Military Review

The breakdown of the hegemon. The Pentagon has officially declared itself a "wimp"

29
The US National Defense Strategy 2018 of the Year, openly made public by the Pentagon, is only a brief retelling of the main document, addressed to the broad working people, analytical and conspiratorial masses. The true document is under lock and key, I mean it is classified. From the abbreviated version it becomes clear that the current United States considers itself systemically "weakened." The text has a term like anatomical: “strategic atrophy”. What happens to the hegemon? Can not collect the remnants of the forces?




The US National Defense Strategy in short form is available at this network address. The brief document is actually not so short. Therefore, we will offer readers its basic positions.

The permanent mission of the US defense department is to provide the necessary combat power to curb war and protect the security of the American people. If a deterrence strategy fails, the combined forces will be ready to win the war. This is stated in the introduction to the new Strategy.

The Pentagon provides military force for the US President and US diplomats to “negotiate from a position of strength” using “America’s traditional diplomatic tools.” Quotes are not without reason - that is what the document says.

Then it suddenly comes to American weakness and even "atrophy." However, such a sad and pessimistic message is accompanied by optimistic notes.

“Today we are leaving the period of strategic atrophy,” the military wrote, “realizing that our military competitiveness, our advantages have been destroyed. We are faced with a growing global chaos, characterized by the weakening of the old world order based on certain rules and creating a more secure environment to this day than all that we have recently observed. ”

“For decades, the United States has enjoyed an undeniable, if not dominant, advantage in every field of operations. We could deploy our forces whenever we want, place them where we want, and act as we wish. Today, every sector is contested, be it airspace, land, sea, space or cyberspace, ”says the text of the Strategy.

Having assured the world of its “strategic atrophy” and also that the Pentagon will get out of there over time (no specific dates are set or they are kept secret), the American military machine lists its fierce enemies scattered around the world.

Enemy number one - "interstate strategic terrorism." The fight against it is named in the document "the main task of US national security."

Enemy number two has a proper name: China. This state is a "strategic competitor using a predatory economy to intimidate its neighbors in a period of militarization." Particularly indicated on the South China Sea.

Enemy number three also has a proper name: this is Russia. She violated the principle of the inviolability of the “borders of neighboring states” and wants to get economic and diplomatic power “over her neighbors”. According to the authors of the Strategy, Russia also seeks to "destroy the North Atlantic Treaty Organization" and change the situation in the field of security and the economy of Europe and the Middle East "in its own favor." Moscow uses "new technologies to discredit and undermine democratic processes in Georgia, the Crimea and eastern Ukraine." In addition, the Russians are "expanding and modernizing the nuclear arsenal." All this is enough, the authors of the document note to summarize: “the problem is obvious”.

The fourth enemy is North Korea. She stands “outside the law” and continues “reckless rhetoric”, despite “condemnation and sanctions from the United Nations”.

The fifth enemy of the United States is Iran. He "continues to spread violence" and remains a state that throws "the most significant challenge to stability in the Middle East."

The sixth enemy is the remnants of the terrorists of the “Islamic State” (“IS”, the group is banned in Russia). Despite the defeat of the “caliphate”, the document says, “the threat of terrorist groups” remains high. The American military "very likely" admits that the IS will continue to "kill the innocent and threaten the world" and will do it "even more widely."

Such an impressive list of enemies led American defense strategists to the following conclusion.

The security environment is becoming "increasingly complex." It is determined today by “rapid technological change” and the existence of a “continuous armed conflict”. In this environment there is no place for “complacency,” the Pentagon points out. The US "must make difficult choices and prioritize," highlight the "most important." The US military has no right to lose!

The “Unclassified Overview”, as defined in the document, displays a number of fundamental principles of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the year.

Americans must "compete, restrain and win" in the current difficult environment.

Long-term strategic competition, rapid and uneven development of technology, new concepts of war and rivalry now cover the whole range of conflicts, which requires the creation of joint forces corresponding to the new reality. The Pentagon proposes the introduction of a "more deadly" force, sustainable, innovative and collaborative, which implies the actions of not only the US Army, but also the forces of "allies and partners." It is this scheme that “will support American influence and provide a favorable balance of forces that will protect a free and open international order”. All of this together and subject to the modernization of the forces will ensure "the preservation of peace through power."

