Author Description

This monograph looks at the reasons to change the national military strategy to a win-hold-win strategy from the existing win-win Two-Major Regional Conflict (MRC) strategy, and then examines naval strategy and doctrine in the context of the required new mission of holding an aggressor in a second MRC. The monograph assesses the requirements to accomplish the holding mission in light of the ongoing revolution in military affairs, and ultimately seeks to address the contributions and limitations of naval forces in stopping and holding an aggressor in a second MRC. Current defense spending is below that required to both maintain the force structure to execute the two MRC strategy and modernize the force. Cuts in defense spending in support of balancing the U.S. budget, justified by the end of the Cold War and reduced threat, will result in a military force structure below that required to support the existing strategy. Moving to a win-hold-win strategy and smaller force structure will still allow the U.S. to maintain the capability to respond to two MRCs, although at increased risk from both a military and foreign policy perspective. Supporting a smaller force structure could free up the funds required to ensure force modernization. Naval forces bring a unique set of capabilities to a win-hold-win national military strategy, and can make a decisive contribution to the execution of the holding mission. The Navy white paper, From the Sea, committed the naval service to the Support of land forces through littoral operations, and the missions of forward presence, crisis response, and power projection ashore. The holding mission in a win-hold-win national military strategy is a logical extension of the enabling mission, and is entirely consistent with the concepts and direction of current naval strategy. It is reasonable to assume that forces designed for the enabling mission could be leveraged, within acceptable cost limts, to successfully carry out the holding mission.