Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

American Military Doctrines of the New Generation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
NATO’s Expansion After the Cold War

Part of the book series: Global Power Shift ((GLOBAL))

Abstract

The chapter explains the historical importance of the Priorities for twenty-first century Defense, a document of the category grand strategy which openly articulated the growing military self–confidence of the USA and its determination to have an assertive security strategy. This doctrine underlined the US determination to enlarge the Western values as well as the right of other countries to demand and obtain security guarantees from the USA. It puts the main emphasis on the access of the US military forces to any place of the contemporary world and their projections over long distances. The following military doctrines (JOAC in Joint Operational Access Concept—United States, [2012], Air-Sea Battle in United States Department of Defense [PDF], [2013], JCEO in Joint Concept for Entry Operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 7 April 2014. Paperback—26 June 2014, [2014], JCRA in Joint Concept for Rapid Aggregation (JCRA), [2015]) are evaluated in the chapter as warfighting concepts for rapid invasive entry operations on the territory of the so-called challengers, who are in the role of the weak actors whose defensive A2/AD systems must be destroyed. All these doctrinal documents are based on a sophisticated cascade of arguments which confirms the neorealist emphasis on the role of ideology as a secondary actor. This cascade has six levels: the American way of life (AWL), its pillars, foreign actors (challengers) who could threaten the AWL, the instruments that they have at their disposal, the US determination to eliminate these threats, and the key instruments that it can use with the aim to defeat these challengers. These doctrines are very closely intertwined with regularly organised military exercises in the post-Soviet space, which lead to a growing number of military incidents and a disturbing military tension in this explosive area of our continent. As a result, Europe faces the challenge of looking for ways that would lead from the contemporary negative peace to a positive peace.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Stephen M. Walt stresses the value of understanding state action as a response to perceived threats rather than potential enemies in The Origins of Alliances.

  2. 2.

    This behaviour was typical for J. V. Stalin and his approach to Hitler’s Germany between 1939 and 1941.

  3. 3.

    This behaviour was typical for G. W. Bush in his approach towards the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

  4. 4.

    Generally speaking, a doctrine is defined as a set of particular principles, positions, and thoughts which define a government’s orientation in the field of national and international security.

  5. 5.

    Two enormously radical and influential proponents of this war.

  6. 6.

    During his career, he held a number of research and teaching positions, especially those at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. and the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.

  7. 7.

    C4ISR is an acronym used by the U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. intelligence agencies, and the defense community which stands for Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance.

  8. 8.

    He has in his background the functions of the commander of a regiment, the commander of armored divisions and even the commander of the Vth Corps.

  9. 9.

    The 18th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in office from October 1, 2011 until September 25, 2015.

Sources

  • AirLand Battle. (2018, August 1). The Armyʼs Cold War Plan to Crush Russia. Available at: …nationalinterest.org › blog › buzz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Air-Sea Battle. (2013, May). United States Department of Defense [PDF]. Available at: https://archive.defense.gov/pubs/ASB-ConceptImplementation-Summary-May-2013.pdf, p. 7.

  • Akulov, A. (2016, October). Iskander Missiles Deployed in Kaliningrad: Whom Do They Threaten? Available at: https://www.strategic-culture.org/…/iskander-missiles-deployed-ka…,13.

  • Attrill, M. (2015). NATO Doctrine. The Three Swords Magazine, p. 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • BMPD. (2020). Кpeпкaя Бaлтикa. bmpd, April 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, J. (2009, October). President Obamaʼs Foreign Policy: An Assessment. Imprimis, 38(10).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brzeziński, Z. (2007). Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Defender Europe 20. Available at: https://shape.nato.int/defender-europe.

  • de Montbrial, T., & Klein, J. (Eds.). (2000). Dictionnaire de stratégie (p. 193). Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Defence. (2012). P. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • DOD Dictionary. DOD Dictionary of Military Terms. Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/dod_dictionary/.

  • Fiott, D. (2016, April–May). Modernising NATO’s Defence Infrastructure with EU Funds. Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 58(2), 77–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedberg, S. J. Jr. (2015, September 11). Russians ʻClosed the Gapʼ For A2/AD: Air Force Gen. Gorenc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, G. (2015). Flashpoints: The Emerging Crisis in Europe. New York: Doudleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frühling, S., & Lasconjarias G. (2016). NATO, A2/AD and the Kaliningrad Challenge. Survival, 58(2), 103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (2006). America at the Crossroads. Democracy, Power and the Neoconservative Legacy. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaddis, J. L. (2009). What Is Grand Strategy? Presented at a meeting of the FPRI-Temple University Consortium on Grand Strategy, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, September 10, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gady, F.-S. (2015, September 9). China or Iran: Who Is the Bigger Threat to U.S. Airpower?

