X hits on this document





81 / 95

changes are comparatively minor in scope when measured against the magnitude of the

threat. For example, the Hart-Rudman commission concluded that the current steps were

simply not enough. Among other things, they recommend DoD “broaden and strengthen

the existing Joint Forces Command/JTF-CS to coordinate military planning, doctrine, and

command and control for military support for all hazards and disasters.” They suggest

that this step would provide the command and control necessary to respond to multiple

incidents--not just a single WMD event.13

Conclusion Eight

Rapidly growing technological innovation and the information age, and the

emerging threats associated with it, justify and require significant structural changes to

America’s defense establishment.

Supporting Discussion

There are many among the national security community who have reached this

conclusion. For example, some of the most credible strategic thinkers at the Fletcher

Conference flatly argue that these new threats “call for a reorganization of the

Department of Defense.”14 They stress that many of the new threats are direct threats,

not only to America’s vital interests, but also to the “other types of contingencies for

which military forces are deemed necessary” in future conflicts.15 Thus, they combine

America’s homeland vulnerability with the potential vulnerabilities of our military forces

as they are being increasingly used in unconventional ways. “Such an undertaking,” they

say, “would require a fundamental revision of the 1947 National Security Act.” They go

on to argue that, because there are now several areas that “fall outside the existing DoD


Document info
Document views336
Page views338
Page last viewedSat Jan 21 10:52:30 UTC 2017