Report Of The Quadrennial Defense Review

Partial contents include: (1) Design, Approach, and Implementation of the Quadrennial Defense Review; (2) The Global Security Environment; (3) Defense Strategy; (4) Alternative Defense Postures; (5) Forces and Manpower; (6) Force Readiness; (7) Transforming U.S. Forces For the Future; (8) Achieving a 21st Century Defense Infrastructure; (9) Defense Resources Section; and (10) Comments by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Partial contents include: (1) Design, Approach, and Implementation of the Quadrennial Defense Review; (2) The Global Security Environment; (3) Defense Strategy; (4) Alternative Defense Postures; (5) Forces and Manpower; (6) Force Readiness; (7) Transforming U.S. Forces For the Future; (8) Achieving a 21st Century Defense Infrastructure; (9) Defense Resources Section; and (10) Comments by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

This is a print on demand edition of a hard to find publication. The DoD is facing the complex challenge of simultaneously supporting continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and preparing its military forces to meet emerging threats of the new security environment. The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) articulates DoD's strategic plan to rebalance capabilities in order to prevail in current operations and develop capabilities to meet future threats. The QDR acknowledged that the country faces fiscal challenges and that DoD must make difficult trade-offs where warranted. This report provides an assessment of the degree to which DoD addressed each of these items in its 2010 report on the QDR and the supplemental information provided to the defense committees. Charts and tables.

Congress mandated that every 4 years the Dept. of Defense (DoD) conduct a review to examine the national defense strategy and its implications for force structure, modernization, infrastructure and the budget. Because the 2001 review, which was issued on Sept. 30, 2001, will have a significant impact on the DoD's planning and budget, the General Accounting Office (GAO) was asked to assess: (1) the strengths and weaknesses of DoD's conduct and reporting of the review, and (2) whether changes in the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) legislation could improve the usefulness of future reviews. Charts and tables.

The problems and issues that the research team tracked during QDR 1997 are far from being resolved and there is no clear guidance on what will be demanded in QDR 2001. The services remain skeptical of the Joint Staff dealing with tough issues that could redirect their own programmatic decisions. Although there is promise of improvement in organization and process, the most glaring problems are the lack of a comprehensive approach to treating resources and understanding the effects of resources on strategy adn transformation alternatives. It is essential that good working relationships be established now with a clear understanding of the different responsibilities and capabilities of the Joint Staff and the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). It will be important to identify an appropriate set of mega-issues (with an appropriate set of supporting specific issues) and initiate studies and analysis on the most important ones.