    Google Scholar 

  • Gariup, M. (2009). European Security Culture: Language, Theory, Policy. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glain, S. (2011). The Pentagonʼs New China War Plan. Salon, August 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Naval Forces. (2008, December 29). News and Defence Headlines. IHS Janeʼs 360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldfein, D. (2015, January 8). Document: Air Sea Battle Name Change Memo. Available at: www.news.usni.org. Pentagon.

  • Gordon, P. H. (2007–2008). Winning the Right War. Survival, 49(4, Winter 2007–2008), 17–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. (2001). Deep Strife. Aif Force Magazine, June 1. Available at: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0601airland/.

  • Gray, C. (1999). Modern Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C. (2007). War, Peace and International Relations: An Introduction to Strategic History (p. 283). Abingdon and New York City: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, G. M. (2016). The New Generation of Operational Concepts. Small Wars Journal, January 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas, M. (2014). Foreign Policy Begins at Home: The Case for Putting America’s House in Order. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, S. P., & Dunn, S. (2004). Who are We? The Challenges to Americaʼs National Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyde-Price, A. NATO and the Baltic Sea Region: Towards Regional Security Governance? NATO Research Fellowship Scheme 1998–2000 Final Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikenberry, J. (2014). Power, Order, and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • IMF. (2016, October 4). World Economic Outlook Database.

    Google Scholar 

  • JC2ALN. (2015, March 20). Joint Concept for Command and Control of the Joint Aerial. Available at: www.hsdl.org › abstract.

  • JCEO. (2014). Joint Concept for Entry Operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 7 April 2014. Paperback—26 June 2014. Available at: https://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/concepts/jceo.pdf?ver=2017-12-28-162000-837.

  • JCHS. (2015, August 31). Joint Concept for Health Services. Joint Chiefs of Staff. Available at: www.jcs.mil › Doctrine › concepts.

  • JCL. (2015, September 25). Joint Concept for Logistics—Center for Joint and Strategic. Available at: cjsl.ndu.edu › Portals › Documents.

    Google Scholar 

  • JCRA. (2015, May 22). Joint Concept for Rapid Aggregation (JCRA).

    Google Scholar 

  • JOAC. (2012, January 17). Joint Operational Access Concept—United States. Available at: archive.defense.gov › pubs › pdfs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2017, September 16). JP 3-18, Joint Forcible Entry Operations CH 1. Available at: www.jcs.mil › Doctrine › pubs.

  • Jones, B. (2012). Russia Rejuvenates Kaliningrad Naval Base. Janeeʼs Navy International, 117(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner, E. J., & Sperling, J. (Eds.). (2007). Global Security Governance: Competing Perceptions of Security in the 21st Century. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krepinevich, A. F. (2010). CSBA: Why AirSea Battle? (PDF). Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuperman, A. J. (2015). Obamaʼs Libya Debacle: How a Well-Meaning Intervention Ended in Failure. Foreign Affairs, 94(2), 66–70, 71–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liddell Hart, B. H. (1991). Strategy (2d rev. ed., pp. 321–222). Toronto: Meridian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock-Pullan, R. (2005). How to Rethink War: Conceptual Innovation and AirLand Battle Doctrine. Journal of Strategic Studies [online], 28(4), 679–702. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01402390500301087.

  • MacArthur, D. (1964). Reminiscences. New York: Ishi Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Majumdar, D. (2015). American F-22s and B-2 Bombers vs. Russia’s S-300 in Syria: Who Wins? National Interest, September 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massala, C. (2010). Alliances. In M. D. Cavelty & V. Mauer (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Security Studies (p. 387). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J. J. (2018). Liberalism as a Source of Trouble. In The Great Delusion: The Liberal Dreams and International Realities (pp. 154–187). New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MECC. (2018, October). Globally Integrated Operations, 30 October 2018. Available at: https://www.jcs.mil/Doctrine/Joint-Education/MECC2018/.

  • Merriam Webster. Available at: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rapid.

