Agencies and Organizations for
U.S. Military Doctrine
--Interview with Dr. Andrew Marshall, the Director of Net Assessment of DoD 访美国国防部基本评估办公室主任安德鲁•马歇尔博士
MR.CHEN BOJIANG: You are the director of Net Assessment 1 of DoD 2, I wonder if I can begin my interview with questions related to your work. What is the role of Net Assessment? How is Net Assessment related to the research on Revolution in Military Affairs and future warfare?
Dr. Andrew Marshall: Well, the role of the office has been to make assessments of the military situation, the military balance, in geographical areas or military mission areas. When it started, the office began in 1973, and it was focused pretty much on U.S., Soviet Union plus allies on both sides. The objectives of these assessment was not only to provide assessment, not only whether the situation was satisfactory, from a U.S. perspective3, but also to provide assessment of the long term trends that were underway, and to surface4 for the top level managers here in the department, issues they ought to pay attention to and do something about. It could be an emerging problem, or an opportunity we ought to seek. And of course with the collapse of the Soviet Union, we began to look at other things. One of those has been the possibility of a Revolution in Military Affairs. So we began in the late 1980s to make an assessment of that area, from the perspective of, did we think what the Russians were then writing about, the onset of a new period of military revolution in the late 1970s, early 1980s.So in the late 1980s we began to have an intersection5 of the questions of were the Russians really right, were we moving towards one of these periods, like others in the past historically when really big changes in warfare take place. If so, were we at the beginning, middle or end of the change? Why is it happening? So, in the middle of 1992, we brought out this assessment which more or less said yes we think the Russians are right, we're probably at the beginning of this process. Why is it happening? For the moment we think the driving factors are a result of the development of the information technologies, of the microchip6, and communications technology and so on. Then while we had a little bit to say about future warfare, we surfaced four or five major issues that we talked about. Since then, we've continued to work in this area, because we find not only notions7 about what future warfare might look like, largely through war gaming8. We've commissioned9 a number of historical studies. How are these big changes happening and why is it our military that's much more successful than others in this period of change?
MR. CHEN: How many agencies and organizations are in charge of developing military doctrine and military concepts in the national security structure of your country? What is the relationship between them?
Dr. Andrew Mar shall: How many? Well，you must know from your experience here, that the American defense research process is a very open one, and there are all kinds of organizations that have a role. Oh, to know about military doctrine, then that narrows it down a little. There are the military services, there's an effort to develop joint doctrine now, but broadly, over all kinds of other issues it's very complex and large numbers of organizations.
Practice Listening to words词汇听力练习：
1.Net Assessment 基本评估办公室
2.DoD:Department of Defense （美国）国防部
3.perspective  n. 看法
4.surface for （向）……提出
5.intersection  n. 十字路口
6.microchip  n. 微芯片
7.notion  n. 概念，看法
8.war gaming 作战模拟
9.commission  vt. 委托，任命