Transcript DAY 3 QDE Mark Gunzinger

Quadrennial Defense Review
SES APEX Orientation Program
September 13, 2005
1
What is the QDR?
QDR Integration
 Mandated by Congress
 DOD’s Capstone Strategic Planning Activity
 Principal aim is to develop guidance for
 “Operationalizing” the National Defense Strategy
 Shaping the future force
 QDR takes a 20-year outlook
 Recognizes near term demands
 QDR Report submitted to Congress in February 2006
 Submitted with the President’s FY07 budget request
September 13, 2005
2
Where does QDR fit?
NDS and NMS at
www.defenselink.mil/publications
QDR Integration
National Security Strategy
•BRAC
• Global Posture
Review
National Defense Strategy
National Military Strategy
• Studies
(e.g., Mobility)
• Service Initiatives
(e.g., Modularity)
Strategic Context
Terms of Reference
Quadrennial Defense Review
Operational
Contingency
Planning
Security
Cooperation
Resource
Organizational
Capabilities Planning
Unified Command
Plan
Program Review-POM
Budget
Transformation
Planning
September 13, 2005
3
How 2005 QDR differs from past QDRs
QDR Integration
 The U.S. is a nation at war
 Defense Strategy was completed before the QDR kickoff
 A “rolling QDR”: executable guidance developed as
issues mature during the Review
• QDR will inform the FY07 Program Review.
 The Department’s force planning construct will be a major
QDR output
 Inclusive: Outreach to Congress, industry and
allies/partners – benefit from their strategic thinking
 An integrated, enterprise-wide review with senior-level
participation throughout
September 13, 2005
4
2005 QDR Terms of Reference
QDR Integration
 Outlined guiding principles and assumptions
 Summarized strategy
 Provided guidance to operationalize the
strategy by considering 4 focus areas
 Directed formation of six issue teams
September 13, 2005
5
Guiding Principles and Assumptions
QDR Integration
 Foster a structured, open and transparent competition of
ideas during the Department’s deliberations
 Draw upon lessons learned from Operations ENDURING
FREEDOM and IRAQI FREEDOM
 Balance near-term operational demands with longer-term
challenges and opportunities
 Develop executable guidance as issues mature during the
QDR, then follow through with execution roadmaps
 Treat the Department’s force planning construct as a QDR
output rather than an input
September 13, 2005
6
Strategy (1) - Security Challenges
QDR Integration
Irregular
 Non-state and state actors employing
“unconventional” methods to counter
stronger state opponents—terrorism,
insurgency, etc.
(e.g., terrorism, insurgency, “unrestricted warfare”)
Traditional
Catastrophic
 Terrorist or rogue state employment of
WMD or methods producing WMD-like
effects against American interests.
(e.g., attack on homeland, global markets, or key ally
that would generate a state of shock and preclude
normal behavior)
Disruptive
 States employing military forces in wellknown forms of military competition and
conflict.
 Competitors employing technology or
methods that might counter or cancel our
current military advantages.
(e.g., conventional air, sea, and land forces, and
nuclear forces of established nuclear powers)
(e.g., technological – bio, cyber, or space war, ultra
miniaturization, directed-energy, other – diplomatic
blackmail, cultural or economic war)
September 13, 2005
7
Strategy (2) - Strategic Evolution
’93 Bottom-Up Review
• Desert Storm
• Soviet Collapse
Moderate
Low
Lesser
Contingencies
High
 2 MTWs
 State-on-State
 Cross Border Conflict
Major Theater War
Future
Near Peer
Strategic Capability
’01 QDR

Citadel I & II
 1-4-2-1
Moderate
 Future Peer
 Ungoverned Areas
 Asymmetric Threats
Low
Lesser
Contingencies
Major Theater War
Strategic Capability
Future
Near Peer
Perceived Capability Emphasis
High
High
Perceived Capability Emphasis
Perceived Capability Emphasis
Perceived Capability Emphasis
QDR Integration
High
’97 QDR

Moderate
 2 MTWs
 State-on-State
 Cross Border Conflict
 Smaller Scale Contingencies
Low
Lesser
Contingencies
Somalia,
Bosnia,
Rwanda,
Haiti
 Industrial Age
Near Peer
Major Theater War
Strategic Capability
Future
Near Peer
’05 Defense Strategy