But this will require "costs." Rejection of such power and expenditures on “protection” will lead to “a reduction in the global influence of the United States, erosion of the cohesion of allies and partners” and other troubles - up to squeezing the United States out of the markets, which will result in a decline in American “welfare and living standards.”

The authors hope that the "investment" in the US military industry will be "stable" and certain. Military forces must be upgraded and ready for battle. They must conform to the spirit of the times, otherwise the United States "will quickly lose its military advantage."

In short, the creation of a united force should ensure the full “protection” of the American people.

* * *


These theses are very similar in their spirit to the party slogans of the days of the aged General Secretary Brezhnev. But, in contrast to the communist slogans of Moscow, through the Pentagon Strategy shines through the true spirit of American charity: money, money, and again money. Without "costs" there is no "protection"; without "modernization" there will be no "technology" and "gain" - neither in wars nor in economic competition. Even in diplomacy there will be defeats, for the power of American diplomacy is provided by military force. So it is accepted in American politics. And not only in it. The Soviet Union, whose slogans were mentioned above, also had considerable military power and was able to reinforce its point of view with the presence of modern weapons and nuclear arsenal.

The impression is created that the Pentagon needs to mention the “period of strategic atrophy” exclusively in order to officially demand even more cash infusions into the military. For this purpose, numerous enemies are enumerated that constantly “squeeze” the United States from somewhere - now from the Middle East, now from world markets, now from the South China Sea.

It is these enemies that are marked by the perpetrators of the weakening of the “world order” that the United States liked so much and which has now reeled everywhere - from the Middle East to Europe and separately taken by Ukraine and Russia. But the Pentagon’s military do not indicate in their document what kind of forces contributed to the “Arab spring” in North Africa and the Middle East, who welcomed and supported the coup d'etat in Ukraine, who imposed sanctions against Russia and who finally stifled the DPRK sanctions, threatened Pyongyang from the world tribune. There’s nothing to say about Iran - after Obama’s diplomacy, Mr. Trump took yes announced Iran as a sponsor of terrorism.

The entire course of the current administration of the White House is pure confrontation. With regard to the buildup of the arms race and the development of the military-industrial complex, this confrontational course is largely copied from Reaganomics. Whether it will lead to economic and competitive success is another question. At the time of R. Reagan, the American economy was still really American, and not moved to China. Today, such centers of power have manifested themselves, which under Reagan simply did not exist: they were only in their infancy. And to turn them into enemies, scattering them in paragraphs of the "defense" strategy, is the height of the stupidity and the very complacency that Pentagon experts dismiss.

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

I have an account? Sign in

  1. andr327
    andr327 24 January 2018 06: 20 New
    +2
    “For decades, the United States has enjoyed an undeniable, if not dominant, advantage in every field of operations. We could deploy our forces whenever we want, place them where we want, and act as we wish. Today, every sector is contested, be it airspace, land, sea, space or cyberspace, ”says the text of the Strategy.

    That’s all American democracy! What else to talk about.
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 24 January 2018 06: 46 New
      +3
      If terrorists are enemy number 5, then they forgot about Ebola altogether. belay
      1. dSK
        dSK 24 January 2018 07: 50 New
        +1
        Hello Oleg!
        Quote: siberalt
        enemy number 5

        But here "expenses" are required.
        "Give money, give money, give, give ..."
        1. Orionvit
          Orionvit 24 January 2018 11: 05 New
          +2
          Quote: dsk
          "Give money, give money, give, give ..."

          Money is the priority of middle managers in the United States, both in the army and in civil administrations. For the main part of the upper "elite" of the United States, money is not a goal, but a means to achieve their goals. Namely, global dominance, that is, power. They have all the money they need for a long time. Moreover, while the dollar is considered the world currency, they have all the money in the world.
      2. Loess
        Loess 24 January 2018 08: 21 New
        0
        Probably they defeated her, "torn to shreds," as our economy
    2. Hanokem
      Hanokem 24 January 2018 08: 49 New
      +1
      Oleg Chuvakin, so dear to your heart, the DPRK is stifled with the help of the sanctions for which Russia voted. Because unlike you, Mr. Putin does not want to have a nuclear and unpredictable Kim Jong Grandson as a neighbor.
      1. dog breeder
        dog breeder 24 January 2018 10: 59 New
        +3
        Dear Hanokem! Can you elaborate on Putin’s plans?
      2. Orionvit
        Orionvit 24 January 2018 11: 12 New
        +4
        Quote: Hanokem
        unpredictable kim jong grandson.

