

  This Strategic Forum paper evaluates the continued relevance of the post–Cold War “two–major theater war” (two-MTW) standard that has guided U.S. defense planning since 1993. Arguing that the strategic environment has evolved beyond the assumptions underpinning the two-MTW framework, the authors contend that preparing to fight two nearly simultaneous large regional wars no longer adequately captures emerging threats. They highlight the declining likelihood of concurrent conflicts in the Persian Gulf and on the Korean Peninsula, the rise of China as a potential peer competitor, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the growing importance of peacetime engagement and smaller-scale contingencies. The paper proposes a revised planning construct—“one plus one-half plus one-half” contingencies—combining capacity for one large theater war with forces for two medium-sized operations elsewhere. This approach aims to enhance flexibility, strategic responsiveness, and adaptability in both peacetime and wartime planning.

• 

  Regional Conflicts with Strategic Consequences

  M. Elaine Bunn, David E. Mosher, and Richard D. Sokolsky

  During the Cold War, strategic capabilities were synonymous with nuclear capabilities, and U.S. strategic planning focused on nuclear deterrence and response against a single adversary. Today, more potential enemies are developing asymmetric capabilities to inhibit or prevent U.S. military intervention in regional conflicts— in short, to wage strategic warfare by implicitly or explicitly threatening highvalue political, military, or economic targets with weapons of mass destruction and disruption. U.S. security over the next several decades will depend increasingly on the ability to deter and respond effectively to strategic regional conflicts with significant escalation potential.

• 

  The U.S. Strategic Posture Review: Issues for the New Administration

  M. Elaine Bunn and Richard D. Sokolsky

  This Strategic Forum examines key issues facing a new U.S. administration in reassessing the nation’s strategic posture. It argues that post–Cold War conditions require a more integrated approach to deterrence that accounts for evolving threats from Russia, China, and emerging regional actors. The authors evaluate the role of nuclear forces, missile defense, and arms control in maintaining strategic stability while adapting to new security challenges. The paper highlights the need to balance offensive and defensive capabilities, sustain the credibility of extended deterrence, and modernize elements of the nuclear force structure. It concludes that a coherent strategic framework, linking nuclear policy, missile defense, and broader defense strategy, is essential to ensure effective deterrence and national security in a changing threat environment.

• 

  A Golden Opportunity: The Next Steps in U.S.-Indian Relations

  John C. Holzman

  This Strategic Forum examines opportunities to strengthen U.S.-India relations at a pivotal moment in the post–Cold War security environment. It argues that shifting geopolitical dynamics and India’s growing regional and global influence create conditions for expanded bilateral cooperation. The paper highlights areas for progress, including defense engagement, economic ties, and strategic dialogue, while acknowledging lingering constraints such as differing policy priorities and India’s tradition of strategic autonomy. It emphasizes the importance of sustained U.S. engagement to build trust, deepen cooperation, and align long-term interests. Ultimately, the analysis concludes that advancing the U.S.-India partnership can enhance regional stability, support a favorable balance of power in Asia, and contribute to broader U.S. national security objectives.

• 

  China: Making the Case for Realistic Engagement

  Michael E. Marti

  This Strategic Forum examines the role of engagement in U.S. policy toward China and argues for a more realistic approach grounded in China’s long-term strategic objectives. It highlights Beijing’s ambition to emerge as a dominant regional power while avoiding direct confrontation and costly arms races. The paper cautions against assumptions that U.S. engagement alone can significantly reshape China’s political or strategic trajectory. Instead, it advocates a balanced strategy that combines continued engagement with prudent hedging to protect U.S. interests. The analysis emphasizes the need to align expectations with achievable outcomes, recognizing both the opportunities and limits of cooperation. Ultimately, it concludes that realistic engagement, tempered by strategic competition, is essential to managing the evolving U.S.-China relationship and maintaining regional stability.

• 

  U.S.-Saudi Relations: Rebuilding the Strategic Consensus

  Joseph McMillan

  This Strategic Forum examines the strain in U.S.-Saudi relations and outlines steps to rebuild a shared strategic foundation in the aftermath of shifting regional dynamics and rising tensions. It argues that the partnership, long rooted in mutual security interests, has been weakened by political, military, and societal pressures, including the challenges of sustaining U.S. military presence and differing priorities in the Middle East. The paper emphasizes Saudi Arabia’s critical role in U.S. efforts to address regional instability and counter terrorism, while highlighting the sensitivities surrounding sovereignty and legitimacy within the Kingdom. It proposes rebuilding consensus through clearer strategic alignment, improved diplomatic coordination, and adjustments to U.S. military posture. Ultimately, the analysis underscores that restoring trust and managing mutual expectations are essential to sustaining an effective bilateral relationship.

• 

  Adversary Use of NBC Weapons: A Neglected Challenge

  John F. Reichart

  Understanding has evolved in the last decade about how an adversary might use nuclear, radiological, biological, or chemical weapons against the United States. Increasingly, America is concluding that potential adversaries view these not as “weapons of last resort” but rather as tactically and strategically useful. The United States can expect their use early in a conflict as well as throughout the extended battlefield, including on U.S. territory itself.

