But the change also could require fewer Navy carriers and Air Force wings. And some U.S. allies in Europe are becoming adamant about handling problems in their back yard without U.S. forces. A shift in the official U.S. strategic focus to Asia could accelerate that movement. If so, it might further threaten the shaky NATO alliance and disturb European nations that rely on the United States for regional security. An Asian orientation also could affect the shape and size of the U.S. armed forces, with the Army again the possible loser.
Strategists say that in Asia and the Pacific, the law of time and distance rules.
That argues for naval and air forces that can span long distances quickly, and against heavy land forces that take weeks to get to a conflict. Furthermore, none of the potential Asian conflicts would call for large U.S. ground forces. However, defense analysts also warn that the threat to naval forces from proliferating missiles and diesel submarines could argue against more supercarriers. A fight over the numbers and type of forces will be ignited by whatever strategic decisions Rumsfeld makes.