        Why don’t you like Kim Jong’s grandson? And why is he unpredictable? It’s quite a normal adequate man, especially against the backdrop of US policy towards his country and the world. And in relation to the "grandson", everything is fine too. An ordinary eastern king in the third generation, and Kim Il Sung, as the founder of the "dynasty", in this respect is no different than, say, Charlemagne, or the same Rurik, and so it has been for millennia, and everywhere. Story in a different country, but do not care, but people are the same everywhere.
  2. Strashila
    Strashila 24 January 2018 06: 39 New
    +1
    To increase the already not really big funding ... they’ll come up with something else. They simply do not know how to count ... the costs of education.
  3. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 24 January 2018 06: 53 New
    +5
    money, money and money again
    And the desire to rule the world. That is the whole strategy.
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 24 January 2018 07: 11 New
    +3
    We got the mericatos. Continuous Russophobia and nothing new. angry
  5. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 24 January 2018 07: 22 New
    +1
    "Recognized", yeah .... stupid and rejoice at this "recognition", obviously they don’t know what is behind this "recognition" - "get unlimited financing" and they will receive it, do not hesitate, you have to "resist threats" .. .. wink
  6. Blue cop
    Blue cop 24 January 2018 08: 00 New
    16
    Tactical move, no more
    1. Lycan
      Lycan 24 January 2018 10: 44 New
      0
      I think so. Dust in the eyes in the form of a tactical retreat.
  7. antivirus
    antivirus 24 January 2018 08: 10 New
    0
    realizing that our military competitiveness, our advantages were destroyed
    Soon aircraft carriers on m \ scrap will begin to hand over?
  8. shinobi
    shinobi 24 January 2018 08: 46 New
    +1
    Yankesy behave like ordinary gopniki. And it will end for them as for most of the gopas.
  9. RusPrim
    RusPrim 24 January 2018 10: 31 New
    +1
    Something we fell into third place lol
  10. Macross
    Macross 24 January 2018 10: 50 New
    0
    To believe in the USA is the most expensive!
  11. statokaev
    statokaev 24 January 2018 11: 00 New
    0
    Another appeal to banks and politicians: "Urgently give money! A lot of money, more money!" It could be funny, but Uncle Sam is not joking! As the unforgettable comrade Ogurtsov said: "I myself do not like to joke and I will not allow others!" We look forward to the next democratic filth!
  12. BAI
    BAI 24 January 2018 11: 03 New
    +1
    For decades, the United States has enjoyed undeniable, if not dominant, superiority in every operational area. We could deploy our forces whenever we wanted, position them where we wanted, and act as we wanted. Today, every sector is disputed, whether it be airspace, land, sea, space or cyberspace. ”

    After the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, the rivals managed to grow up. Finally saw.

    Moscow uses "new technologies to discredit and undermine the democratic processes in Georgia, Crimea and Eastern Ukraine."

    Are Crimea and Eastern Ukraine considered as separate states that are not members of Ukraine, along with sovereign Georgia?
    The fact that Crimea is not considered the territory of Russia is understandable, but Crimea and Donbass from the point of view of the USA are not Ukraine?
  13. Dzmicer
    Dzmicer 24 January 2018 11: 24 New
    +1
    The average annual reign of the hegemon is approximately 150 years. Such a time sequence, traced from the time of Venice and the fourth crusade. Since the first and very controversial plunder of Constantinople - Byzantium, in 1204.
    (1200) - 1204 - hegemony of Venice.
    (1350) -1352 year - hegemony of Genoa.
    (1500) - 1492 - hegemony of Spain.
    (1650) - 1648 - hegemony of France.
    (1800) - 1815 - hegemony of Britain.
    (1950) - 1945 - hegemony of the USA.
    At the same time, technological and, as a result, military dominance, the hegemon loses somewhat earlier than cultural dominance.
    Accordingly, there were only a few decades before the United States finally lost military dominance.
  14. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 24 January 2018 11: 31 New
    0

