February 05, 2018

How the United States Can Get More Strategic Bang For Its Force Structure Buck

Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis released an unclassified summary of the new National Defense Strategy two weeks ago. The big news in the strategy is a front-and-center focus on strategic competition with China and Russia. Though this change is evolutionary, not revolutionary, it provides badly needed clarity amidst the chaos that has been a hallmark of the Trump administration to date. Particularly notable is the strategy’s unambiguous direction to “build a more lethal joint force” in part by “prioritizing preparedness for war.”

A return to strategic competition against China and Russia, who both have the technology and the resources to challenge the U.S. military’s ability to operate freely in their respective regions, requires the Pentagon to think differently about the way it uses the military — or what’s known as force employment. To compete effectively against China and Russia while maintaining commitments in the Middle East, the Defense Department will need to figure out how to maximize the strategic impact of the size and capability of the force it has now — dubbed “force structure” in Pentagonese — by developing a new force employment model. In other words, it needs to figure out how to get more strategic “bang” out of its force structure “buck.”

Civilian and military leaders have been talking about the need for a more dynamic global presence for some years now, recognizing the fact that America’s post-Cold War force employment is generally static. The military tends to repeat the same deployments and exercises in the same places in the same ways year after year, without much consideration of how these events affect high-end competitors’ decision-making. This pattern of force employment cannot continue if the military is to execute the National Defense Strategy. The primacy of competition against China and Russia in the strategy requires that the United States change its approach to force employment in at least three ways.

Read the full article in War on the Rocks.

  • Commentary

    Defense

    From Innovation Ecosystem to Industrial Base

    Introduction America’s defense technology boom is real. Venture-backed firms building in artificial intelligence (AI), autonomy, space, and advanced manufacturing are winning ...

    By Brian Katz

    • May 14, 2026
  • Podcast

    Defense / Technology & National Security

    WarTalk: Iran War with Jack Shanahan

    The “love tap” White House readout. A failed convoy operation. KSA pulling overflight rights. Iran with 70% of its missile force still intact. And one F-15E shoot-down from ab...

    By Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan & Jordan Schneider

    • May 11, 2026
  • Podcast

    Defense

    Numbers Matter

    Among the many lessons of Ukraine and the Iran war is the role of small, distributed air and missile defenses, whether using — or defending against — missiles or drones. Dr. S...

    By Stacie Pettyjohn

    • May 8, 2026
  • Commentary

    Defense

    Experts Make Their Picks for Acquisition Reform Litmus Tests

    If the department cannot pass these easy tests, there is little reason to believe it will do well on the harder ones....

    By Stacie Pettyjohn

    • National Defense Magazine
    • May 5, 2026

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia