The American Environment Security Scenarios of 2035: Content Analysis of Quadrennial Defenses

Review of 2014

KHEMIS Mohamed

Assistant professor in future studies Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla, Algerie

khemiss-moh@hotmail.comkhemise.mo@univ-ouargla.dz

The American Environment Security Scenarios of 2035: Content Analysis of Quadrennial Defenses

Review of 2014

KHEMIS Mohamed

Assistant professor in future studies Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla, Algerie

khemiss-moh@hotmail.comkhemise.mo@univ-ouargla.dz

Obviously, The QDR is a strategy-driven assessment that balances the preparations of the present with anticipated challenges and opportunities of the future. Therefore, the scenario planning seems the main analytical framework of Quadrennial Defense Reviews, and it provides us also a comprehensive tool to read Quadrennial Defense Reviews as well. Because, today scenario planning is prime technique of future studies that have been used currently by governments, planners, corporate managers and military analysts as powerful tool to help decision making process to face uncertainty and establish new thinking about possible futures to avoid catastrophic outcomes.According to Bernard Berelson, content analysis “a versatile tool for social science and media researchers” thus many scholars adopted it for historical and political researches as well (Holsti, 1969). However, the content analysis method has achieved a greater popularity among scholars after the its developments as full-fledged scientific method took place during the World War Two, when the American government sponsored a project under the directorship of Harold Laswell to analyze the enemy’s propaganda contents (Steve, Stemler, 2001).

Category Definitions1- Driving Forces (Df): Driving forces are the external factors that are causing, or might cause, changes in likelihood of system. These factors are external to the system of interest to stakeholders in that they are considered to be beyond the control of these stakeholders. Driving forces can include change in demographical, social, economic and environmental factors. The category of driving forces includes 54 frequencies in QDR 2014, and occupied 33 percent of the total frequencies of the whole text. See figures and the tables. This category addressed the role of the Unites States and its exercise global leadership in supporting its interests: 2- Uncertainties/ Wild Cards (Un): Uncertainties are wicked problems which resist to be solved with conventional methods of scientific inquiry. This type of problems is probably needs a multi-disciplinary approach or multiple types of knowledge. They are likely to require people to change their mindsets and behaviors. The category of Uncertainties/ Wild Cards includes 24 frequencies in QDR 2014, and occupied 14 percent of the total frequencies of the whole text3- Strategy (St) The category of Strategy which represents the major of the Quadrennial Defense Review 2014 frequencies, it contains 58 frequencies, and occupied 35 percent of the total frequencies of the whole text. Noting that, the QDR 2014 was “strategy-driven and resource-informed process focused on preparing the Department of Defense for the future and prioritizing our efforts in period of fiscal austerity (QDR, 2014, p. 1) Therefore we conclude that the strategy is the central theme of 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review4- Weak Signals (We):Weak Signals are the anticipating indicator events of the coming changes in the future, and detecting weak signals is the main activity for acquiring information and gathering data to make changes in strategies and policies to avoid chaos and disaster of future surprises (Elina Hiltunen, 2008). The category of Weak Signals (We) includes 30 frequencies in QDR 2014, and occupied 18 percent of the total frequencies of the whole text

CONCLUSIONThe content analysis process of Quadrennial Defense Review 2014 has shown a huge development in terms of distributed frequencies at each category, if we compare the development

frequencies percentage that addressed the uncertainties and weak signals categories in QDR 2006 where they represented just 7 percent from whole text which contributed its 93 percent to the Strategy and driving forces issues, and exceeds 20 percent of the total frequencies of Quadrennial Defense Review of 2014.

Although, the increasing percentage of uncertainties and weak signals categories in previous Quadrennial Defense Reviews has redoubled twice in QDR 2014 and exceeds 30 percent of the whole report. See the figures.

Regardless, the strategy-driven nature of Quadrennial Defense Review, the wide range of weak signals and critical uncertainties facing the United States in security environment has escalated dramatically, especially the fiscal austerity that constrained the Department of Defense’s future investment plans and initiatives. In addition, the growing cost in personal

accounts are already raised the pressure on investment, especially R&D and procurement. The urge need to build a robust strategy and make the right assessment of the security environment is getting more and more difficult especially when the security threats were blur

and cloudy. During the Cold War, the NATO alliance and most of other nations of the noncommunist world saw the potential expansion of the Soviet Union as clear and present danger against which well-defined security plans (strategies/driving forces) were an absolute necessity. Therefore, the previous QDRs were spending much attention on plans or the so-called Strategies/Driving forces. However, the rapid changing nature of security environment and the rising of new threats and challenges have brought the American strategists to pay more

attention to weak signals ascendance that might detect dramatic changes in the near future.

CONCLUSIONThe content analysis process of Quadrennial Defense Review 2014 has shown a huge development in terms of distributed frequencies at each category, if we compare the development

frequencies percentage that addressed the uncertainties and weak signals categories in QDR 2006 where they represented just 7 percent from whole text which contributed its 93 percent to the Strategy and driving forces issues, and exceeds 20 percent of the total frequencies of Quadrennial Defense Review of 2014.

Although, the increasing percentage of uncertainties and weak signals categories in previous Quadrennial Defense Reviews has redoubled twice in QDR 2014 and exceeds 30 percent of the whole report. See the figures.

