国际战略研究中心-2022财年的美国军队：窥视预算和战略概述的深渊（英）-2021-14页_305kb

U.S. Military Forces in FY 2022: Summary

Core Content

The U.S. military force structure in Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 is under significant pressure due to strategic and budgetary constraints. The Biden administration's approach to military strategy and budgeting reflects a shift from the previous emphasis on great power competition to a broader, more integrated national security framework. However, the lack of substantial defense budget growth has raised concerns about the adequacy of current military capabilities to meet both immediate and long-term security demands.

Main Points

• Force Structure in the Abyss: The current force structure is facing a strategic and financial challenge, with the potential for significant reductions if budget growth continues. The Biden administration's FY 2022 budget maintains a slight decline in active-duty end strength and shows a cautious approach to modernization and force reallocation.

• Budget Constraints: The defense budget has remained flat since FY 2021, which is insufficient to meet the rising costs of personnel and operations. Congressional proposals to increase the budget may help stabilize force levels, but the administration's approach is seen as inadequate by some defense hawks.

• Strategic Focus on China: Despite the administration's broader national security strategy, the emphasis on China remains strong. However, the lack of investment in advanced technologies and the retention of legacy systems are seen as problematic by some analysts.

• Legacy Systems and Modernization: The term "legacy systems" is ambiguous, with some strategists advocating for the retirement of outdated platforms and others focusing on the replacement of old systems with modern equivalents. The military services have not fully embraced the latter approach, and the FY 2022 budget shows a continued reliance on manned systems.

• Public Opinion and Force Size: Public support for the current size of the military is strong, suggesting that significant cuts may not be politically feasible. The administration's strategy includes a focus on global engagement, which reinforces the need for a robust force structure.

Key Challenges

1. Regional Conflicts and Crisis Response: The U.S. military remains heavily engaged in regional conflicts and crisis response, which requires a sustained presence and increases operational tempo. This demand makes it difficult to reduce force size, even as the administration seeks to shift focus toward great power competition.

2. Strategy-Resources Gap: There is a growing mismatch between the defense strategy and available resources. The strategy calls for modernization, but the flat budget hinders this process. The need for 3–5% real growth in defense spending to maintain readiness and capabilities is widely recognized.

3. Shift to Great Power Conflict: The military is expected to transition toward a structure better suited for great power competition, but this shift is not yet fully realized. Critics argue that the current budget does not adequately support this transformation, particularly in terms of advanced technologies and the reduction of legacy systems.

4. Strategic Restraint Proposals: Some progressive and libertarian voices advocate for a more restrained foreign policy, reducing military involvement and focusing on global health, climate change, and diplomacy. However, these proposals have not gained significant traction, especially in light of the Afghanistan withdrawal and ongoing global threats.

Budget and Force Structure Trends

• Active-Duty End Strength: Declined slightly from 1,351,000 in FY 2021 to 1,346,400 in FY 2022.
• Reserve End Strength: Also declined slightly, from 800,200 to 799,500.
• Army and Air Force: Both services have seen reductions in personnel, with the Air Force facing particular pressure to reduce legacy systems.
• Navy: Slight decrease in ship numbers, though some modernization efforts are underway.
• Marine Corps: Substantial personnel cuts, contributing to nearly half of the DOD's FY 2022 personal reductions.

Recommendations

• A high-low mix of forces is recommended, with high-capability units for great power conflict and lower-capability units for regional operations.
• Increased reliance on reserve forces is suggested to help manage the burden of global commitments.
• A gradual transition to new technologies is necessary, but the pace of modernization must be balanced with maintaining current readiness.

Conclusion

The Biden administration's FY 2022 defense strategy and budget represent a cautious approach to force structure, balancing global engagement with the need for modernization. However, the lack of sustained budget growth and the ambiguity around "legacy systems" pose significant challenges. The administration is urged to provide a clearer rationale for its force structure decisions, as this has been absent for nearly two decades. The public's support for the current force level and the ongoing global security threats suggest that the U.S. military will remain a key component of national security policy for the foreseeable future.