A document from the US Army Combat Training and Doctrine Development Command (TRADOC) has been published on the Internet, dedicated to the development of a new strategy for the action of the ground forces. The text speaks of military operations and "successful campaigns" simultaneously on several fronts: in space, cyberspace, in the air, on land and at sea against "all opponents." Strategy framework (timeframe) - 2025-2040
The new strategy will require the participation of "people with supernormal abilities" and the actions of "small groups". These people and groups will be distinguished by the highest mobility and will be able to fight simultaneously "in all areas." Such units will replace in the future the “traditional large units” used in wars today.
Since the end of the Cold War, the United States and its joint forces have enjoyed considerable freedom in all areas. The purpose of the new concept is to prepare the state for the growing number of opponents who "challenge the global hegemony of the United States."
Evolution of combined operations in 2025-2040 will be next.
Small teams operating on land, in the air and on the Internet will take on opponents who will not show themselves openly. The new strategy assumes that America's enemies will attack in space, on the Internet, on land, at sea and on land in such a way that the very distinction between peace and war will be blurred. To adequately "meet such opponents", the army of the future must be much more mobile in all areas of war.
TRADOC has created a kind of guide that the army of the future will take into account in the development of field manuals and in the training of the troops of tomorrow. The newest Concept Paper states that adversaries will “make life for American troops” as difficult as possible. Moreover, these enemies will by no means declare themselves enemies. The enemy's "regular and irregular forces" will be combined with "criminal and terrorist groups."
Not a completely new idea, according to American analyst Patrick Tucker. In his opinion, the world has already seen how modern hybrid war is organized, when “thousands of green men invaded the Crimean peninsula in 2014”.
The concept gives four more reasons why the army of the future will not be able to successfully fight the way it did in the past.
1. Information technology is growing exponentially. American troops cannot assume that they will have better communications, drones, or computer equipment. As computers get smaller, cheaper, and more affordable, the US's technological advantage will diminish.
2. The war will be much more "urban". About 60% of the world's population in 2030 is likely to live in cities, and many of them in megalopolises with a population of more than 10 million people. It is here, and not at all in the fields and deserts, that opponents will try to take action.
3. The Internet will become a key front not only in terms of cyberattacks, but also in terms of shaping global opinion about the conflict. Troll troops will spread “fake news and misinformation,” which, combined with conventional media coverage, could complicate the army’s ability to “obtain and maintain an accurate, modern and reasonable understanding of the situation” and “control the information environment” (from document).
4. Every bad guy becomes a joker. The army will see the actions of "super-capable people and small groups" who will be able to "use access to cyberspace, space and nuclear, biological, radiological and chemical weapons."
To fight in the new environment of the 21st century, the army will have to move towards creating smaller and much more versatile formations - something like today's special operations forces that can carry out a wide variety of missions. These "semi-independent" formations will not only be tasked with conquering and holding territory. They, according to the same P. Tucker, will have to do everything: from the use of UAVs and protection against them to launching missiles at targets on enemy territory. Equally, they must be able to "outplay the bad guys in cyberspace." The operations of these small groups will be "semi-independent". They will have "no defended flanks, no permanent communication with higher headquarters, no stable communication line at all."
"Semi-independent" is the key definition. The US Army does not seem to intend to return to "large tank formations" in the future.
At the same time, this does not mean that each mobile unit will carry its own missile battery. No. Rather, small teams should be able to access drones and fire support. The sources of such support themselves will not be large units either.
According to Mr. Tucker, the idea of small, elusive groups, loosely coupled and “in sprawling networks,” fits well with what was previously defined as the future of the US Navy and Air Force. In the future, the units are getting smaller, and their number is growing.
* * *
Therefore, lone wolves and small land teams (not completely land, rather, universal) soldiers, possessing some kind of superpower, will undertake to compete with other states. The United States has the conditions for such a strategy and for training "super fighters", including abroad. American analysts remind that America has about 800 military bases in more than 70 countries. And politicians do not intend to cut anything: in order to preserve global strength, the US Senate this year approved a defense bill worth $ 700 billion. For comparison, peacekeeper Obama in the budget for the 2011 fiscal year set a cap on military spending to $ 549 billion.
Obviously, the military build-up and modernization initiated by the hawk Trump is rapidly gaining momentum. It is difficult to say where the American army will come in 2025-2040, but today military strategists, relying on the experience of unsuccessful "traditional" wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East, generate ideas of small decentralized groups capable of manifesting themselves in several areas at the same time: cyberspace, space, air, land and sea. This is a kind of today's response to tomorrow's war.
By the way, as another point, the TRADOC document establishes the receipt of profit by the US military-industrial complex. It is felt that a businessman is sitting in the Oval Office.
