Author Topic: US National Defense Strategy focused on ‘Great Power Competition’  (Read 1760 times)

Ayoshi

  • Timawan
  • Boffin
  • *
  • Posts: 5679
    • View Profile
US National Defense Strategy focused on Russia, China, and ‘great power competition’ | Janes - 22 January 2018
Quote
The United States’ new National Defense Strategy (NDS) continues the Pentagon’s push, which began a few years ago, to focus more on peer military threats after more than a decade focusing on terrorism and counter-insurgency.

“Great power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of US national security,” Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said during a 19 January speech unveiling the NDS.

The NDS is a more defence-focused outcropping of the National Security Strategy (NSS), and Mattis echoed that document, saying the US faces “growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia, nations that seek to create a world consistent with their authoritarian models”.

He mentioned “rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran” as a focus, as well as “violent extremist organisations like Lebanese Hezbollah, [the Islamic State group], and Al Qaeda”.

Specifically, Mattis said the NDS prioritises investments “in space and cyberspace, nuclear deterrent forces, missile defence, advanced autonomous systems, and resilient and agile logistics”.

Ayoshi

  • Timawan
  • Boffin
  • *
  • Posts: 5679
    • View Profile
Re: US National Defense Strategy focused on ‘Great Power Competition’
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2018, 10:44:19 AM »
Pentagon budget 2019: Russian, Chinese hypersonics emerge as clear concern | Janes - 22 February 2018
Quote
Development of hypersonic weapons, and defences against those weapons, are given new life in the US Department of Defense’s fiscal year 2019 (FY 2019) budget amid concerns that peers such as Russia and China are advancing hypersonics technologies.

These systems, such as hypersonic glide vehicles, are meant to be capable of significant range within a short period of time; a hypersonic weapon would reach speeds between Mach 5 and Mach 10.


Lockheed Martin worked with DARPA on an early hypersonic vehicle effort, the Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle concept, from 2003 to 2011. Pictured is an artist's rendering of a separated Falcon vehicle in flight. Source: DARPA

Ayoshi

  • Timawan
  • Boffin
  • *
  • Posts: 5679
    • View Profile
Re: US National Defense Strategy focused on ‘Great Power Competition’
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2018, 05:21:28 PM »
Russia's Putin unveils 'invincible' nuclear weapons | BBC - 1 March 2018
Quote
Mr Putin made the claims as he laid out his key policies for a fourth presidential term, ahead of an election he is expected to win in 17 days' time.

The weapons he boasted of included a cruise missile that he said could "reach anywhere in the world".

He said of the West: "They need to take account of a new reality and understand ... [this]... is not a bluff."

Giving his annual state of the nation speech, Mr Putin used video presentations to showcase the development of two new nuclear delivery systems that he said could evade detection. One video graphic appeared to show missiles raining down on the US state of Florida.

Ayoshi

  • Timawan
  • Boffin
  • *
  • Posts: 5679
    • View Profile
Re: US National Defense Strategy focused on ‘Great Power Competition’
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2019, 01:45:27 AM »
https://breakingdefense.com/2019/02/no-more-playing-defense-for-us-navy-offensive-weapons-are-the-play/

No More ‘Playing Defense’ For US Navy; Offensive Weapons Are The Play | Breaking Defense - February 14, 2019 at 11:04 AM
Quote
“We’ve spent a lot of time over the past years playing defense,” Rear Adm. Ronald Boxall, director of surface warfare, said at the West 2019 conference here. “Waiting for them to come to you, waiting for the missile to come, for the airplane to come. The best defense is a good offense, and the idea that we will go after the threat — at range — is something that we have to be able to do.”

The admiral’s comments come as the Navy — and the Pentagon — braces to meet the new challenges presented by modern Chinese surface ships, submarines, and aircraft in the Pacific, and similar, if far fewer, Russian assets in the waters around Europe and the Arctic.

