Though the end of the Cold War brought a decrease in the likelihood of global war and significant reductions in U.S. military force levels, demands placed on remaining American military forces increased rather than subsided. Over the past decade, American political leaders have used military forces much more frequently to achieve national policy objectives. Most of the post-Cold War deployments fall under the general heading of smaller-scale contingencies (SSCs), but their cumulative effect has placed considerable burdens on the Army, in particular. In this study, Dr. Conrad Crane analyzes the role of land-power in the 170 SSCs conducted during the last decade. He disaggregates such contingencies into engagement, enhanced deterrence, hostility, and stabilization phases, and discusses the military's role in each one.

Though cruise missiles and aircraft have been the primary policy tool for actual hostilities, the Army has been the predominant service in the other phases, especially for stabilization. He points out that no major foreign policy objectives have been achieved from major theater deployments during the last decade without some form of significant long-term Army involvement in the region after the crisis has been resolved. Nonetheless, there have been many flaws in the Army's performance during the stabilization phase of these SSCs. Using historical examples and unit after-action reports, Dr. Crane points out recurring problems in planning, execution, and force structure for such missions. He concludes that despite the desires of American leaders to limit the nation-building involvement of the troops they deploy, the capability mismatch between military and civilian organizations, combined with the require-ments of peace operations and character of American soldiers, makes such a result unavoidable. He argues that the Army iii especially needs to accept some degree of nation-building as its mission, and adapt its force structure, training, and planning accordingly. He also presents some other recommendations to enhance further the Army's ability to meet the full spectrum of future challenges it will face.

There is much in this study to support the current program for Army Transformation, as well as to present a case for a larger active force structure, especially for combat support and combat service support. Dr. Crane's analysis and recommendations also merit examination as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review process. Statistical analysis of the period since America became the world's lone superpower suggests that its armed forces will face an increasing number of SSCs. The services will have to find a way to accomplish these most-likely missions while still retaining full ability to win those major wars that remain the most dangerous threat to national security.