From the original document stored at: http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/policy/fromsea/ftsunfp.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Navy Public Affairs Library (NAVPALIB)
A service of the Navy Office of Information, Washington DC
Send feedback/questions to navpalib@opnav-emh.navy.mil
----------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Navy Policy Paper
"...From the Sea" Update
NAVAL FORWARD PRESENCE: ESSENTIAL FOR A CHANGING WORLD
May 1993
Control of the seas, a requirement for unencumbered sea
commerce to and from maritime nations, is now enjoyed by the
United States and our allies.
America is no longer threatened by a global navy whose
leaders vow to bury us and our way of life. This changed
strategic landscape provides us significant opportunities.
In response to the changes in the character of the security
policy challenges facing the United States, the Navy is shaping
its littoral forces to concentrate more on operating in littoral,
or coastline, regions of the earth than on open ocean conflict at
sea.
While recognizing the dramatic changes that have reshaped the
United States' National Security Strategy, the Department of the
Navy must continue to train, man and equip forces capable of
conducting prompt and sustained combat operations at sea.
The U.S. military is first and foremost a war fighting, war
winning organization. While maritime forward presence tangibly
contributes towards peace, it also contributes significantly
toward our ability to prevail should conflict occur. However,
relevant preparation in peacetime is required for effectiveness in
war.
Forward deployed forces gain invaluable familiarization with
potential conflict environments; intelligence focus and flows are
established before a crisis; communications paths are
strengthened; and climatic impact on equipment is assessed.
Furthermore, the capabilities of potential coalition partners
can be determined, credibility established and operational
procedures practiced. That situational awareness is particularly
critical in the first stages of conflict when maritime forces are
likely to form the initial core of U.S. forces on-scene.
Having thus trained where they will fight, they can provide
effective command and control, serve as the nucleus around which a
decisive joint or coalition based response can be shaped, and
enable the introduction of heavier follow-on forces if necessary.
Collectively the Armed Forces represent the military element
of our nation's power. Combined with the other elements --
diplomatic, political, and economic -- our armed forces play an
important role in:
- Promoting important U.S. security and economic interests;
- Providing our nation's leadership with a wide range of
options to forestall crises, manage them should they emerge, and
respond swiftly should our interests be threatened; and
- Developing decisive and sustainable combat power capable of
swiftly winning any conflict.
To be effective instruments of power, our forces must be
available not just when crises occur, but on a day-to-day basis in
flashpoint regions where friends rely on our influence and
potential adversaries are convinced of our commitment to defend
our interests. Naval forces have long conducted, as have our
sister services, important peacetime forward presence operations.
Now, as overseas land basing is reduced, naval forces will
become more important in meeting future forward presence
requirements.
Posturing future forward presence will be more complicated
than the routine rotational deployments made in response to the
Soviet threat of the past. While control of the seas will mean
our maritime forces can be anywhere, domestic fiscal constraints
and reduced force size will preclude their being everywhere.
The challenge, consequently, is to tailor forces used for
forward presence such that our forward presence operations are
credible for the missions they are assigned.
PROMOTING AND PROTECTING IMPORTANT U.S. SECURITY AND ECONOMIC
INTERESTS.
Large-scale forward presence is no longer required in
specific theaters to deter or engage a global Soviet threat. In
fact, naval forward presence -- even during the Cold War -- was
driven in large measure by regional interests.
Those interests persist in the littoral areas surrounding
three traditional deployment hubs -- the Mediterranean, the North
Arabian Sea, and the Western Pacific. In the 1990s U.S. domestic
economic well-being depends on the capability to promote and
protect U.S. interests in geographically diverse potential
conflict zones.
The U.S. is the world's largest exporter of goods and
services; 99 percent of U.S. export tonnage is sent by ship to
international trading partners every year. Over seven and
one-half million U.S. jobs are linked directly to our merchandise
exports. On a daily basis forward deployed naval forces help
ensure the freedom of the seas critical to regional trade.
Perhaps more important, however, we live in a world in which
increased adventurism is likely. Whether motivated by
territorial, ethnic, or economic ambitions, a rogue ruler may
justifiably think his chances for mischief are better now than
they have been for decades.
Properly positioned forces, in conjunction with clearly
articulated policy and demonstrated commitment, help prevent power
vacuums and reduce the temptation for regional powers to prey on
weaker neighbors. Enhanced mobility for U.S.-based contingency
forces will undoubtedly improve our ability to win future wars,
but it is far less likely to plant the same seeds of doubt in the
minds of potential enemies than will credible, visible, on-scene
U.S. forces.
The precise benefits of forward presence are difficult to
quantify; the risks of abandoning it are high.
PROVIDING OUR NATION'S LEADERS A WIDE RANGE OF CRISIS PREVENTION,
MANAGEMENT AND RESPONSE OPTIONS
As our overseas base structure shrinks, maritime forces will
shoulder an increasing portion of the forward presence burden.
Fortunately, maritime forces -- by virtue of their versatility,
agility, and sustainability -- provide our national leadership
with a broad range of options. They serve as a diplomatic
rheostat which allows our country's leaders to turn up the heat or
withdraw once the situation returns to normal. Moreover, as long
as control of the seas is maintained, maritime forces will have
the inherent advantage of assured access to the littorals without
having to rely on sometimes politically difficult overflight or
basing rights.
VERSATILE. Short of war, forward presence is as much an
element of statecraft as military strategy. Although its
importance has often been misunderstood -- especially by those who
view naval forces as existing only to fight battles at sea --
forward presence in fact provides diplomatic leverage during peace
that may well deter war on land as well as at sea.
