Challenges to U.S. Military in the Next Century
--Interview with Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Dr. James N. Miller, Jr. 访美国国防部助理国防部长帮办小詹姆斯•米勒博士
MR. CHEN BOJIANG: How do you view challenges to US military in the next century? What will be the toughest1 challenges? What will be the most likely future challenge that is different from that faced today?
DR. MILLER: That is a very good question. Many aspects of the early part of the next century are not hard to project, because many of the challenges that we face today will still be with us not just the next couple of years but for the next decade or more. One of those that the QDR2 emphasized and that I believe the RMA is very important in dealing with is the problem of so-called “asymmetric warfare3.” And that would include the threat of chemical and biological or potentially nuclear, but particularly chemical and biological weapons against U.S. forces, allies and possibly the United States territory.
Terrorism4 is another element of asymmetric warfare, as is information operations. The possibility of attacks on U.S. theater communications or on the U.S. infrastructure5, whether military, more broadly governmental or including private as well. And we've seen some hacker6 activity lately that I think is a reminder that this could be a very serious problem, indeed .
Those are very serious challenges. Others that I would add would be some¬thing the Marine Corps7 is very much em¬phasizing with Army participation, military operations in urban terrain8. This could come in the context of anything from peacekeeping in a somewhat hostile9 envi¬ronment-even small numbers of hostile people can make that quite difficult, as you know-to large-scale military operations in which an adversary10 might decide to go to the cities in order to gain sanctuary11. This is a very difficult problem and a very different type of conflict from what it looked like in Desert Storm.
The U.S. is, I expect, and the de¬fense strategy would say that the U.S. is going to retain its power projection capabil¬ities12, and projecting power has a number of difficulties. The possibility of access denial13 by chemical or biological weapons, or even sufficient numbers of conventional missiles is certainly an area of concern.
And I can imagine a number of new challenges. Some project extended prolif¬eration14 of cruise missile15 to countries that today don' t have them, which married with chemical and biological agents would pose a very, very difficult threat. Contin¬ued work in bioengineering could produce new types of viruses16-as difficult as it is to imagine why people would do this, but to the extent17 that a terrorist group or a nation puts sufficient resources to such an effort that is a challenge that, again, could be very daunting18. The bio threat is one we see today, but with fundamentally new pieces or agents in the mix the challenge would increase.
To some extent the challenges of the future depend on the success of the Shap¬ing portion of our strategy, and I hope very much that the focus that's been put on that will help. Getting beyond the op¬erational level, and thinking for a moment about global politics-you have to look, for example, at whether we are improving re¬lationships with Russia, since the Cold War end. It's been a great power histori¬cally and our success with that relationship is critical. The same is true of China. If we face a resurgent19 China that doesn't like the United States, then that will be a challenge that none of us should even want to consider. The point is that the nature of U.S. relations today with China, Russia, and also other countries, will affect the challenge faced by the U.S. military in the future. So the “shape” part of our strate¬gy is very, very important.
MR. CHEN: Secretary Cohen raised the “Shape-Respond-Prepare Strategy” in his report of the Quadrennial Defense Re¬view last May. What is the essence and main points of this new strategy?
DR. MILLER: As we have already talked about, it' s extremely straightfor¬ward20. First, the department should sup¬port national efforts to shape the interna¬tional environment in ways favorable to United States interests. Second, the mili¬tary must have the capacity to respond to crises when they occur. And third, we must prepare now for an uncertain future--in other words, we must ensure that we have the capacity to shape and respond in the future as well as in the present. Within the Shape portion, and I know you've read the QDR so know the main pieces, the leadership of the department has been very active with military to mili¬tary contacts at many levels as well. And one of the recent things that happened since the QDR is that each of the commanders-in-chief, each of the regional CINCs21, has been asked to create a theater engage¬ment22 plan that specifies the CINC' s ob¬jectives23 in the region and how that CINC will work with regional partners, including joint combined exercises and other activi¬ties with all of the players in the region. Systematically planning engagement is an important part of implementing24 the Shap¬ing Strategy.
Having American forces prepared, about 100,000 in Europe and 100,000 in Asia, is an important part of forward pres¬ence25. The capacity to deter26 conflict by that presence, if necessary, and by the continuing military capabilities that we have at home that could be brought to bear is also a part of Shaping, so is the capaci¬ty to deter as well as to interact with peo¬ple in a region.
Now to the Response capacity. The U.S. military must have response capabili¬ties across the full spectrum27 of possible operations, from very small scale humani¬tarian28 and peace operations, to a major theater war. And again, the deterrence aspect of the Shaping portion of the strat¬egy requires the capacity to respond along the full spectrum, up to and including the nuclear deterrence provided by our nuclear weapons.
The Prepare now for the future por¬tion of the strategy. We've talked about a core element of it in talking about the RMA. In addition, one of the things that the department is working hard to do is to operate more efficiently internally29, to conduct a “revolution in business affairs.” For example, take the Defense Reform Ini¬tiative30 that reduced the Office of the Sec¬retary of Defense and other parts of the de¬partment, and the ongoing effort to streamline31 the department at all levels. Also consider the desire to reduce military infrastructure, the bases in the United States and overseas, as appropriate. These steps are part of being sure that the de¬partment can live within the resource con¬straints it has and is efficient enough to be prepared for the future.
And as I said before, the RMA ef¬forts, including not only experimentation but also science and technology development is a very important part of the Prepare Now. Finally, continuous intelligence projections and assessments32, though very difficult, provide necessary pieces in considering what possible future capabilities we may need. All of these are important pieces of the Prepare portion of the strategy.
Practise Listening to Words 词汇听力练习:
1.tough  adj. 艰难的
2.QDR:Quadrennial Defense Review《四年防务审查报告》
5.infrastructure  n. 基础设施
6.hacker  n.电脑黑客
9.hostile  adj. 敌对的
10.adversary  n. 敌人，对手
11.sanctuary  n. 避难所
12.power projection capability力量投送能力
13.denial  n. 否定，否认
14.proliferation  n. 扩散
15.cruise missile 巡航导弹
16.virus  n. 病毒
17.to the extent 到……程度
18.daunt  vt. 威吓
19.resurgent  adj. 重新崛起的
20.straightforward  adj. 直截了当的
21.CINC:commanders-in -chief 总司令
22.engagement  vt. 接触
23.objective  n. 目标
24.implement  vt. 执行
25.forward presence 前沿存在
26.deter  vt. 阻止
27.spectrum  n. 频谱
28.humanitarian  n. 人道主义
29.internally  adv. 在内部
30.Defense Reform Initiative《国防改革倡议》
31.streamline  vt. 精简
32.assessment  n. 评估