海上力量与兵力投送委员会主席称,目前兴起的全球威胁与冲突，将拖缓五角大楼热烈讨论的“重返亚太”步伐。众议员兰迪·福布斯,R-Virginia称,正在中东进行的反对“伊斯兰国”军事行动,以及俄乌之间的紧张关系，将拖延五角大楼“重返亚太”的计划。福布斯提倡建立和维持一支强大的海军来解决全球问题,支持打击伊斯兰国,同时确保“重返亚太”计划。
福布斯2月3日告诉记者，“太平洋轴心的构成之一是我们与盟友一起构筑的友好关系。我们不必全权尽责，这不仅仅是美国的事情”。服役官员称，“亚太平衡”有许多工作要做，包括澳洲达尔文基地海军陆战队单位的定期轮调,驻新加坡港口的四艘濒海战斗舰的调遣。还包括在关岛建立能够训练4700名海军陆战队的试验场，2021年他们将进驻那里。谈到2016年的预算提交案，高级海军将领表示,亚太再平衡已经在部署。
海军少将威廉·雷斯切尔称,“会有30000名船员以及27000名海军陆战队员,包括超过40000名船员和海军陆战队派驻在东亚和太平洋地区。根据美国《四年防务评估报告》,会有51艘船部署到太平洋，34艘在中东,反映了美国在这些地区的战略重点”。福布斯强调,我们需要分配必要的技术和平台资源，以确保美国战力支持“亚太平衡”。
“2016财年预算的项目包含,航母检修,海上巡逻机投入,新的远程轰炸机的发展，这些都至关重要。我们十分关切该地区的态势发展,但前提是确保项目得到充分资助。美国在亚洲的存在是需要战力支撑的，我们要投入确保战力所需的可靠的资源,这才是维持“亚太平衡”唯一的办法，而不是仅仅空喊口号。”“我们的盟友和竞争对手，从来只是通过我们的战力来判断我们在该地区的承诺。在不断削减国防预算的背景下，政府却口口声声说要保持“再平衡”。
海军官员称,全球任务不会减缓正在调整部署的“重返亚太”计划。“一切都表明‘太平洋平衡’正按计划推进。海军作战部长称，到2020年我们要在该地区部署40-60％的战力维持平衡。一切都会发生”。
几个月前海军上将乔纳森称,海军努力在太平洋地区部署60%的舰队。“60%是我们驻在西太平洋海军的比例。这样部署有了回旋余地，可以及时反应。我们正这样做。我们建造船舰,希望在西面部署，它不只关乎数字,而是关乎数字背后所代表的能力”。
福布斯称，由于最近全球发生的事情，增加在太平洋地区的存在显得更加重要。“我们永远不会离开那里。我们有俄罗斯、伊斯兰国和非洲的一连串事情要处理，所以“增强”这个词比“枢轴”或“调整”更好。多数情况下事情不会异常地发生。这就是为什么我们必须增加存在”。福布斯称,美国盟友强调贸易也是维持地区平衡很重要的一点,同时称关注五角大楼取消“空海一体战”部门这一动态。
五角大楼关闭“空海一体战”办公室,把精力投入到更广泛的联合概念,引发很多讨论概念被边缘化的担忧。创建“空海一体战”概念原是为了找到成功的战略途径,对抗复杂的防空系统、远程反舰导弹以及其他旨在阻止美国军事投射能力的技术。主要关注于空、海军平台和技术,“空海一体战”旨在使用高空、深度打击战机，与美国海军一起，为飞机和船只开放港口和航道。
这一概念是为了应对五角大楼分析师所称的反介入/区域封锁（A2 /AD）,潜在对手为拒绝美国接近其海岸线，进而打击具有重要战略意义的地区，所以使用了这一策略，A2/AD就是用来描述这些武器,技术和战术的。例如A2/AD远程反舰导弹能够打击距海岸1000英里处的航母，或者是高科技、新一代的防空系统，相比上一代，能够在更远距离跟踪、打击运输机,无人机或战机。
“我们之所以研发“空海一体战”，就是要穿透A2 /AD防御。这不仅仅是针对中国,还有伊朗和其他国家。
福布斯称,停止或者改变空海一体战（ASB）概念会让美国在太平洋的盟友发生误判。“我担心,由于取消“空海一体战”概念，他们可能觉得我们不再继续玩啦”。虽然一些评论家们认为，停止ASB是五角大楼在尽量节省资金，用于其他各种武器项目,然而，作为解决新兴、下一代威胁的方法，这一概念还是得到广泛认可与支持。虽然它并不是特定针对潜在的中国军事威胁,“太平洋平衡”与“空海一体战”对快速现代化的中国军事的影响并不明显。然而事实上,至少在某种程度上,它是这一环境下的产物。
当被问及中国核潜艇巡逻能力的报道时,福布斯称,美国应该认识并解决这种竞争。“这些东西是不会令一直看着它的人感到惊喜的。它只表明我们迫切需要认识到，中国是一个非常厉害的竞争对手。这并不一定意味着中国就是对手,只是我们必须认识到竞争就在那里。我们必须探讨如何处理这种竞争的策略。如果我们不这样做,将危及我们自身。”
福布斯强调,美国战略家和军事开发人员做决定时，不应该再基于中国对其意图或动机的解释，而是应该完全依据对中国军事能力的精确计算。
原文：
Forbes: Ukriane and ISIS Put Pacific Re-balance at Risk
By Kris Osborn | Tuesday, February 3rd, 2015
The chairman of the powerful House Seapower and Projection Forces subcommittee is concerned that current emerging global threats and conflicts will slow down the implementation of the Pentagon’s much-discussed Pacific rebalance.
Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Virginia, is concerned that Pentagon plans to rebalance to the Pacific could be neglected in light of ongoing military operations against ISIS in the Middle East and continued tensions between Russia and Ukraine.
