Military Review

Hegemon will win in space, air, sea, on earth and in the virtual?

28
The newest strategy of actions of the US Ground Forces has been determined. It covers everything from traditional combat operations to operations in space, cyberspace, air, sea and on earth. Strategists looked into the future: the document deals with the period of 2025 — 2040.




Published online document Commands of combat training and development of the doctrine of the US Army (TRADOC), dedicated to the development of a new strategy for ground forces. The text refers to the fighting and "successful campaigns" simultaneously on several fronts: in space, cyberspace, in the air, on land and at sea against "all opponents." Strategy framework (timeframe) - 2025-2040

The new strategy will require the participation of “people with supernormal abilities” and actions of “small groups”. These people and groups will be distinguished by the highest mobility and will be able to fight simultaneously "in all areas." Such units in the future will replace the "traditional large units" used in wars today.

After the end of the Cold War, the United States and joint forces had considerable freedom in all areas. The goal of the new concept is to prepare the state for a growing number of opponents who "challenge the global hegemony of the United States."

Evolution of combined operations in 2025-2040 will next one.

Small teams working on land, in the air and on the Internet will take on opponents who do not openly show themselves. The new strategy assumes that the enemies of America will attack in space, on the Internet, on land, at sea and on land in such a way that the very distinction between peace and war will be blurred. To adequately "meet these opponents", the army of the future must be much more mobile in all areas of war. simultaneously.

TRADOC created a kind of guidebook that the army of the future will take into account in the development of field manuals and in the preparation of the troops of tomorrow. The newest “concept paper” establishes that opponents “will make life for American troops” as difficult as possible. However, these enemies will not declare themselves enemies. The adversary’s “regular and irregular forces” will be combined “with criminal and terrorist groups”.

Not quite a new idea, says American analyst Patrick Tucker. According to him, the world has already seen how the modern hybrid war is organized, when "thousands of green men invaded the Crimean peninsula in 2014 year."

The concept gives four more reasons why the future army will not be able to successfully fight as it did in the past.

1. Information technology is growing exponentially. American troops can not proceed from the assumption that they will have the best means of communication, unmanned vehicles or computer equipment. As computers become smaller, cheaper and more affordable, the technological advantages of the United States will diminish.

2. The war will be much more "urban." About 60% of the world's population in 2030 will likely be living in cities, and many of them in megalopolises with a population of more than 10 million people. It is here, and not at all in the fields and deserts, that the adversaries will try to take action.

3. The Internet will become a key front not only in terms of cyber attacks, but also in terms of forming a global opinion on the conflict. "Troll troops" will distribute "fake news and disinformation ”, which, in combination with ordinary materials in the media, can complicate the army’s ability to“ receive and maintain an accurate, modern and reasonable understanding of the situation ”and exercise“ control over the information environment ”(from the document).

4. Every “bad guy” becomes a “joker”. The army will see the actions of “super-capable people and small groups” who can “use access to cyberspace, space and nuclear, biological, radiological and chemical arms».

In order to fight in the new environment of the 21st century, the army will have to move towards creating smaller and much more universal formations - to something like today's special operations forces that can perform a variety of missions. These "semi-independent" formations will not just be assigned to conquer territory and retain it. They, the same P. Tucker believes, will have to do everything: from the use of the UAV and protection from them to rocket launches at targets in the enemy’s territory. Equally, they should be able to "beat the bad guys in cyberspace." The operations of these small groups will be conducted “semi-independently”. They will have “neither protected flanks, nor constant communication with the higher headquarters, nor any stable communication line”.

“Semi-independent” is a key definition. The US Army does not seem to intend to return to “large tank formations. "

At the same time, this does not mean that each mobile unit will carry its own missile battery. Not. Rather, small teams should be able to access drones and fire support. The sources of such support themselves will not be large divisions either.