    In my opinion, the United States has already lost its military advantage.
    1. Tektor
      Tektor 24 January 2018 13: 01 New
      +1
      This is true. But it is necessary to clarify, due to what? One of the most significant breakthroughs of half a century can be considered Status, and not necessarily with number 6, because it is a multi-purpose platform ... It solves the main problem: it completely eliminates the superiority of states on the sea-ocean. Those. while the states were tirelessly riveting aircraft carriers and Virginia from the last means, with a little brain we created an underwater multi-purpose robot that can be anywhere and at any time ... And it can carry a nuclear mine on board to the same extent , like Caliber or Squall (other mines and torpedoes). This poses an unavoidable threat to both all surface and submarine forces of the states and coastal territories. And this is the check and checkmate of the entire state military machine. This is the most important success of our military-industrial complex and military-industrial complex: we are capable of projecting force on any part of the world's oceans and coastal territories. The situation of Sputnik was repeated when the states suddenly realized that they can now be reached. Just at the click of a finger. When we want.
      1. MadCat
        MadCat 25 January 2018 05: 46 New
        0
        Quote: Tektor
        This is true. But it is necessary to clarify, due to what? One of the most significant breakthroughs of half a century can be considered Status, and not necessarily with number 6, because it is a multi-purpose platform ... It solves the main problem: it completely eliminates the superiority of states on the sea-ocean.

        Another nuclear toy was added, so what? Did the states lose their arsenal of hydrogen bombs or rockets because of it? Still, in a nuclear war, cockroaches alone will survive.
        Quote: Tektor
        The situation of Sputnik was repeated when the states suddenly realized that they can now be reached. Just at the click of a finger. When we want.

        Status 6 is a prototype of what real data is on it in order to have such hopes and why if a hydrogen bomb of sufficient power can burn the entire planet and start a chain reaction in the atmosphere. The ultimate weapon. Read at your leisure what happened during the test in the USSR and why a moratorium was imposed immediately after them under a mutual agreement with the United States.
      2. bratchanin3
        bratchanin3 25 January 2018 08: 24 New
        0
        Yes, Status-6, this is a serious argument, but not only that. All this American strike armada carries an air wing with a range of up to 700 km, but they will not be able to approach this distance to the coastline of Russia. The range of destruction of our coastal anti-ship cruise missiles is 1000 km. So it turns out that all 11 aircraft carriers will be able to work in a remote sea zone. That is, Russia is not just a threat to infrastructure in the United States, but also a threat to the entire US Shock Force. Maybe this is why the Americans are fighting in hysteria - the “King" turned out to be naked.
  15. Navigator Basov
    Navigator Basov 24 January 2018 13: 36 New
    0
    She violated the principle of the inviolability of the “borders of neighboring states” and wishes to gain economic and diplomatic power “over her neighbors”.
    Even if this is so, it is certainly much worse than violating the inviolability of the borders of non-neighboring states and wanting to gain economic and diplomatic power over the states of other continents.
    The document puts everything in its place: they create the number one enemy and support them in every possible way, they are ready to negotiate with the enemy number two (to set the military relationship between our two countries on a path of transparency and non-aggression), but it is impossible to negotiate with the enemy number three. What is the logic? Is it really so turned upside down in the American brain that the number one enemy is the smallest danger? Can I arm Iraq by creating ISIS, and then, under the guise of allegedly fighting ISIS, bomb Assad and an excavator? I would like to wish everyone patience in such a world order diligently supported by the United States.
  16. Dmitriy75
    Dmitriy75 24 January 2018 13: 36 New
    +1
    Only a global catastrophe will change this world; people do not learn from the mistakes of the past.
  17. Dmitry Tantsyura
    Dmitry Tantsyura 24 January 2018 18: 29 New
    0
    What interesting body and with a diagnosis prohibiting the carrying of weapons do in the organization that people did to protect against them?
  18. flicker
    flicker 24 January 2018 22: 36 New
    +2
    money, money and money again. Without “costs” there is no “protection”; without “modernization” there will be no “technology” and “gain” - neither in wars, nor in economic competition. Even in diplomacy there will be defeats, for the power of American diplomacy is provided by military force.

    These thoughts (in one form or another, in one context or another) have increasingly begun to flash in the foreign press.
    In essence, this means that the US military is pointing bankers and financiers to their real place, and indicate kick of a soldier’s boot.