  • MILDEC. (2012, January 26). Military Deception (MILDEC)—Joint Forces Staff College. Available at: jfsc.ndu.edu Additional_Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milevski, L. (2020, March 30). Military Exercise Defender Europe-20 Is Cancelled: What Does It Mean for the Baltic States? Available at: www.fpri.org.

  • NATOʼs Act. (2011, February 25). Assured Access to the Global Commons. Available at: https://www.act.nato.int/images/stories/events/2010/gc/aagc_recommendations.pdf.

  • NPRR. (2010, April 6). Nuclear Posture Review Report. Available at: www.hsdl.org › abstract.

  • NSS. (2010a, May 1). National Security Strategy—Obama White House. Available at: obamawhitehouse.archives.gov › files.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSS. (2010b). National Security Strategy 2010 (PDF). United States Government. Retrieved 21 April 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obama, B. (2002). Transcript: Obamaʼs Speech Against The Iraq War: NPR. Available at: www.npr.org › story › story. Barack Obama delivered this speech in Chicago on 2 October 2002.

  • Obama, B. (2007). Renewing American Leadership. Foreign Affairs, July–August.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obama, B. (2009). Remarks by President Barack Obama in Prague as Delivered. The White.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obama, B. (2011, April 5). The Obama Doctrine: Leading from Behind. Washington Post, April 28. Available at: www.washingtonpost.com › opinions. House, Office of the Press Secretary.

  • OʼHanlon, M. (2012). The Case for a Politically Correct Pentagon. Foreign Policy, September 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • OʼHanlon, M., & Steinberg J. (2012). Going Beyond ʻAir-Sea Battleʼ. The Washington Post, August 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posen, B. (1984). The Sources of Military Doctrine: France, Britain, and Germany Between the World Wars (p. 13). Ithaca and New York: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, D. (2011). Russia Plans More Iskander-M Systems. Jane’s Missiles & Rockets, 15(9).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, T. W. (2018, January 9). The Power of Partnership Security Cooperation and Globally Integrated Logistics. Joint Force Quarterly, 88.

    Google Scholar 

  • RT News. (2014). Russian Military Completes Rapid Deployment Drills in Kaliningrad. RT News, December 16. Available at: https://www.rt.com/news/214667-russiadrills-kaliningrad-region/.

  • rusnavy.com. (2012). Russian Navy to Receive Corvette Boiky by Year End. rusnavy.com, November 16. Available at: http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=16470&sphrase_id=2327045.

  • Russia & India Report. (2016). Russian Military Spending Cut Significantly. Russia & India Report, November 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanger, D. E., & Shanker, T. (2010). White House Is Rethinking Nuclear Policy. New York Times, February 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, J. L. (1977). The Soviet Strategic Culture: Implications for Limited Nuclear Operations. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, J. (1997). Alliance Politics. Ithaca and New York: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprūds, A., & Bukovskis, K. (2014). Security of the Broader Baltic Sea Region: Afterthoughts from the Riga Seminar. Riga: Latvian Institute of International Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • SS-26 Iskander. (2016, September 22). Missile Threat. Available at: https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/ss-26-2/.

  • Starry, D. A. (1981). Extending the Battlefield. Military Review, March, pp. 31–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R. W. (1994). The United States Army in Somalia 1992–1994. Washington, DC: United States Army Center of Military History.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strategic Trends. (2017). Key Developments in Global Affairs, CSS Zurich 2017, p. 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Balance. (2016, October 26). U.S. Military Budget: Components, Challenges, Growth. The Balance. However, the GDP share of defence in Russia (3.3 percent in the 2017 budget) is comparable with the situation in the US.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Guardian. (2016). Russia Transfers Nuclear-Capable Missiles to Kaliningrad. The Guardian, October 8, World News. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com › World › Nuclear Weapons.

  • Utz, C. (1994). Assault from the Sea: The Amphibious Landing at Inchon. Washington, DC: Naval Historical Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winton, H. R. (1996). Partnership and Tension: The Army and Air Force Between Vietnam and Desert Shield. Parameters, (Spring 1996), 100–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zapfe, M., & Haas, M. C. (2016, June–July). Access for Allies? NATO, Russia and the Baltics. The RUSI Journal, 161(3).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of International Relations, Prague, Czech Republic

    Jan Eichler

Authors
  1. Jan Eichler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Eichler .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Eichler, J. (2021). American Military Doctrines of the New Generation. In: NATO’s Expansion After the Cold War. Global Power Shift. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66641-5_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation