战略与国际研究中心-The-US-as-a-Superpower_-Comparative-National-Military-Forces-and-Defense-Spending-Efforts_45页_172kb

Summary of "The US as a 'Superpower'" by Anthony H. Cordesman (CSIS, April 1998)

Core Content Overview

This document provides a detailed analysis of the United States' military capabilities and defense spending in comparison to global and NATO/European powers. It is structured into several parts focusing on different aspects of military strength, including conventional forces, nuclear forces, defense spending, and US forces within NATO. The data is sourced from the IISS's Military Balance reports and other defense-related documents, with figures spanning from 1985 to 1997.

Main Points

US Defense Efforts Relative to Global Efforts

• Military Spending (1995): The US spent significantly more on defense compared to other global powers, including China, Russia, France, Germany, and Turkey.
• Military Spending (1997): The US continued to lead in defense expenditure, maintaining a substantial edge over other countries.
• Military Manpower (1995): The US had the largest active military manpower globally, surpassing China, Russia, and other nations.
• Military Manpower (1997): The US remained the top in active military manpower, though the numbers showed some changes compared to 1995.

US Conventional Forces Relative to Global Conventional Forces

• Active Military Manpower: The US had significantly higher active military manpower than most global powers, including China, Russia, and others.
• Main Battle Tanks (1997): The US had fewer tanks than China, Russia, and other countries like India and Pakistan.
• Combat Aircraft (1997): The US had a much larger number of active combat aircraft compared to other global powers.
• Major Combat Ships (1997): The US maintained a strong lead in the number of major combat ships.
• Smaller Combat Ships (1997): The US had a larger number of smaller combat ships than most global powers.

US Nuclear Forces Relative to Global Nuclear Forces

• Nuclear Delivery Systems (1997): The US had a significant number of nuclear-capable assets, including ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and bombers.
• Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs): The US had 18 SSBNs, while Russia had 29.
• ICBMs: The US had 580 Minuteman III and 50 Peacekeeper missiles, while Russia had over 800 ICBMs.
• Bombers: The US had a large number of heavy bombers, including B-1B and B-52H models, while Russia had fewer but still a notable number.
• Arms Control: The US had plans for reducing nuclear forces in line with START treaties, but it still maintained a substantial nuclear arsenal.

US Defense Efforts Relative to NATO/European Efforts

• Military Spending (1985-1995): The US consistently spent more on defense than the combined spending of NATO and NATO Europe.
• Military Spending as a Percent of GNP (1995): The US had a higher percentage of defense spending relative to GNP compared to NATO and Switzerland.
• Military Spending as a Percent of Central Government Expenditures (1995): The US allocated a higher proportion of its central government spending to defense compared to NATO and Switzerland.
• Military Spending per Active Man (1995): The US spent more per active military personnel than most NATO and European countries.
• Military Manpower (1985-1995): The US had a larger active military manpower than NATO and European countries combined.
• Active Military Manpower (1997): The US had a much larger active military manpower than NATO and European countries.

US Forces in NATO (1988-1997)

• USEUCOM (1988-1997): The number of US personnel in NATO Europe decreased significantly over time, from 317,000 in 1988 to 127,200 in 1997.
• Germany (1988-1997): US military equipment in Germany decreased, with a significant portion of POMCUS (Programmed Objective Military Cost Unit) being reallocated or reduced.
• Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg: The US had a presence in these countries, with varying numbers of personnel and equipment.
• Northern Flank (Norway): The US had a prepositioned MEB (Marine Expeditionary Brigade) in Norway, indicating strategic deployment for rapid response.
• Mediterranean and Southern Flank: The US maintained a consistent presence in the Mediterranean with a fleet and Marine Corps units.
• Italy, Spain, Greece: These countries had varying levels of US military presence, including personnel and equipment for theater readiness and support.

Key Information

• The US military spending in 1995 was significantly higher than that of other global powers, with China and Russia being the next largest spenders.
• In terms of conventional forces, the US had a large number of combat aircraft, major combat ships, and a substantial military manpower base.
• The US nuclear forces included a significant number of SSBNs, ICBMs, and bombers, with plans for reductions under START treaties.
• The US spent more on defense as a percentage of GNP and central government expenditures than most NATO and European countries.
• US forces in NATO Europe decreased over time, with the focus shifting to strategic deployments and reduced troop numbers.
• The document includes detailed comparisons of military capabilities across different countries, highlighting the US's dominance in many categories.

Conclusion

The document emphasizes the US's continued leadership in global military spending and capabilities, while also noting a trend of reduced troop numbers and a shift towards strategic and technological dominance. It underscores the US's nuclear arsenal and its role in NATO, despite decreasing direct military presence in Europe. The comparative data highlights the US's role as a superpower in terms of both conventional and nuclear military strength.