Regardless, the strategy-driven nature of Quadrennial Defense Review, the wide range of weak signals and critical uncertainties facing the United States in security environment has escalated dramatically, especially the fiscal austerity that constrained the Department of Defense’s future investment plans and initiatives. In addition, the growing cost in personal

accounts are already raised the pressure on investment, especially R&D and procurement. The urge need to build a robust strategy and make the right assessment of the security environment is getting more and more difficult especially when the security threats were blur

and cloudy. During the Cold War, the NATO alliance and most of other nations of the noncommunist world saw the potential expansion of the Soviet Union as clear and present danger against which well-defined security plans (strategies/driving forces) were an absolute necessity. Therefore, the previous QDRs were spending much attention on plans or the so-called Strategies/Driving forces. However, the rapid changing nature of security environment and the rising of new threats and challenges have brought the American strategists to pay more

attention to weak signals ascendance that might detect dramatic changes in the near future.

INTRODUCTION

On March 3, 2014, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel submitted the latest Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). This report has identifies the major security challenges likely to emerge in the foreseeable future of United States of America. The QDR is a legislative mandated review of Department of Defense to conduct a comprehensive examination of the national defense strategy, force structure, force policies of United States and establishing a defense program for the next 20 years. Though, the QDR is also provides new trends and directions for the structure of Department of defense in order to develop common assessment of the security environment. Thus, the QDR represents a scenario based document that explores the multiple possible futures of U. S near and long term security challenges. The reviews of QDR are supposed to look out over twenty year horizon. Since 1997 review, these reviews have become integral components of defense’s Department overall strategic planning. Obviously, The QDR is a strategy-driven assessment that balances the preparations of the present with anticipated challenges and opportunities of the future. Therefore, the scenario planning seems the main analytical framework of Quadrennial Defense Reviews, and it provides us also a comprehensive tool to read Quadrennial Defense Reviews as well. Because, today scenario planning is prime technique of future studies that have been used currently by governments, planners, corporate managers and military analysts as powerful tool to help decision making process to face uncertainty and establish new thinking about possible futures to avoid catastrophic outcomes

ICES 3° International Conference on Educational Sciences 2014 TIRANA ALBANIA, April 24-25, 2014

Frequencies percentage at each category of QDRs 2014, 2010, and 2006

PROJECT OBJECTIVE

This study tries to analyze the content of Quadrennial Defense Review 2014 by using central themes of scenario planning literature such: Driving forces, uncertainties, Weak signals and Strategies. The analysis of the manifest and latent content of QDR 2014 is the first step to evaluate and assess the challenges and opportunities of security environment of the United States and international system as well.

ABSTRACTThe Quadrennial Defense Review represents an important official document to drawn the multiple scenarios of America’s future security environment, and highlights the main shifts that rebalance the urgent demands of today and the most likely threats of the future. This study aims to analyze the Quadrennial Defense Review of 2014 by using the content analysis as a central methodological tool, and noting that scenario-based planning literature is the theoretical background of this study.keywords: Quadrennial Defense Review 2014, Content analysis, Security environment, Scenario building, Driving forces, Uncertainties, Weak signals, Strategy

Content Analysis of QDR 2014Sampling Units Selection of QDR 2014: It could be argued that, what makes content analysis technique useful and unique is its reliance on coding and categorizing of the data, according to many scholars the unit of analysis refers to the basic unit of text to be classified during content analysis. Therefore, this study has selected paragraphs of Quadrennial Defense Review 2014 as sampling units which are compatible with multiple ideas of the whole text.The manifest content categories of QDR 2014: The manifest content of Quadrennial Defense Review 2014 has exposed as the table illustrated below: Categories Definitions: In fact, categorizing and coding scheme is process that can be derived from three sources: the data, previous related studies, and theories. Thus this study relies on scenario planning literature as significant basis that enable us to develop four categories inductively from the whole text of QDR 2014, and we assume that the QDR written to make future strategies, and response to the possible threats. The four categories are addressing the wide range of QDR 2014 connotations. The QDR 2014 categories are outlined as following: - Driving forces coded as (Df) - Uncertainties coded as (Un)- Strategy coded as (St)-Weak signals coded as (We)See tables and the appendixes below:

Categories Number of frequencies

Percentage Coding Scheme

1 Driving Forces 54 33 % Df 2 Uncertainties 24 14 % Un 3 Strategy 58 35 % St 4 Weak Signals 30 18 % We

Text order

Original categories order of QDR 2014

1 Future Security Environment: - Regional Trends - Global Trends - U. S. Strengths and Opportunities

2 The Defense Strategy: - Pillars of the U. S. Defense Strategy

o Protect the homeland o Build security globally o Project power and win decisively

- Force Planning Construct - A Foundation of Innovation

3 Rebalancing The Joint Force: - Air Force - Army - Navy - Marin Corps - Adjusting the Balance between Active and Reserve - Protecting Key Priorities

o Protect the homeland o Build security globally o Project and win Decisively

- Risks - Main Elements of Planned U. S. Force Structure and End Strength, FY

2019 o Department of the Army o Department of the Navy o Department of the Air Force o Special Operations Forces o Strategic Nuclear Forces o Cyber Mission Forces

4

Rebalancing the Defense Institution - Strengthening the Health of All Volunteer Force - Rebalancing the Defense Institution

o Efficiencies o Better buying power and financial management reforms o Managing the Total Force o Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)

- Pay and Compensation

5 Implications and Risks of Sequestration-Level Cuts

Research categories Categorizing according to original text connotations

Driving Forces It contains all connotations about: the role of United States at international mainstream, and the rising challenges from emerging powers such as BRICS countries, U.S. relations with allies and partners, globalization and the proliferation of technology, knowledge and WMD, proliferation of asymmetric challenges.

Uncertainties (Wild Cards)

It contains all connotations about: uncertainties, Black Swans and Wild Cards of that might happen at operational, institutional, political and military levels.

Strategies It contains all connotations about: Rebuilding, rebalancing the defense enterprise, new approaches adoption, new reforms integrations.

Weak signals It contains all connotations that address the small changes and unconventional policies such: Climate change, human care, assistance, education, and training.