On August 4, 2011, CNA convened a conference of leading international security, foreign policy, and maritime strategy experts at the Army and Navy Club in Washington, D.C. Its purpose was to examine U.S. grand and naval strategy in light of new domestic and international dynamics, and to discuss the strategic principles that should inform the Nation and its naval services in the coming decades. Key insights and recommendations for U.S. naval strategy are: Forward presence will continue to be an important and unique contribution to U.S. military and foreign policy. Forward presence provides political and military decision-makers with a range of flexible and scalable options that can be tailored to a specific situation and context. U.S. naval forces are one of the greatest asymmetric capabilities in the world and should be protected from budget cuts because they provide a high degree of return on investment. A move towards equipment that is produced faster and has the expectation of a shorter service life would be tremendously beneficial for the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. military as a whole, because it could then experiment and replace equipment at a faster rate. The maritime arena is more fungible than others. Ships are more mobile than other types of military equipment and can operate equally well in different environments, which is a major strength compared to the other services. The United States has a vital, central, and indispensable role in maintaining and supporting the global system, which has economic order at the center. Seapower is crucial for this role because it ensures access to the world's largest markets, patrols principal trade routes, and safeguards oil from the Gulf. The United States is more closely tied to the international economy than it has been at any other time in U.S. history, and thus has strong incentives to play a leading role in the international system. As part of a grand strategy of restraint, the United States should adopt a military strategy of 'offshore balancing.' This is a military strategy of burden shifting, not burden sharing, as it encourages our allies and partners to take on more responsibilities. For the United States, the greatest danger from terrorism is not the attack itself, but rather our response to it. Effective military planning should move beyond a focus on capabilities and pay greater attention to an enemy's behavior and intent.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.