tacts. In addition, CSCE negotiators are working hard to lay the foundations for a Center for Prevention of Conflict, a new institution designed to be a locus for CSBM implementation as well as the forum for early resolution of European security problems. As in the case of the CFE Treaty, agreements flowing out of CSCE negotiations will have a direct impact on how the U.S. Army operates and trains in Europe.

U.S. national policy is to seek a comprehensive, effectively verifiable ban on chemical weapons (CW). The 40-nation Conference on Disarmament is negotiating a CW treaty that was tabled in April 1984 by then Vice President Bush. The United States has promised to destroy over 98 percent of its stockpile of chemical weapons in the first 8 years of a treaty banning chemical weapons, and all of its stocks in 10 years if all nations with a chemical weapons capability join the treaty. In June 1990, the United States and the Soviet Union took a significant step toward a global ban by signing a bilateral agreement to cease production and to destroy the vast majority of their chemical weapons stocks. The U.S. Army already has started the destruction of these weapons, beginning in June 1990 at the Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System. Construction of other disposal and training facilities is under way.

Proliferation of chemical weapons in developing countries continues to be a major concern. The United States is working towards a global, verifiable ban on chemical weapons. Until this can be achieved, the Army will continue to support the maintenance of forces trained and equipped to operate in a chemical environment.

Conclusions

The national security strategy of the United States is evolving to provide the framework for shaping the Nation's defense capabilities for the changing international environment. As the President stated in his August 2, 1990, address to the Aspen Institute Symposium, "Our task today is to shape our defense capabilities to these changing strategic circumstances. In a world less driven by an immediate threat to Europe and the danger of global war -- in a world where the size of our forces will increasingly be shaped by the needs of regional contingencies and peacetime presence -- we know that our forces can be smaller." The national security strategy is evolving from one of containment of the Soviet Union to one of forward presence backed up by the projection of forces from the United States for peacetime engagement and crisis action. This evolution has fundamental implications for the way that we structure Army forces and perform strategic roles. The Army is in the second year of shaping a smaller, versatile, deployable, lethal, and expansible Total Force that is trained and ready to meet the Nation's future requirements for land forces.

Regional Focus

Despite the progress made by democracy in many parts of the world, political instability, sporadic economic development, regional conflicts, and ethnic tensions will continue to pose threats to global peace and vital U.S. interests. In light of this situation, it seems clear that maintaining peacetime presence and responding to regional contingencies will present complex challenges to Army forces in the years ahead. These challenges will be as diverse as the regions of the world where they exist.

The United States continues to rely on collective security relationships with other friendly countries to promote peace and to protect mutual regional security interests. Such relationships assist allied and friendly countries to defend themselves and to reduce the risk of involvement of U.S. forces. The Army provides versatile, deployable, trained, and ready forces to U.S. theater commanders around the world to sustain U.S. forward presence, and, if necessary, for combat operations. These forces support these collective security relationships and engage in a wide range of activities designed to build individual national and collective defense capabilities. In addition, the forward presence of Army forces deters conflicts, allows expeditious responses to crises, and provides tangible evidence of America's commitment to protect the mutual security interests of the United States and its friends and allies. As the size of our permanent forward deployments decreases, the ability of the Army to project forward presence from CONUS will be crucial to deterring conflict and sustaining regional alliances.

Europe and the Soviet Union

With the impending demise of the Warsaw Pact, Europe faces a greatly reduced residual Soviet threat. The traditional threat of a massive Soviet offensive against NATO has withered in the face of Soviet unilateral withdrawals, military restructuring, bilateral agreements to remove forward-stationed troops, and the limits of the CFE Treaty. The threat of Soviet attack has been replaced by the more ambiguous threat posed by instability in Central Europe and the Soviet Union and the possibility of a conservative retrenchment in the Soviet Union.

