The US Military’s Journey from Air Land to Air Sea Battle
The transition of the US military from the Air Land Battle to the Air Sea Battle (ASB) concept represents a significant strategic evolution, aimed at adapting to the changing nature of global threats, particularly those posed by nations with advanced anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities, such as China.
The Air Land Battle concept, developed during the 1980s, was a response to the Soviet threat in Europe. It emphasized close coordination between the Army and Air Force, focusing on using precision-guided munitions to attack Soviet units before they could engage in combat. This doctrine was effective against a clearly defined adversary like the Soviet Union, where the battlefield was primarily land and air-based.
In contrast, the Air Sea Battle concept emerged in response to the growing A2/AD threats in regions like the Western Pacific and the Persian Gulf. It was inspired by the Air Land Battle but adapted for a different theater of operations where naval and air forces, and the domains of space and cyberspace, play dominant roles. This concept was not just about developing new weapons but about creating a network to support in-depth attacks on A2/AD systems. The ASB concept aimed to ensure the US military’s ability to project power and defend its interests in these contested environments, working closely with allies and partners to enhance regional security and stability.
The ASB concept rapidly found acceptance and was officially adopted by US war planners as part of a broader strategy to shift U.S. military focus from counter-insurgency operations to confronting challenges in A2/AD environments. The Joint Operational Access Concept (JOAC), signed by the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in early 2012, defined ASB within the broader context of how U.S. joint forces would operate against emerging anti-access and area-denial security challenges.
However, there were criticisms and evolutions of the ASB concept over time. For instance, there was discomfort about focusing too explicitly on war with China, leading to a rebranding of ASB as the Joint Operational Access Concept and broadening its focus to include other actors like Iran. The concept was also criticized for its high cost and potential escalation risks. Furthermore, the exclusion of a significant role for US land forces in the original ASB concept led to contention and a rethink of the strategy, resulting in the formation of the Strategic Landpower Task Force by the Army, along with the Marines and Special Operations Command.
This led to the development of the Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons (JAM-GC), an expansion of the ASB concept to include contributions from all military services, including the Army and Marine Corps. The JAM-GC, supported by the Joint Staff’s Joint Force Development Office, aimed to address a broader set of operational access problems and incorporate recommendations from combatant commanders around the globe. This evolution highlights the US military’s commitment to a joint, integrated approach to overcoming modern threats.
In conclusion, the transition from Air Land Battle to Air Sea Battle, and subsequently to JAM-GC, reflects the US military’s continuous adaptation to the dynamic global security environment. It demonstrates a strategic shift from a primarily land-air focus to a more comprehensive approach encompassing air, sea, land, space, and cyberspace domains, responding to the changing nature of threats and technological advancements in modern warfare.