According to Mr. Tucker, the idea of ​​small elusive groups that are loosely connected and located “in extended networks” is in good agreement with what was previously defined as the future of the naval fleet and the U.S. Air Force. In the future, units are becoming smaller, and their number is growing.

* * *


Consequently, lone wolves and small land teams (not quite land, rather universal) soldiers, possessing some kind of super-power, will take to compete with other states. Conditions for such a strategy and the preparation of "super fighters", including abroad, the US has. American analysts remind that America has more than 70 military bases in more than 800 countries. And politicians do not intend to cut anything: for the sake of preserving global power, the US Senate this year approved a defense bill worth 700 billion dollars. For comparison: the peacemaker Obama in the budget for the 2011 fiscal year set a limit on military spending to 549 billion dollars.

Obviously, the build-up and modernization of military forces, initiated by the hawk Trump, are rapidly gaining momentum. It is difficult to say what the American army will achieve in 2025 — 2040, but today military strategists, drawing on the experience of unsuccessful “traditional” wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East, generate ideas for small decentralized groups capable of expressing themselves in several areas at the same time: cyberspace, space, in the air, on land and in the sea. This is a kind of response today to tomorrow's war.

By the way, as another point, the TRADOC document establishes the receipt of profits by the US military-industrial complex. It is felt that a businessman sits in the Oval Office.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 20 October 2017 07: 27
    +1
    ... here is the army that in the photo, put one PC queue ... bully ... warriors ... bully ... probably landed where they run with bows and spears ... laughing
    1. NIKNN
      NIKNN 20 October 2017 13: 32
      +5
      I don’t understand, with whom is the American region of Russia with Governor Trump in 2025-2040? going to fight? ... laughing
      1. Sharansky
        Sharansky 20 October 2017 14: 48
        +1
        where did they get this grass?
        1. NIKNN
          NIKNN 20 October 2017 14: 55
          +6
          Quote: Sharansky
          where did they get this grass?

          Not for everyone, but only with a sense of humor ...
          1. Sharansky
            Sharansky 22 October 2017 03: 20
            +1
            I'll give it to Petrosyan. This is his level.
    2. WapentakeLokki
      WapentakeLokki 20 October 2017 19: 16
      +2
      Well, I didn’t see a trench tool on any of the mattresses on the agitation photo (apparently in the charter of the land forces of Great Pind-i the term “dig in” is unknown by the way remember Gibson with his “We were soldiers” the same eggs nobody from brave aerial paratroopers it wasn’t dug in. It was Vietnam, now Agan’s times are changing and there are no mattresses). And this testifies to the same thing. Americans are used to fighting where they get arrogant (black, white, yellow, that is, true American) the face is dubious and you can stupidly sit on your rolls and not be afraid of mortars and other MLRS but. And what will happen to the brave Marins or other berets if you remove all this? And you will need to fight face to face and not from Utah to the UAV or 5 km altitude from the F-35?
      Your answer options yeah
      1. aszzz888
        aszzz888 21 October 2017 13: 40
        +2
        WapentakeLokki Yesterday, 19:16 ↑

        good ... much you battery them ...
      2. karabas-barabas
        karabas-barabas 22 October 2017 20: 45
        +1
        The answer is that you have no idea what the modern American army is, nor what about the history of the wars of the US army. Your emotional impulse has little to do with reality. Just the Americans have great experience in close combat, and what’s more successful, you can see on the internet how many operations were filmed, where there are fights of several meters. The stupidest thing you can do when faced with the Yankees in a battle is to think that they are, by definition, Sykuns and they can’t fight. You only need to be able to get them “face to face”, given their technological level and the presence of all this in the army, and not at exhibitions.
      3. Spnsr
        Spnsr 26 October 2017 10: 06
        0
        Pin to si like a Chinese, everyone is copying!
        A long-established method in Chechnya and in Syria MTR!
        What's new in their strategy strategy? Maybe only that they want to connect it with science fiction, the technology of which has not yet been achieved !? Although maybe 2025 will be, Russia has already tested tactics!
        1. karabas-barabas
          karabas-barabas 26 October 2017 21: 50
          0
          The Americans have already been around 20 years old as the technology of network-centricity has been introduced, and with it all of NATO. In the Russian Federation, this is still a long way off. What are you talking about?)
          1. Spnsr
            Spnsr 26 October 2017 22: 02
            +1
            Quote: karabas-barabas
            The Americans have already been around 20 years old as the technology of network-centricity has been introduced, and with it all of NATO. In the Russian Federation, this is still a long way off. What are you talking about?)