NATO will continue to be the linchpin for meeting the security challenges in Europe. The United States will continue a commitment to NATO at levels appropriate to Europe's evolving security situation. The Army provides extensive forces to the U.S. European Command for employment by the Alliance, including units in place in Europe and units that would deploy to Europe in the event of crisis or hostilities. Although the number of U.S. Army units in Europe will be reduced in the future, the remaining forces will remain well-trained and ready to fight

when called upon. The U.S. Army also will retain the capability to reinforce NATO forces in Europe and to project European-based Army forces beyond the NATO area if circumstances require, as was the case in Operation Desert Storm.

The task of implementing a successful conventional arms control agreement is still before the Alliance. It will require that the United States work closely with NATO allies to ensure that individual national contributions to the Alliance continue to support the cause of mutual defense and collective security that have served the United States and the allies so well in the past.

Middle East and South Asia

As is now obvious, this is a region of vital importance to the United States because of the reliance of the global economy on the region's energy resources and strong U.S. political and military ties to many of the region's countries. U.S. interests in the region will continue to be threatened by ethnic rivalries, economic disparities, the continuing Arab-Israeli conflict, and radical Islamic fundamentalist movements. The region also is among the most heavily armed in the world, to include increasing arsenals of sophisticated conventional weapons as well as weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's aggression against Kuwait poses a direct challenge to a peaceful post-Cold War world order. If left unchecked, Iraq's control over a significant portion of the world's oil coupled with its large conventional military and aggressive development of weapons of mass destruction would have constituted a serious threat to its neighbors as well as to the international economy. The threat of terrorism also has risen as a result of Iraq's policy of confrontation.

scope of the Army's future roles in the area. The Army may become more heavily involved than in the past with security assistance, combined exercises, and regional defense planning. Army forces provided to the U.S. Central Command will facilitate peacetime engagement in the Middle East and Southwest Asia through army-toarmy relations and nation assistance and will provide the CINC the ability to maintain a credible joint power projection capability.

Along with the men and women deployed for Operation Desert Storm, soldiers serve in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula with the Multinational Force and Observers and with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization in Israel, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. These soldiers are visible symbols of U.S. commitment to stability and the peaceful settlement of long-standing disputes.

The primary threat to security in South Asia is the continued rivalry between India and Pakistan. Both are heavily armed, and India is a nuclear power. A conflict between them could be extremely violent and could rapidly spread to other countries in the region. A U.S. goal in this region is to encourage these two nations to resolve their differences peacefully. The U.S. Army maintains military-to-military contacts with both India and Pakistan, although relations with the latter are currently limited as a U.S. policy response to Pakistan's nuclear program.

East Asia and the Pacific

Political trends in Asia are moving toward greater political openness, a natural accompaniment to the sweeping socioeconomic changes of recent decades. The role of ideology has declined in the Marxist-Leninist states as well as others, with second and third generation leaders taking a more pragmatic, problem-solving approach to the issues confronting them. Economic relations are penetrating ideological boundaries, as indicated by the growth of trade and investment between China and South Korea and China and Taiwan. Even the North-South Korean relationship is showing a few signs of flexibility.

Nonetheless, serious problems remain. Although the standing militaries of Vietnam and China recently have been reduced, they remain large and capable forces. Conflicting territorial claims, especially over the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, could lead to armed clashes. North Korea remains rigidly opposed to any change to its existing political structure, a disturbing fact given the existence of its extraordinarily large armed force, its estrangement from the rest of the international community, and its refusal to forswear Korean reunification by military means. Certain governments have failed to meet their citizens' expectations of minimal social and economic needs, promoting the conditions for insurgency. The growing flood of narcotics out of the Golden Triangle

The Golden Triangle region is a source of drugs entering the United States. Gamma Liaison

region is directly threatening the United States and other countries in both the West and Asia. Further, the generational changes taking place in virtually every Asian country, especially China, Taiwan, North Korea, and Indonesia, are cause for concern as well as hope. Although these changes may lead to greater pragmatism and willingness to cooperate with neighbors, they might also result in instability.

National security objectives in the region include sustaining U.S. presence throughout the area, ensuring continuous access to lines of communications, and providing a counter to Soviet and Chinese power. To accomplish these objectives, the United States is a party to a number of bilateral treaties and has forward-deployed forces in the region. The primary security relationships are with Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, and Australia. The major forward presence of Army forces remains in the Republic of Korea. The Army works within U.S. bilateral agreements to improve combined doctrine, tactics, and overall interoperability with regional armies to enhance intraregional cooperation.

