CRS Insights
The 2015 National Military Strategy: Background and Questions for Congress
Kathleen J. McInnis, Analyst in International Security (kmcinnis@crs.loc.gov, 7-1416)
July 29, 2015 (IN10333)
In June 2015, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff issued the most recent United States
National Military
Strategy (NMS). This NMS argues that "revisionist states" seeking to change the existing international order (such
as Russia) and non-state actors (such as the Islamic State) are creating a strategic context whereby "global disorder
has significantly increased, while some of our comparative military advantage has begun to erode." Of note, the
NMS states—for the first time in a major strategy document produced in the past twenty years—that there is a
distinct possibility that the U.S. may find itself at war with another great power, although it notes that the
probability of that actually happening is "low but growing."
The Threat Environment
Like many other national strategy documents, the NMS describes a global environment marked by increasing
interdependence, complexity, and the diffusion of information and technologies across state boundaries. In
contrast to the National Security Strategy that was issued in February 2015 (see CRS Report R44023, The 2015
National Security Strategy: Authorities, Changes, Issues for Congress, coordinated by Nathan J. Lucas), the NMS
organizes threats to the U.S. into two primary categories: "revisionist" states and "violent extremist organizations"
(VEO). With respect to "revisionist states," the NMS calls attention to the challenges posed by four different
nations: Russia, Iran, North Korea and China. Russia, it states, has demonstrated its willingness to redraw
international boundaries and violate international law using military force. Further, the NMS states that Iran is a
state sponsor of terrorism that has undermined stability in Israel, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. North Korea,
according to the NMS, threatens its regional neighbors (including Japan and South Korea) with its production of
nuclear weapons. Finally, the NMS argues that China's recent "land reclamation" (also referred to as "island
building") activities in the South China Sea are destabilizing. With respect to Violent Extremist Organizations, the
NMS points out that these actors utilize a combination of low-technology weaponry (such as suicide vests and
improvised explosive devices) as well as sophisticated propaganda and messaging strategies to spread their
influence.
While the NMS judges that the VEO threat is "immediate" due to the fact that they are currently destabilizing the
Middle East, it also notes—for the first time in several decades—that the probability that the U.S. may find itself
at war with another great power "low but growing." The NMS also discusses "hybrid" warfare, whereby state and
non-state actors (Russia and its Ukrainian proxies, for example) "blend techniques, capabilities, and resources to
achieve their objectives." The ensuing ambiguity in the battle space makes it difficult for the U.S. and its allies to
coordinate responses.
National Military Priorities
In order to respond to the emerging threat environment, the NMS prioritizes the following tasks for the U.S.
military:
Maintain a secure and effective nuclear deterrent. This includes investing in sustaining and modernizing the
deterrent and improving command and control of nuclear forces.
Provide for military defense of the homeland. This includes interdicting adversaries' attack preparations
abroad, defending against ballistic missiles and cyber-attacks.
Defeat an adversary. This refers to the projection of military power to compel an adversary to cease
hostilities. Interestingly, the NMS refers to an adversary rather than defeating adversaries generally, which
may have force planning implications.
Provide a global, stabilizing presence. The military will continue providing stability around the world to