            do you laugh or what?
            I’m not trying to reduce the dignity of the pin to soff, but their real combat says the opposite about what you say!
            in Russia, in general, it has been since 1999, there were only communication problems, but this is just a matter of technology!
            and theirs, this strategy described in the article, is a derivative of the actions of the MTR and VKS, or rather copy-paste!
  2. Ren
    Ren 20 October 2017 09: 16
    +1
    Gygymon will win only virtually in the virtual! wassat
    1. 210ox
      210ox 20 October 2017 09: 23
      +3
      WOT to help them .. And Klava on the head.
      Quote: Ren
      Gygymon will win only virtually in the virtual! wassat
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Uryukc
      Uryukc 24 October 2017 14: 58
      +1
      The new strategy will require the participation of “people with supernormal abilities” and the actions of “small groups”


      USA: Sim win))
  3. Galleon
    Galleon 20 October 2017 10: 05
    +6
    You can joke over the fantasies of these plans for as long as you want, but one of the points of this document will begin with the words "are responsible for the implementation of the mentioned plans and measures" ... This is not the government of the Russian Federation, there they will draw up the documents in detail and ask in full. Therefore, over these theses, which seem to us delirium, they will work seriously. And the second: we do not all live up to that time, but our children live. "People who shot our fathers make plans for our children." Funny?
    These Petrosyans have already gotten VOShny with their laughter.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 20 October 2017 14: 18
      +4
      Firstly, the article does not talk about the government. About the document of the Command of the Ground Forces is the Pentagon. Second. What do you know about the documents and the execution in our Defense Ministry? Nothing. Also serious. What article are such and comments. Unsmiling you are ours.
      Quote: Galleon
      You can joke over the fantasies of these plans for as long as you want, but one of the points of this document will begin with the words "are responsible for the implementation of the mentioned plans and measures" ... This is not the government of the Russian Federation, there they will draw up the documents in detail and ask in full. Therefore, over these theses, which seem to us delirium, they will work seriously. And the second: we do not all live up to that time, but our children live. "People who shot our fathers make plans for our children." Funny?
      These Petrosyans have already gotten VOShny with their laughter.
  4. AleBors
    AleBors 20 October 2017 10: 26
    +1
    Beautiful, of course ... Just do not forget about the traditional mess present in all the armies of the world. With a similar arrangement of aircraft, the mess will win ... IMHO ..
  5. sa-ag
    sa-ag 20 October 2017 10: 26
    +1
    Americans will always try to fight not directly, but using local or those who are on the ground, and now they are doing so, in Syria ...
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 20 October 2017 11: 17
      +4
      Try and could ... at there is a big difference.
      Their teachers are Britons, and other colonialists, and all sorts of internationalists helpers often received an "unexpected" result!
      To list for all sepoys, dushmans, and other "friendly" military formations ... "dive" into history and please. how many examples you like.
    2. Dedall
      Dedall 20 October 2017 21: 19
      +4
      And you probably forgot the saying of Julius Caesar that a donkey with a bag of gold is much stronger than the legion of warriors. Such a "donkey" will come to our next "effective manager" and everything will be as Congress decided. Siluanov's words are an example of this. Like, why should we spend on the Army if it is still sold by politicians. Basically, a healthy person said.
  6. Sverdlov
    Sverdlov 20 October 2017 14: 51
    +1
    There is such a sport - boxing chess ...
  7. Klaus
    Klaus 20 October 2017 18: 06
    +1
    Mankind (at least over the last 40 thousand years of “saponism”) is developing unevenly in time, geographically in space, and in terms of population.
    - In space, development is "pointwise", from one growth point to another. We know this in history as the heyday of various states and empires.