Recent developments in the area include the establishment of Headquarters, United States Army, Pacific, in Hawaii and the withdrawal of approximately 5,000 soldiers from the Republic of Korea. The Army continues to seek the most efficient command and control for the vast Pacific region.

Army forces in the Pacific enable the U.S. Pacific Command in Hawaii and the Combined Forces Command in Korea to deter aggression throughout the theater and unambiguously demonstrate U.S. commitments to Korea and Japan. For CINC, Combined Forces Command, they provide the capability to participate in the defense of Korea. For CINC, U.S. Pacific Command, they provide a centrally located, rapidly deployable reserve and the ability to participate in nation-assistance programs and militaryto-military contacts.

Latin America is confronted by three major challenges that have a synergistic effect in thwarting the development and expansion of democratic pluralism while simultaneously retarding economic growth: terrorist and insurgent violence, drug trafficking and narcoterrorism, and massive external debt.

During the last decade, the region experienced a decline in economic growth and living standards and a simultaneous growth of external debt that is now approaching $450 billion. Although several newly elected governments are pursuing mainstream economic recovery programs designed to reverse negative trends and stimulate foreign investment, these reform packages will take years to complete. In some cases, the prospects for successful economic reform and reduction of the debt burden are uncertain.

Economic difficulties are exacerbated by the increased levels of violence associated with active insurgencies and narcoterrorist activities. Central government authority is being challenged by a marked increase in the involvement of guerrilla groups in all phases of production and distribution of cocaine, particularly by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and the Sendero Luminoso in Peru. Prolonged insurgencies and drug-related violence thwart economic recovery programs, undermine democratic values, and increase the probability of a reversal of the prodemocratic regional trends of the 1980s.

U.S. security is inextricably linked to the collective security, social peace, and economic progress of the Western Hemisphere. The United States promotes peace and economic well-being within the hemisphere through commitment to the stability, growth, and economic development of democratic governments in Central and South America and the Caribbean. This approach is consistent with U.S. security strategy and supports the national policy of seeking a mature partnership with neighbors in Latin America.

This U.S. policy recognizes that continued influence in the region is essential to confronting destabilizing aggression. Army partnership in organizations like the Conference of American Armies assists in achieving this

objective by improving military-to-military contacts and the discussion of hemispheric security issues. The Army further supports U.S. regional objectives through the provision of soldiers and equipment for nation-assistance projects, civic action programs, and infrastructure development. The Army also participates in security assistance activities, training programs, combined training exercises, and DOD efforts to counter the illegal drug trade that threatens the democracies of the Western Hemisphere.

The Army provides U.S. Southern Command with capabilities that range from individual area specialists to the potential employment of a multidivision corps for rapid deployment in times of crises. Army combat support and service support units form the foundation of many regional civic action programs, and much of U.S. Southern Command's internal development program is built around the capabilities of Army special operations forces. The Army school system also supports the region through training of foreign officers and soldiers from the region and through a variety of exchange programs. The return to democracy of most nations throughout Latin America emphasizes the importance of U.S. and Army efforts to support professional, apolitical militaries in the region.

Africa

The problems that affect much of Africa are similar to but in many ways even more severe than those that beset other regions. Climatic catastrophes, starvation, and the epidemic spread of the acquired immuno-deficiency syndrome (AIDS) virus compound the adverse impacts of population growth, political unrest, insurgencies, and tribal and ethnic animosities. International economic fluctuations also inflict a significant blow on singlecommodity economies, causing wide and unpredictable swings in economic fortunes. Such challenges vastly complicate the problems of economic and political development, create severe human suffering, and greatly reduce the effectiveness of outside assistance.

