Posts Tagged ‘QDR’

Quadrennial Defense Review Fails to Match Resources to Priorities

Lawrence J. Korb, Sean Duggan, and Laura Conley. Center for American Progress, 04 February 2010.


The QDR … does not prioritize the missions that the military must be prepared for. The document states that “successfully balancing [DOD’s priorities] requires that the Department make hard choices on the level of resources required as well as accepting and managing risk in a way that favors success in today’s wars,” yet it also notes that “U.S. forces must be prepared to conduct a wide variety of missions under a range of different circumstances.” In other words, the QDR promises to make tradeoffs but asserts that DOD must be capable of confronting every contingency.

Editor’s Comment:

Follow the money. The priorities are reflected in where the money goes. A few changes, per usual, at the margins. Mostly the same ol’ same ol’ division of spoils.

Rebalancing and Reforming Defense: Quadrennial Defense Review 2010

Michèle Flournoy. remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations, 02 February 2010.

Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) 2010

Office of the Secretary of Defense, 01 February 2010. Hosted on the Commonwealth Institute website.

Quadrennial Defense Review 2010

QDR 2010 – final version, early release

final version as published by on 30 January 2010. Hosted on the Commonwealth Institute website.

Assessing the 2010 QDR: a guide to key issues

Project on Defense Alternatives Briefing Memo 46, 26 January 2010.


Today’s military is stressed by having nearly 25% of the full time military overseas, including 16% in overseas operations.

How does the QDR seek to reduce the stress of overseas stationing and deployment?

In recent years large counter-insurgency campaigns have demanded much of the military’s attention and energy.

Is the QDR preparing for more of the same in the future? At what scale and frequency?

December 3rd Draft of the 2010 QDR

“pre-decisional” draft dated 03 December 2010 and published by on 27 January 2010. Hosted on the Commonwealth Institute website.

Draft QDR: DoD Alters Force Planning Construct

John T. Bennett. Defense News, 27 January 2010.


The new force-shaping model was derived from what the draft report calls the Pentagon’s four defense strategy priorities: “prevail in today’s wars; prevent and deter conflict; prepare to succeed in a wide range of contingencies; and preserve and enhance the force.” Sources say the priorities are known within the QDR process as “the Four Ps.”

The planning framework is designed to prepare U.S. forces to, according to the review, carry out “a broad, plausible range of several overlapping operations to prevent and deter conflict and, if necessary, to defend the United States, its allies and partners, selected critical infrastructure, and other national interests.”

Draft Pentagon review calls for “hard choices”

Reuters, 21 January 2010.