Forbes advocates building and maintaining a large enough Navy to address global presence concerns, support the war against ISIS and also ensure progress toward the planned Pacific rebalance.
“One of the major components to the Pacific pivot is the relationship we have with our allies in terms of all coming together. We can’t do that pivot all by ourselves. It is not just a U.S. thing,” Forbes told reporters Feb. 3.
The Pacific rebalance includes a variety of measures including rotating Marine Corps units through Darwin, Australia and moving up to four Littoral Combat Ships through ports in Singapore. The effort also includes ongoing work to build a live fire range able to train up to 4,700 marines slated to relocate to Guam by 2021, service officials said.
When discussing the 2016 budget submission, senior Navy leaders said the Pacific rebalance is already underway.
“There are an additional 30,000 sailors and 27,000 Marines forward ashore, including over 40,000 sailors and Marines in East Asia and the Pacific. Consistent with the QDR{Quadrennial Defense Review}, you see 51 ships deployed to the Pacific and 34 to the Middle East, reflecting the directed strategic focus in these regions,” said Rear Adm. William Lescher, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Budget.
Forbes emphasized that resources need to be allocated to ensure the right technologies and platforms are available to U.S. force to support the Pacific rebalance.
“Some of the programs included in the FY16 (fiscal year 2016) budget, like the overhaul of an aircraft carrier, investment in maritime patrol aircraft, and the development of a new long-range bomber are essential to demonstrating our seriousness in the region—but we need to make sure they are fully funded. Devoting credible resources to the capabilities required to ensure U.S. presence in Asia is the only way to ensure that the ‘rebalance’ is more than just a slogan,” he said. “Both our allies and our competitors judge our commitment to the Asia-Pacific region by the capabilities we maintain. The Administration’s rhetoric about ‘rebalancing’ to the region is seen in the context of continuous cuts to national defense, including a Navy among the smallest since the First World War and an Air Force that is the smallest in the service’s history.”
Navy officials say global commitments will not slow ongoing plans to rebalance to the Pacific.
“There is nothing to suggest that the Pacific rebalance will not proceed as planned. The CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) has said we’re going to do a 60–40 force structure rebalance there by 2020. There is nothing to indicate that won’t happen,” a Navy official said.