• 

  Normalizing U.S.-Russian Relations

  Eugene B. Rumer and Richard D. Sokolsky

  This paper examines the challenges of defining a stable framework for engagement between Washington and Moscow. Past efforts to characterize the relationship as either a strategic partnership or a renewed rivalry have proven insufficient. The authors propose a pragmatic, interest-based approach that evaluates cooperation and competition on a case-by-case basis. The article highlights how enduring differences in political values, security priorities, and global objectives continue to shape bilateral interactions. While opportunities for cooperation remain in areas such as arms control and nonproliferation, they are often limited by persistent mistrust and conflicting interests. A more flexible and realistic policy, grounded in U.S. national interests, offers a more effective way to manage the complexities of U.S.-Russian relations.

• 

  Do European Union Defense Initiatives Threaten NATO?

  Kori N. Schake

  This paper looks at whether European efforts to develop independent defense capabilities undermine or support the transatlantic alliance. EU defense initiatives, particularly the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP), do not inherently threaten NATO. Instead, the primary concern lies in Europe’s limited military capabilities and continued reliance on U.S. support. This paper explores how EU-led operations, focused largely on crisis management, differ from NATO’s broader warfighting role. It highlights the importance of coordination, interoperability, and avoiding duplication between the two institutions. Stronger European defense capabilities, if aligned with NATO, can reinforce, rather than weaken, the alliance and contribute to more effective burden sharing.

• 

  Renovating U.S. Strategic Arms Control Policy

  Richard D. Sokolsky

  This paper argues that traditional, treaty-based approaches to arms control are increasingly misaligned with the post–Cold War security environment. With progress on formal agreements stalled and U.S. and Russian priorities diverging, reliance on legally binding treaties has limited further reductions in nuclear risks. The paper proposes a more flexible framework centered on unilateral and reciprocal measures, cooperative threat reduction, and increased transparency. These approaches have already produced meaningful results and are better suited to addressing challenges such as tactical nuclear weapons, nondeployed warheads, and nuclear safety. A reoriented strategy focused on reducing nuclear risks, improving U.S.-Russian relations, and supporting broader national security objectives offers a more practical path forward.

• 

  A Military for the 21st Century: Lessons from the Recent Past

  Anthony C. Zinni

  This paper looks at how U.S. military operations have changed since the Cold War and what those experiences suggest for the future. Drawing on recent missions, Zinni shows that the operating environment has become more complex, not less, with forces expected to handle everything from major conflicts to peacekeeping and humanitarian crises. The paper highlights the growing importance of adaptability, joint operations, and readiness across a wide range of scenarios. It also emphasizes the need to better align force structure, training, and strategy with these evolving demands. It argues for a military that is flexible, responsive, and prepared to operate across diverse and unpredictable challenges.

• 

  China Rising: New Challenges to the U.S. Security Posture

  Jason D. Ellis and Todd M. Koca

  This Strategic Forum explores how China’s growing military capabilities and strategic ambitions are reshaping U.S. defense planning. It points to China’s expanding defense budget, modernization of its forces, and increasing missile capabilities as key factors driving concern in Washington. The paper also highlights persistent uncertainty surrounding China’s intentions, including limited transparency, tensions over Taiwan, and concerns about proliferation and espionage. These dynamics make it difficult for U.S. policymakers to assess future risks and plan effectively. It also emphasizes that China’s rise presents long-term strategic challenges, requiring the United States to adapt its security posture, maintain deterrence, and prepare for a shifting balance of power in Asia.

• 

  Transforming the Armed Forces of Central and East Europe

  Jeffrey Simon

  This Strategic Forum looks at the ongoing effort to reshape post-Cold War militaries in the region into effective contributors to Euro-Atlantic security. The paper highlights how early optimism about integration with Western institutions gave way to more difficult, long-term challenges, including limited resources, incomplete reform plans, and institutional friction. It also explores key issues such as downsizing forces, restructuring defense institutions, and strengthening civilian control of the military. The transition to professional forces and the integration of defense ministries also present political and social challenges that complicate reform efforts. This paper also emphasizes that while progress has been made, sustained commitment, realistic planning, and external support are critical to completing the transformation and ensuring these forces can operate effectively within NATO frameworks.

• 

  Military Lessons from Desert One to the Balkans

  Ike Skelton

  This Strategic Forum reviews key U.S. military operations from the failed Iran hostage rescue in 1980 through interventions in Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, the Persian Gulf, and the Balkans to identify enduring lessons for future force development. The U.S. military improved significantly after the post-Vietnam period by learning from both failures and successes across these operations. This paper highlights recurring challenges, including unclear missions, coordination gaps, force protection, and the need for effective joint operations. It also emphasizes the growing complexity of missions, which increasingly include peacekeeping, coalition operations, and nontraditional contingencies. Future effectiveness depends on applying past lessons while preparing for different and evolving forms of conflict.