Senior Fellow, Defense Program; Lead, The Gaming Lab at CNAS. Tweets on U.S. defense strategy, wargaming, and the occasional soccer match. Usual caveats apply.
Nov 30, 2021 • 10 tweets • 3 min read
I’ve seen many tweets about how the Global Posture Review is a flawed exercise that doesn’t prioritize, won’t produce change on a reasonable timeline, and examined the wrong things. Some of that is true, but it reflects misunderstandings about the review. [THREAD]
What is the GPR? It is a review of US global bases, forces & access arrangements, among other things. It is meant to adjust posture gradually rather than radically change it. It also provides a baseline to measure future deployment and posture requests.
Altering the US footprint in Middle East and freeing up high-demand, low density assets is necessary if DoD is serious about focusing on the Indo-Pacific to counter the China threat. But the US has done this song and dance before—what could make it different this time? [THREAD]
Removing Patriot missiles from KSA, reducing carrier presence, and shifting ISR assets to other theaters are all part of the Biden admin’s plan to rightsize the bloated US posture in the ME, previewed in the interim NSS guidance. whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/…