Maritime presence takes many forms. Navy port visits promote
American ideals, encourage democratic trends, and signal
commitment to friends. As has been amply demonstrated in northern
Iraq, Bangladesh, and Somalia, naval forces can provide disaster
relief and humanitarian assistance. They can also be used to
underwrite U.S. diplomatic initiatives -- to influence friends as
well as send unambiguous signals, or if appropriate ... ambiguous
signals that can be extremely effective during crisis negotiation
... to potential adversaries. Finally, when called upon, naval
forces can generate precise and lethal power from the sea to
achieve our nation's objectives.
AGILE. Naval forces can quietly monitor budding crisis
situations from over the horizon or make themselves selectively
visible and menacing to hostile regimes. If political, economic,
and/or diplomatic measures succeed, maritime forces can be quietly
withdrawn without action or buildup ashore.
Freedom and control of the seas provide the option of not
only positioning naval forces where they are strategically needed,
but of moving to other crisis locations on ambiguous warning if
the need arises.
In an era of regional crises and threats, warning times may
be measured in days and hours, not weeks and months.
Strategic agility to respond expeditiously to these threats
is often critical.
SUSTAINABLE. Naval forces can maintain their presence in an
area of interest indefinitely, free of major land-based
infrastructure for support. Sustainability provides political
leaders a critical commodity -- time -- to create conditions
necessary for policy success.
In many instances, naval forces provide the means to
forestall potential problems, to return to "situation normal"
without the use of force. In the event of conflict, Marine Corps
ground fighting forces who carry their own initial sustainment and
resupply can be deployed in harms way without having first to
begin a logistics build-up to support operations ashore.
After a crisis or conflict is resolved, naval forces can
remain in the region to help win the peace, again without
political or large logistic encumbrances ashore.
ASSURED ACCESS. Seaborne forces can attain access to all
littoral states of the world.
Internationally recognized as sovereign territory, naval
forces can be positioned abroad to influence events in politically
sensitive areas without necessarily polarizing foreign public or
political opinion with respect to the intentions of the United
States or her allies.
But whatever the political situation, the critical issue is
that American political leaders can employ naval forces to further
national objectives without the requirement of asking permission
for access from foreign governments.
WHERE AND HOW MUCH?
Although naval forward presence operations provide a host of
statecraft tools, their most important missions are deterring and
if necessary winning regional conflicts such that U.S. security
and economic interests are protected.
It is these essential missions which will determine the shape
our force packages will take and where forward deployed forces
will be positioned.
Our force packages must demonstrate substantial credibility.
For the foreseeable future the centerpieces about which we
structure our naval force packages will be aircraft carriers and
amphibious ready groups.
If the specific situations allow, more intermittent presence
or lesser force levels may suffice. Ultimately, however,
consistent use of lesser force packages and/or intermittent
presence in flashpoint regions where the potential for conflict
exists will adversely affect our regional interests, strain our
credibility and trivialize our global leadership role.
The challenge and fiscal imperative is to develop new
concepts that can meet forward presence requirements with
effectiveness and with greater efficiency -- force packages which
are smaller but flexible and still credible.
As in actual warfighting, joint operations offer the most
effective and efficient means of enhancing our forward presence
operations with a smaller force. Only through joint operations --
combining and leveraging the individual strengths of each Service
-- can we meet the demands of an uncertain world with a smaller
force.
To this end the U.S. military is exploring adaptive joint
force packaging concepts. These concepts call for the formation
of capabilities-based packages containing a mix of forces -- Army,
Navy, Air Force and Marines -- tailored to specific theater
requirements for land, maritime, air and special operations.
RETURN ON INVESTMENT. Maintaining forces forward, whether
permanently based or through rotational deployments is expensive.
It is, however, a worthwhile investment.
On any given day more than 2.5 million Americans are living,
working, or traveling abroad.
American companies, in the form of direct investment, own
more than 400 billion dollars worth of capital assets in foreign
countries.
Two-thirds of the dollar value of our trade, about one
trillion dollars annually, is carried on the oceans' surfaces.
Raw materials critical to American industry come from all
corners of the globe. Over half of our petroleum is imported.
Each year nearly one billion tons of commerce transits to and
from our seaports via narrow straits and choke points that must be
kept open -- trade routes that could easily be closed by
determined third world powers or terrorist organizations.
FUTURE. Forward deployed forces at credible levels
demonstrate U.S. commitment and resolve at or near trouble spots
far better than those same forces based at home. They bolster
U.S. deterrent capabilities and put U.S. military power in
position to contain incipient threats.
The tangible nature of forward presence is far more apt to
preserve regional power balances than the uncertain and unseen
threat of surging U.S.-based forces if something happens.
Finally, the operational expertise and mutual trust gained in
exercises with friends, provide a solid foundation upon which
coalitions are built. Most important, the advantage of operating
forward is the ability to respond rapidly with U.S. armed might at
or near trouble spots with such rapidity that force itself may
very well not be required to resolve the crisis.
The exact degree to which forward presence alters the
strategic calculations of regional belligerents is difficult to
assess.
Clearly some acts will not be deterred, even when all
elements of our nation's power are brought to bear. It is
therefore easy to point to specific instances where deterrence
appears to have failed. At the same time, successful efforts,
arguably the great majority, generally go unnoticed.
In a fiscally constrained environment, it is tempting to
accept the risks of limited policy options, decreased deterrence,
and warfighting decrements associated with reduced forward
presence. However, preventing wars or rapidly winning them make
investing in forward presence a compelling choice.
The challenge is to tailor and position our forces in areas
where regional crises would be most damaging and in ways which
maximize their contributions to our security and economic
interests.
A world leader can do no less.
-USN-