Alternative Futures And Army Force Planning Implications For The Future Force Era

Predicting the friture is almost always fraught with uncertainty. How- ever, Army force developers working to plan a force capable of meet- ing the challenges of the 2025 timeframe (the Future Force era) face more uncertainty than most. Today's world, especially in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and the Iraq war, exhibits a level of dynamism and change not seen during the comparatively static decades of the Cold War-times when the drivers of U.S. secu- rity policy were relatively fixed and their demands upon the Army easily identified. This study has attempted to help the Army deal with the task of long-term force planning by using the tool of alternative futures analysis. Rather than positing a single point estimate of the 2025 fli- ture and trying to defend it, we chose to help the Army bound the future by laying out a representative spectrum of different "future worlds" in the hope that they would illustrate the complete universe of future missions.

Year ago the Chief of Staff of the Army initiated the Army After Next Project (AANP) as a means of stimulating constructive thinking about the Army's future throughout the service. AANP has quickly developed into a primary vehicle for long-range planning. Under the leadership of the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), the AANP has conducted an ambitious program of studies, symposia and workshops, culminating in a Winter War Game and Senior Seminar held at Carlisle, January 27-February 6, 1997. A key line of initial inquiry for us has been to forecast the nature of the future security environment in which the Army will operate. That is the task Dr. Steven Metz set for himself in this monograph. In the pages that follow he propounds "currents of change" that will determine the future and sketches a series of plausible future security systems. Each system is characterized by the forms of conflict that will dominate it, the major strategic issues the United States might face, and the resulting military implications. While Dr. Metz's analysis leads to observations certain to be controversial, he illustrates quite clearly the primacy that environmental context will have in shaping our national security outlook and military strategy. Thus, Dr. Metz's observations on trends and systems warrant careful consideration as national policymakers and the Army's leaders build the military force of the future.

A year ago the Chief of Staff of the Army initiated the Army After Next Project (AANP) as a means of stimulating constructive thinking about the Army's future throughout the service. AANP has quickly developed into a primary vehicle for long-range planning. Under the leadership of the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), the AANP has conducted an ambitious program of studies, symposia and workshops, culminating in a Winter War Game and Senior Seminar held at Carlisle, January 27-February 6, 1997. In addition to supporting TRADOC's AANP through the world class simulation and gaming facilities of the Center for Strategic Leadership, the Army War College has begun a complementary research project, combining the talents of faculty and students. A key line of initial inquiry for us has been to forecast the nature of the future security environment in which the Army will operate. That is the task Dr. Steven Metz set for himself in this monograph. In the pages that follow he propounds "currents of change" that will determine the future and sketches a series of plausible future security systems. Each system is characterized by the forms of conflict that will dominate it, the major strategic issues the United States might face, and the resulting military implications. While Dr. Metz's analysis leads to observations certain to be controversial, he illustrates quite clearly the primacy that environmental context will have in shaping our national security outlook and military strategy. Thus, Dr. Metz's observations on trends and systems warrant careful consideration as national policymakers and the Army's leaders build the military force of the future.

As it carries out its long-term force structure and modernization plans, one useful approach for the Army to take is based on the analysis of "alternative futures." Having developed several plausible alternative futures (looking out roughly 25 years), the authors describe each one's possible implications for the Army's likely mission and the forces required for those missions, discussing the impact on Army modernization plans. The futures range from a benign, relatively peaceful world all the way to a dangerous, chaotic world containing many "failed states." The research indicated that the creation of medium forces was a good long-range strategy for the Army, since those forces appeared to be relevant in many of the possible futures. Traditional heavy forces were found to be useful in a limited number of the possible futures and should therefore receive relatively fewer modernization resources. Army aviation appeared to be applicable to most of the futures, but there could be a need to shift the balance from attack-type aviation to transport aircraft, depending on which future appeared more likely. In all cases, increased C4ISR seemed to be a very important capability. Even within that category, however, there might be a need to focus C4ISR resources in different ways. For example, in some futures, there would be a need to stress unconventional operations in urban areas rather than systems more applicable to locating conventional enemy forces in open terrain.

As it carries out its long-term force structure and modernization plans, one useful approach for the Army to take is based on the analysis of "alternative futures." Having developed several plausible alternative futures (looking out roughly 25 years), the authors describe each one's possible implications for the Army's likely mission and the forces required for those missions, discussing the impact on Army modernization plans. The futures range from a benign, relatively peaceful world all the way to a dangerous, chaotic world containing many "failed states." The research indicated that the creation of medium forces was a good long-range strategy for the Army, since those forces appeared to be relevant in many of the possible futures. Traditional heavy forces were found to be useful in a limited number of the possible futures and should therefore receive relatively fewer modernization resources. Army aviation appeared to be applicable to most of the futures, but there could be a need to shift the balance from attack-type aviation to transport aircraft, depending on which future appeared more likely. In all cases, increased C4ISR seemed to be a very important capability. Even within that category, however, there might be a need to focus C4ISR resources in different ways. For example, in some futures, there would be a need to stress unconventional operations in urban areas rather than systems more applicable to locating conventional enemy forces in open terrain.

A number of assumptions about continuities relevant to US military strategy and force structure underlie much of the analysis in the contributions to the Airpower Research Institute's (ARI) study of The Future of the Air Force. Three of the propositions have to do with the international environment, and two concern the internal US situation. If circumstances other than the ones foreseen do emerge, these circumstances could have implications for both US military strategy and US force structure that vary from the prescriptions of contributors to ARI's study. Some of the deviations might even be quite significant.

The author attempts to forecast the nature of the future security environment in which the Army will operate. He sketches a number of feasible future global security environments, and assesses the implications each might hold for the U.S. Army. Each system is described with respect to the forms of conflict that will dominate it, the major strategic issues the United States might face, and the resulting military implications.

Having developed several plausible alternative futures, the authors of this book describe each one's possible implications for the Army's likely missions and the forces required for those missions, discussing the impact on Army modernization plans.

The United States is currently engaged in a military effort that has been characterized as the "long war." This study explores the concept of long war and identifies ways in which it might unfold as well as the implications for the Army and the U.S. military more generally. This report uses the generation of either "trajectories" or alternative paths in which the long war might unfold to explore the implications for the U.S. military.