< snipped >

Testifying before Congress on Tuesday, Indo-Pacific Command chief Adm. Phillip Davidson told senators that “developing and fielding advanced munitions is a critical component” to challenging Chinese threats. He added that he is most interested in innovations in heavy-weight torpedo technology which can “provide force-multiplying effects that currently do not exist, including long-range in-port or at-sea attack and shallow water covert mine laying.”

Boxall delivered the same message to Navy colleagues and defense industry execs on Wednesday, saying “we need to go after offensive [weapons] to prevent us from being in a position where we go broke playing defense when in fact we can significantly improve our own position though an aggressive offensive posture.”

The Navy already expects to put the anti-ship Naval Strike Missile aboard vessels later this year, and the submarine force is bringing the Harpoon missile back into play after more than a decade without it.

Sitting alongside Boxall on the dias was commander of the Pacific Fleet’s submarine force, Rear Adm. Daryl Caudle, who said he wants to “extend well beyond” the capabilities of the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile being used on his subs. Until industry can develop a missile that can fly farther and faster than the TLAM, Caudle’s subs will start packing the Harpoon, for which Boeing is already working on a bevy of upgrades to increase precision and range.

http://defenseph.net/drp/index.php?topic=4276.msg14937#msg14937

Navy May Bring Back Harpoon Missiles on Attack Subs After Successful SINKEX; RIMPAC Also Highlights Ground-to-Ship Strike Capability | usni.org - July 30, 2018 6:09 PM
Quote
Los Angeles-class attack submarine USS Olympia (SSN-717) fired a Harpoon at the ex-USS Racine (LST-1191) during the first of two SINKEX events in RIMPAC this month. That shot marked the first time a Harpoon had been fired from a U.S. submarine in more than 20 years, and Commander of U.S. Pacific Fleet’s Submarine Force Rear Adm. Daryl Caudle said he expects that the cruise missile will be added back into the SSN’s regular armament.

“The old guys like me actually were on ships that had Harpoons. So it has been a long time since we’ve actually had it onboard our ships,” the admiral joked during a July 25 interview in his office in Pearl Harbor. He said the missile was “designed predominantly to go against Russian ships and their surface action groups – Cold War – from our submarine force.” But as that threat declined and modernization dollars were needed elsewhere, the Harpoons went out of favor.



Ayoshi

  • Timawan
  • Boffin
  • *
  • Posts: 5679
    • View Profile
Re: US National Defense Strategy focused on ‘Great Power Competition’
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2019, 12:11:51 AM »
Quote
US Army Moving Forward on Hypersonic Missile and 1,000-Mile Super Cannon | The Diplomat - March 22, 2019

New long-range strike weapons targeted at China and Russia conflict scenarios.

The U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force are all working on hypersonic weapons with major shared components, with the army designing the maneuverable warhead likely to be used by all three services. One of the principle reasons the United States says it needs these weapons is to defend against similar long-range and hypersonic weapons being developed or already fielded by China and Russia. While the United States is exploring possible space-based and laser weapons to complement its missile defenses, their viability against hypersonic weapons is doubtful. A 2016 study concluded that the only likely way to defend against hypersonic weapons was for the United States to use its own hypersonic weapons to destroy its adversaries’ weapons before they are launched. The Pentagon’s chief of research and development has said recently that the United States cannot intercept hypersonic weapons in the air and they will need to be destroyed on the ground.

The army’s ground-launched hypersonic weapon will have a range of 1,400 miles and thus would have been banned under the Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaty between the United States and Russia, which prohibits ground-launched missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. The United States has long held that Russia was in breach of the treaty with weapons like its 9M729 missiles, and in February announced that it intended to withdraw. A month later, Russia announced that it was officially suspending its participation in the treaty.

The navy and air force’s sea-launched and air-launched variants were not affected by the INF treaty and the army’s Strategic Long Range Cannon would also have been exempt because it is an artillery system and not a missile system. That system will utilize proven artillery principles and technologies but scaled-up to be able to fire guided, rocket-assisted artillery shells up to 1,000 miles.

https://thediplomat.com/2019/03/us-army-moving-forward-on-hypersonic-missile-and-1000-mile-super-cannon/