Africa's strategic importance as a major contributor to the world supply of raw materials and minerals, as well as a region of enormous human potential, will persist throughout the 1990s. U.S. Army activities there are governed by the U.S. commitment to promote sustained and equitable economic, political, and social development as keys to a stable and secure Africa. The United States seeks to foster regional stability and the growth of democratic institutions by assisting African governments to protect their natural resources and resist destabilizing outside influence and by supporting internal political reconciliation and development efforts.

The Army provides U.S. European Command and U.S. Central Command with a range of capabilities for

potential employment in the region. The Army school system also supports these regions through training of indigenous officers and soldiers from the region and through a variety of exchange programs.

Army International Activities Plan (AIAP)

The Army International Activities Plan establishes guidance, methods, and means for the conduct of activities involving Army interactions with the armed forces, governments, and peoples of foreign nations. Army international activities support U.S. foreign policy goals and the national security strategy of the United States. The goal of Army international activities is to strengthen army-to-army relations and promote allied and friendly nations' cooperation in the achievement of U.S. foreign policy and military strategy objectives. An effective international activities program strengthens collective defense measures and helps meet the legitimate security needs of friends and allies by improving their ability to protect mutual security interests. The AIAP aids Army planners in determining what types and mixes of international activities to pursue and provides the methods and means for the worldwide coordination of Army international activities to ensure that finite U.S. defense resources are used effectively to support U.S. security strategy.

The Department of the Army provides central policy guidance and coordination under the AIAP. Implementation is centered on the Army component command of the regional CINC. Each regional Army component command is responsible for integrating country team requests for Army support, articulating the CINC's priorities, and coordinating execution of international activities with the Department of the Army and appropriate Army agencies. The AIAP links regional priorities with available international activities by identifying those activities that complement the peacetime actions of other U.S. agencies and that offer the best potential for enhancing the Army's operational mission capabilities.

Last year's Army Posture Statement laid out the conceptual underpinnings of our plan to reshape the Army into a smaller, capable Total Force for the future. This plan was based on careful assessments of the future capabilities the Army would require to fulfill our strategic roles in support of the national military strategy, the threats the Nation was likely to face through the end of the decade, and the lessons learned from demobilizations following recent conflicts. It was developed, beginning in 1988, to provide the framework within which the Army could efficiently adapt to change in the international security and domestic fiscal environments while minimizing risks.

The essence of our plan was to reduce the size of the Army and to accept some near-term risks in modernization to maintain the quality and readiness of the Total Army during the transition and for the future. We planned to shape a versatile, deployable, and lethal Army, based on adherence to six fundamental imperatives and commitment to a controlled and rational build-down process.

The importance of sustaining near-term readiness as we build down the Army was shown by our analysis of previous large Army restructurings following World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. This analysis indicated that the Army's warfighting capabilities declined significantly as a result of the precipitous rate at which past reductions took place. This resulted in substantial and avoidable casualties when American forces were committed to unanticipated combat. Building down the Army during such a turbulent international transition period as we now face

is clearly not without risk. The Army's plan is based on attenuating this risk by maintaining a trained and ready force throughout the build-down for rapid action in unforeseeable contingencies.

All near-term actions to reshape the force also must be taken with an eye toward the future. The Army that is currently executing Operation Desert Storm is the result of past policy decisions, investment, and commitment to fielding trained and ready forces. Our quality, volunteer soldiers are manning weapon systems developed, in some cases, over the past two decades. They are being led by leaders whose skills have been honed by training and leader development opportunities over the same period. These leaders have remained in the Army not only because of their commitment to the Nation, but also because of the challenging career opportunities and the quality of life that the Nation has provided them. In making nearterm decisions, we must ensure that we continue to build for the uncertain and unpredictable future.

At this time last year, we planned to reduce the size of the Army from a 5-corps, 28-division force to a4-corps, 23-division force by the mid-1990s. The requirement to meet the targets of last year's budget agreement necessitated further reductions. Our current plans envision building down to a 4-corps, 20-division force by the mid1990s. We strongly believe this is the minimum force required for the Army to accomplish our strategic roles in support of national security strategy.

The future Army will be largely CONUS-based. Forward deployments will be reduced to the minimum levels sufficient to maintain credible deterrence and to