11 Sept / GWoT
OEF / OIF
4 Challenges
 GWoT /
 Disruptive
Ungoverned Areas
Technologies
 Irregular Warfare
 Superiority in the
 Low-End Asymmetric
Commons
(Space, Cyber,
 1-4-2-1
Seas, Air)
(State-on-State War)
Low
Lesser
Contingencies
Major Theater War
Strategic Capability
Future
Near Peer
September 13, 2005
8
Four QDR Focus Areas
QDR Integration
 Centerpiece of QDR effort is assessment of DoD’s
wherewithal to address four focus areas:
• Building partnerships to defeat terrorist extremism
• Defending the homeland in-depth
• Shaping the choices of countries at strategic crossroads
• Preventing the acquisition or use of WMD by hostile state or
non-state actors
 Caveats
• Focus areas are not all inclusive
• Focus areas are not just in the far term
September 13, 2005
9
Six Major Issues
QDR Integration
 Six Integrated Project Teams examine the following sets
of issues in addressing the four focus areas
•
Capability Mix
•
Joint Enablers (e.g., space, logistics, ISR)
•
Roles / Missions and Organizations
•
Manning and Balancing the Force
•
Business Practices and Processes
•
Authorities
 A senior civilian and military leader for each issue
September 13, 2005
10
QDR Organization
QDR Integration
SecDef
⇧
SLRG
DepSecDef, VCJCS
⇧
QDR Co-Leads
Outreach
Recommendations
Option Development
INTEGRATED PRODUCT TEAMS
Integration Group
(PDUSDP, PA&E, J-5, J-8
England
Giambastiani
Cambone
Moseley
DuBois
Sharp
Chu
Willard
Krieg
McNabb
Harvey
Odierno
Supporting
IPT
Supporting
IPT
Supporting
IPT
Supporting
IPT
Supporting
IPT
Supporting
IPT
Analysis
Resources
Analysis
Resources
Analysis
Resources
Analysis
Resources
Analysis
Resources
Analysis
Resources
Capability
Mix
Joint
Enablers
Roles,
Missions &
Organizations
Manning &
Balancing
the Force
Business
Practices &
Processes
Authorities
September 13, 2005
11
UNCLASSIFIED
QDR Phasing and Timelines
QDR Integration
Phase I
QDR
TOR
First 4 Roundtables
(Focus Areas)
Phase II
36 Issues – TOR/Taskers from 4 Roundtables
& FPC Development
SLRG
Guidance
(July)
Phase III
Major Muscle Movement Options, PR-07
Decisions
PDM Guidance
(Sept-Oct)
Phase IV
PR-07 Program Guidance
Develop Report & SPG
QDR
Report,
SPG
September 13, 2005
12
UNCLASSIFIED
QDR Co-Lead Meetings
QDR Integration


Co-Lead Meetings:
•
•
•
Day-long sessions
•
•
Other agencies: State, Justice, DHS
Co-chaired by DepSecDef and the VCJCS
Vice Chiefs, Under Secretaries, all IPT Co-Leads, CoComs, NGB
Chief
International allies: Canada, UK, Australia
Objectives:
•
Develop a common understanding of major challenges / threats,
desired end states and approaches
•
Take an unconstrained look at the capabilities the nation needs to
meet the major challenges / threats
•
Obtain senior leader guidance and priorities
Cornerstone of Strategy-Based, Inclusive, and Unconstrained QDR
September 13, 2005
13
UNCLASSIFIED
12 QDR Major Muscle Movements
QDR Integration
Co-lead meetings considering options in 12 major areas:
• 4 integrated and joint capabilities:
− Air
− Ground
− Maritime
− Special Operations
• ISR
• Counter WMD
• Tailored Deterrence
• Mobility and Agility
• Persistent ISR / Net
Centricity
• Build Partnership Capacity
• Homeland Defense
• Human Capital Strategy
September 13, 2005
14
UNCLASSIFIED
Updating the Force Planning Construct
QDR Integration
QDR-2001 construct for shaping / sizing the force (1-4-2-1)
(1) Defend the U.S. homeland
(4) Operate in and from four forward regions
(2) Swiftly defeat adversaries in overlapping military campaigns while
(1) preserving for the President a “win decisively” option
Also, be capable of conducting limited number of lesser
contingencies (e.g., tsunami relief)
Strengths
Post-9/11 Shortcomings
 Introduced Homeland Defense
 Does not capture War on Terror nor clearly
define Homeland Defense
 Associated with forward deterrence
 Limited to forward deterrence in four
defined regions
 Adapted previous “one size fits all” concept to
two broad classes (swift defeat, win decisive)
 Emphasizes major combat over deterrence,
stability operations, and War on Terror
 Maintained ability to fight and win wars swiftly
 Does not adequately account for duration,
scale / intensity and frequency
September 13, 2005
15
UNCLASSIFIED
Next Big Steps
QDR Integration
 Complete reviews of Major Muscle Movement options
 Develop:
•
•
•
•
•
QDR Report (Feb 2006)
FY07 budget request (Feb 2006)
Strategic guidance for FY08 and beyond
Implementation Roadmaps
Chairman’s independent risk assessment
 Interagency and allied consultation
 Roll-out: Congress, allies, industry, public, internal
September 13, 2005
16
UNCLASSIFIED
QDR Integration
Backups
September 13, 2005
17
Major Events Driving Change
QDR Integration
Liberia
Citadel Speech I
Haiti
Citadel Speech II
Libya
9-11 / OEF
Afghanistan
QDR
’05
OIF Iraq
Istanbul
Madrid
Due Feb 06
USS Cole
1999
2000
Bali
2001
2002
 QDR ‘01  Homeland
Security
 National Security Strategy
Riyadh
Musharraf
Beslan,
assassination
Russia
2003 attempts
2004
London /
Egypt
2005
 9/11 Commission
 Combating Terrorism
 Secure Cyberspace
 Protection of Critical
Infrastructures
 War on Terrorism Plan
 Defense Strategy
 Silberman/Robb (WMD)
 Weapons of Mass Destruction
LEGEND
Presidential Speeches
DoD Reports
US Military Action
USG Reports
Terrorist Activity
Commission Reports
September 13, 2005
18