    - In time, the development is cyclical, but with an increasing amplitude of remissions and elevations of the level of civilization.
    - And only in number, the global dependence of growth on the amplitude of development of the level of civilization can be traced. You don’t have to go far for an example: over the past 70-80 years of the explosive development of scientific and technological revolution, the world's population has doubled.
    Against this background, we have:
    - On the rise phase: a jump in scientific and technological progress, an increase in the population and the War / confrontation between the "growth points".
    - In the phase of remission: peaceful respite, mixing / relocation / mixing of peoples, crisis of the “troubled times” worldview with the subsequent evolution of morality and philosophy.
    - Life expectancy of individuals practically does not grow, while there is a strange distribution in the birth rate on the planet.
    - The sudden appearance of “out of nowhere” genetic constructs (plague, AIDS, Ebola), out-of-control the population size.
    Behind all these processes is logic. And not natural evolutionary.
    Something reminds me of all this ... - Yes, well, neither give nor take - selection! We are carefully withdrawn, and purposefully developed. Moreover, it seems that, especially recently, they are in a hurry with this matter.
    So, whether we like it or not, the unknown “progressors” launched another act of our development through confrontation with other growth points (in our case, the same America).
  8. shinobi
    shinobi 21 October 2017 04: 38
    +1
    Their doctrines and plans are more and more like Marvel comics. As history shows, these brave warriors simply can not stand the battle, not only with equal strength, but with an opponent who just wants to fight.
  9. Berkut24
    Berkut24 21 October 2017 11: 07
    +1
    I re-read all this crap and that's what I thought. The US budget deficit for the past fiscal year was $ 666. Almost exactly as much as they spent on the Pentagon. In other words, the US has no money for the army. Absolutely. And all these Napoleonic plans in the future will depend only on how many political and financial sadomasochists are ready to pay for the army, which will keep them in fear and obedience.
    1. Klaus
      Klaus 22 October 2017 02: 06
      +1
      you are my friend. (with)
      there’s nothing to add
      1. Klaus
        Klaus 22 October 2017 02: 08
        0
        get a pension, and rejoice for now. what can I say.
        The fate of the motherland, even on the forum, not your hobby
        1. Berkut24
          Berkut24 22 October 2017 18: 05
          0
          Who has prescribed this medicine for you?
  10. parma
    parma 23 October 2017 14: 58
    +1
    Quote: Berkut24
    I re-read all this crap and that's what I thought. The US budget deficit for the past fiscal year was $ 666. Almost exactly as much as they spent on the Pentagon. In other words, the US has no money for the army. Absolutely. And all these Napoleonic plans in the future will depend only on how many political and financial sadomasochists are ready to pay for the army, which will keep them in fear and obedience.

    I would rather say that many "sponsors" of the American army invest more in military development of weapons and the protection provided by the American army .... For example, while the CA sponsors the United States, Iran does not even have a 1/1000000% chance of coping with Arabia .. .. And there are a lot of such examples ....
    As for the article, well, the Americans perfectly understood that simply taking and driving 100000 soldiers into Afghanistan is not effective, it is more an occupation than putting things in order (exercising control), which is why we need mobile MTR groups (and the whole army from the MTR is generally a dream) ... .And with whom be stronger than the Papuans, they will fight with large forces. The same British in the colonies, too, only British officers were kept mostly.
    By the way, look at the composition of the army in the United States, mainly corporals and sergeants, and in order to reach the high sergeant rank you need to spend more than one year. This is exactly what was done in case of mobilization and a major war, so I would not laugh at them ...