Speaking several months ago, CNO Adm. Jonathan Greenert said the Navy was still making progress with effort to home-port 60-percent of the fleet in the Pacific region.
“60 percent represents the percentage of our Navy that is home-ported west. The idea is it’s easier to rotationally deploy or to react if you have to, if you’re home-ported where you believe your focus of attention should be. We’re on track for that. As we build ships, we look toward home-porting them to the West and keeping that process going, because it’s not just numbers; it’s also the numbers with the most capability,” Greenert said.
Forbes said increasing presence in the Pacific is even more important in light of recent global events.
“We never left there and came back. Enhancement is a better word (than pivot or rebalance) because we have the Russian concern and of course ISIS and Africa that we are concerned with. Things don’t happen singularly they happen in multiple situations. That is why we have to look at why we have to increase presence,” Forbes explained.
Forbes added that U.S. allies emphasize trade is a vital part of the rebalance to the region as well and said allies are likely to be concerned about the Pentagon’s move to close the AirSea Battle office.
The Pentagon closed up the AirSea Battle office and moved the effort into a broader joint concept, sparking concern that the much discussed concept was being sidelined. The AirSea Battle concept was created as an attempt to find successful strategic avenues through which to potentially counter sophisticated air defenses, long-range anti-ship missiles and other technologies designed to thwart or prevent the U.S. military from projecting power.
Drawing primarily upon Air Force and Navy platforms and technologies, the AirSea Battle concept was aimed at using high-altitude, deep-strike aircraft in tandem with naval assets to open up ports and waterways to U.S. planes and ships.
The concept was created to counter what Pentagon analysts call anti-access/area-denial, or A2/AD, a term used to describe weapons, technologies and tactics designed by potential adversaries to deny the U.S. an ability to operate closer to the coastlines in strategically important areas. A2/AD tactics, for example, refer to long-range anti-ship missiles able to hold aircraft carriers at risk for up to 1,000 miles off the coast or high-tech, next-generation air defenses able to track and fire upon cargo plans, drones or fighter aircraft at much further distances than previous systems can.
“Why do we need it in the first place? There are A2/AD defenses that we need to penetrate. It is not just China but Iran and all over the globe.
Forbes added that closing up or moving the ASB concept could send U.S. allies in the Pacific the wrong message.
“I worry because taking away the AirSea Battle concept is sending a huge message to them about whether we are going to be players or not,” he said.
While some critics have dismissed ASB as an inside-the-Pentagon effort to secure funding for various weapons projects, the concept did have widespread recognition and support as representing and intelligent method for addressing emerging and next-generation threats.
While not specific to a potential Chinese military threat, the Pacific rebalance and AirSea Battle are not oblivious to the implications of rapid Chinese military modernization. In fact they are, at least in part, inspired by the circumstance.
When asked about reports of China’s nuclear-armed submarine patrol capability, Forbes said U.S. planners should recognize and address the competition.
“None of this stuff surprises those of us who have been looking at it. It shows the importance of recognizing China is a very serious competitor. It does not have to mean they are an adversary but we have to recognize the competition that is there. We have to talk about strategies regarding how to deal with that competition. If we don’t do that we do it to our own peril,” he explained.
Forbes emphasized that U.S. planners and military developers should not base their decisions upon interpretations of Chinese intention or motivation but should instead ground their calculations purely according to Chinese military capability.
原文链接：
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/02/0 ... re-balance-at-risk/
作者: meirenjiao 时间: 2015-2-4 16:12
标题: 干妹妹，没有看到“带路党”的话啊！
作者: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 时间: 2015-2-4 23:04
标题: 居然不相信带路党，灯塔啊，你让公知母猪们怎么办
作者: 轰炸机 时间: 2015-2-5 05:47
标题: 这么说，带路党要断奶了？公知们打滚撒泼怎么办？
| 欢迎光临 鼎盛网 (http://www.top81cn.cn/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.1 |