Back to Blog
Amerikansk slik5/4/2023 ![]() There are three main traits of low availability: the subordinate position of Europe in US maritime-strategic thinking long US readiness time and short warning time. This issue is likely to become more pressing as great-power competition intensifies and other challenges remain. Low AvailabilityĪlthough US naval presence in Norway between 20 has been at its highest level since the end of the Cold War, the availability of US forces in the case of major crises is low. In this myriad of maritime challenges and threats, Washington’s priority of China will continue to have significant implications for the Northern Flank and Norway. In extremis, the US may face a two-front war with China and Russia, an eventuality that must be considered even during regular great-power competition. US naval forces struggle to address all these challenges. There is also a myriad of other maritime and naval challenges that confront the US naval services, although these are considered as lesser ones. However, Russia’ place in current US naval priorities is more prominent than it has previously been in the post-Cold War era. From a maritime perspective the Asian giant is the pacing threat, drawing forces away from other theatres such as Europe, including the Northern Flank. The most significant factor driving the HIPLA-approach is the re-emergence of great-power competition and the emergence of China as a strategic challenger. Finally, I conclude and address the likely implications for Norway, the Northern Flank and Europe. This policy brief will describe HIPLA by first looking briefly at the two first characteristics as embodied in US maritime-strategic priorities before going into the details of the high-profile and low availability aspects. In combination, these four developments make up what I have termed a High-Profile/Low-Availability (HIPLA) approach to the Northern Flank. Rather, a combination of four separate but interconnected developments form the basis of a new, albeit unarticulated, US maritime-strategic approach to NATO’s Northern Flank: first is the primacy of Asia in US strategic priorities second the significant Russian naval challenge on the Northern Flank thirdly, the US is attempting to balance strategic challenges and available resources by prioritising mostly short-term, high-profile presence and fourth, US naval forces’ ability to assist its allies in the case of crisis or conflict on the Northern Flank is limited. Utforske mulighetene for at US Army kan kan erstatte US Marine Corps’ tilstedeværelse i Norge.ĭespite a resurgence of Russian naval power, and subsequent increase in US maritime-strategic interest in the Northern Flank and Norway, the grand return of US naval forces to this region is unlikely.Jobbe for europeisk samarbeid om maritime out-of-area operasjoner.Operasjonell planlegging i Europa burde reflektere at amerikansk maritim assistanse vil være begrenset i åpningsfasen av en konflikt.Fortsette og styrke europeisk forsvarsintegrasjon og samarbeid, slik som Joint Expeditionary Force.Styrke det norske forsvars- og marinebudsjettene.Snarere danner en kombinasjon av fire separate, men sammenhengende, utviklinger grunnlaget for en ny amerikansk maritim-strategisk tilnærming til NATOs nordflanke. Til tross for en gjenoppblomstring av russisk marinemakt, og påfølgende økning i USAs strategiske maritime interesse i Nordflanken og Norge, er det usannsynlig at amerikanske marinestyrker kommer tilbake til denne regionen. Klikk her for å laste ned policy brief-en som PDF. ![]() Denne teksten er hentet fra NUPI Policy Brief nummer 1/2022: «Navigating High-Profile and Low Availability: Norway and the Emerging US Maritime-Strategic Approach», forfattet av førsteamanuensis Amund Lundersgaard (Stabsskolen, Forsvarets høgskole (FHS)).
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |