Report of the Quadrennial Defense ReviewAs the fourth comprehensive review of our military since the end of the Cold War, the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) builds on our experience with the policy and forces of the 1991 Base Force Review, the 1993 Bottom-Up Review (BUR), and the 1995 Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces (CORM). As a result of those reviews, we made significant adjustments in our forces, procedures, and organizations. We have also accumulated a wealth of experience in a new and constantly changing security environment. That experience tells us that we have the finest military force in our nation's history, with unsurpassed professionalism and capability. Nevertheless, this is a propitious time to reexamine our assumptions, programs, and operations. Indeed, the rapid rate of change in the world since the end of the Cold War underscores the importance of undertaking such a reexamination on a regular basis. The QDR is required by the Military Force Structure Review Act, which was included as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997. The Department of Defense designed the QDR to be a fundamental and comprehensive examination of America's defense needs from 1997 to 2015: potential threats, strategy, force structure, readiness posture, military modernization programs, defense infrastructure, and other elements of the defense program. The QDR is intended to provide a blueprint for a strategy-based, balanced, and affordable defense program. |
Common terms and phrases
ability achieve active additional aggression Air Force aircraft allies Army assessment asymmetric billion budget C4ISR challenges civilian coalition Cold War combat command commitments continue decisions defense infrastructure defense program defense strategy Department Department's deployed deployment deter efforts ensure focused force structure full spectrum funding future global improve increase information warfare initiatives investment Joint Vision 2010 JSTARS levels logistics maintain major theater wars Marine Corps military forces missile defense missions modernization program National Defense Panel National Guard National Missile Defense NBC weapons near-term operational concepts OPTEMPO outsourcing overseas presence path peacetime percent plans potential procurement protect Quadrennial Defense Review readiness reduce reengineering regional requirements Reserve component Review Revolution in Military risk security environment Service shape and respond smaller-scale contingency operations START II THAAD theater warfare threats TRANSFORMING U.S. FORCES U.S. military United unmanned aerial vehicles warfare warfighting weapons
Popular passages
Page 1 - Monday morning, when we will meet in executive session for a comprehensive and full briefing by the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with whom I conferred just before getting here.
Page 8 - US national interests at stake — be they vital, important, or humanitarian in nature — and by whether the costs and risks of a particular military involvement are commensurate with those interests. When the interests at stake are vital — that is, they are of broad, overriding importance to the survival, security, and vitality of the United States — we should do whatever it takes to defend them, including, when necessary, the unilateral use of military power.
Page 1 - At the third level, a Senior Steering Group, co-chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, oversaw the entire process and made recommendations to.
Page 5 - ... wild card" scenarios that could seriously challenge US interests both at home and abroad. Such scenarios range from the unanticipated emergence of new technological threats, to the loss of US access to critical facilities and lines of communication in key regions, to the takeover of friendly regimes by hostile parties.
Page 39 - MA) — centers on developing the improved information and command and control capabilities needed to significantly enhance joint operations. With the support of an advanced command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) common backbone, the United States will be able to respond rapidly to any conflict, warfighters will be able to dominate any situation; and day-to-day operations will be optimized with accurate, timely, and secure information....
Page 46 - TRANSFORMING US FORCES FOR THE FUTURE Joint Strike Fighter. The JSF will be the Department's largest acquisition program and the first to develop a family of common aircraft for use by land- and sea-based aviation forces. The JSF will be employed by the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps in variants configured for each Service's specific needs. This tri-Service program reflects the judgment that developing three major new combat aircraft simultaneously would have been prohibitively expensive. The...
Page 16 - States will likely face in the next 15 to 20 years require a military of sufficient size and capability to defeat large enemy conventional forces, deter aggression and coercion, and conduct the full range of smaller-scale contingencies and shaping activities, all in the face of asymmetric challenges. US forces...
Page 12 - As a global power with worldwide interests, it is imperative that the United States, now and for the foreseeable future, be able to deter and defeat large-scale, cross-border aggression in two distant theaters in overlapping time frames, preferably in concert with regional allies.
Page 17 - ... ability to shape the international security environment and respond to the full spectrum of crises are a host of capabilities and assets that enable the worldwide application of US military power. These critical enablers include: • Quality people, superbly led by commanders. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines are the bedrock of the US military. They will be the deciding factor in all future operations. The Department's strong commitment to the quality of life of all its people remains unchanged....