1/ This report from 1988 is a really interesting read, esp thru lens of the geopolitical situation in 2021, regarding China-US competition.
@cgberube @cdrsalamander @lawofsea @JerryHendrixII @graham_euan @ElbridgeColby @Rory_Medcalf @BDHerzinger @mercoglianos @man_integrated
2/ This report is also interesting after listening to @Ng_Eng_Hen speech at #AspenSecurity, with his sweeping historical view, and quotes from Singapore's LKY on the nature of US and China.
mindef.gov.sg/web/portal/min…
3/ Seems that 1998 and 2021 have a lot in common.
4/ This seems to be an enduring observation, almost always ignored, the higher up the chain of command one gets.
5/ Good to see that the thought on Unmanned vehicles has not really changed much...
6/ Wonder if Chinese PLA Strategists think the same about "Time & Surprise" regarding Taiwan, as the Soviets did?
7/ This is probabaly the most accurate statement in the whole report, when applied ot China.
8/ Here is a bullseye statement reagrding how China will treat its neighbours regarding border disputes:
9/ Here is the understatment of the year, well, actually last four decades.
10/ It's almost impossible to think that thhese kinds of disruptions won't happen between US & China in proxie battles in among other countries.
11/ Nailed it again. Remember SCUDs?
Well, they also explained the challenge, later called A2/AD, from Chinese missiles.
12/ What's more accurate than a Bullseye?
Describing our outsourcing of industrial capability and risk to supply chain for key materials and defense supplies in 1988.
Well, at least we have a Task Force in 2021.
13/ Section III on Shocks is worth reading in full.
How many Shocks & Dsconinutities have we seen since 1988?
14/ This one really makes you think hard.
11 SEP
GFC
COVID19
6 JAN
Hello, 1988? This is 2021. We'd like to have your Cold War clarity back.
15/ OMG. Nailed it.
Could you not have warned us more specifically about Trump?
16/ Two timeless questions for strategic planners:
17/ An important paragraph regarding Alliances & Partnerships:
18/ Section on Loss of US Bases is interesting.
Identifies the "streamlining" drive, for "sake of efficiency"
Also, written 2 years before getting kicked out of 🇵🇭
Role of USMC for amphibuous campaigns to seize bases.
20/ And nailed it again:
Impact of a US Setback or Defeat.
Read this whole section.
Then re-read SIGAR AFG Lesson Learned Report.
sigar.mil/interactive-re…
21/ 1988 thinking about the coming multipolar world:
22/ Looking at Asia, they are asking the same questisn that many are asking today.
23/ And the call for more analysts that understand the workings of rising powers.
This always seems to be pointed out as a critical requirement, but do we ever invest in this enough?
24/ An important section on the challenges of mobilization of the US Industrial Base.
More relevant today, than I think 1988 could even have predicted.
25/ And finally, important questisn about assumptions regarding US Basing Structure, or as we not call it, Force Posture. With the impending DoD Force Posture Study, I hope we aren't making any predictable mistakes in analysis, that 1988 warned about.
26/ Here is a link to "The Future Security Environment" reort of 1988:
books.google.com.sg/books?id=__YuA…
27/ As usual, sorry for all the typos.
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.