DOD’s Previous Rebalance to the Pacific Strategy and Current Policy

In President Obama’s speech to the Australian Parliament in November  2011, he stated that after a decade of fighting two wars, the United States  was turning its attention to the vast potential of the Asia-Pacific region. PACOM used military strategy documents to implement presidential  strategic direction to rebalance efforts to the Pacific. Instead, these officials identified a  number of strategy documents published since 2012 that guided activities  associated with the rebalance to the Pacific effort. The six documents that we reviewed are:
Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century  Defense. Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). National Military Strategy (NMS). Guidance for the Employment of the Force (GEF). Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP). PACOM 2015 Theater Campaign Plan (DRAFT) (TCP). In February 2018, the  Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs  notified GAO that although DOD continues to prioritize the Asia-Pacific  region, the rebalance to the Pacific is no longer U.S. policy. DOD Strategy Documents Associated with Rebalancing to the Pacific Collectively Included Most of the Desired Elements of an Effective National Strategy

Six DOD strategy documents that helped guide the rebalance to the  Pacific collectively included most of the desired elements of an effective  national strategy. We found these six DOD strategy documents that collectively guided the  rebalance to the Pacific included, to varying degrees, 24 of the 31 desired  elements we determined as being the most relevant to an effective  strategy for the rebalance. Further, DOD officials from  the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, the Joint Staff,  and the U.S. Pacific Command involved in planning and implementing the  rebalance to the Pacific were unable to identify a definition for the  rebalance to the Pacific in the strategy documents, and consequently  could not provide a definition that was in use consistently across the  department. Lack of a documented end state for the rebalance to the Pacific. According to a DOD official from an office with  department-wide performance management responsibilities, defining the  rebalance to the Pacific and identifying the initiative’s strategic objectives,  or end state, were both important for establishing accountability and  measuring progress. For instance, a definition could have helped those  charged with implementation to distinguish activities essential to  operationalizing the strategic guidance to rebalance from those activities  that were routine or peripheral to that effort. Further, knowing the end state could have helped management make the  best use of resources, enable the assessment of progress toward a  particular goal, and as described in joint doctrine, facilitate the  development of strategic and military objectives. In moving forward in the  Asia-Pacific region, considering the identification of strategic end states  (one of the desired elements of an effective national strategy that is also  discussed in joint doctrine) —as well as the other missing elements—  could help position DOD to achieve its objectives in the region. DOD had no  comments. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To determine the extent to which the Department of Defense (DOD) has  developed strategy documents to guide the rebalance to the Pacific that  include desired elements of an effective national strategy, we conducted  a search of the literature, from January 2010 to July 2015, to identify  official statements on, guidance for, and studies of DOD’s implementation  of the rebalance to the Pacific. Also, based on this  information, we found that there was not a single strategy or plan that  provided guidance for or outlined DOD’s implementation of the rebalance  to the Pacific.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2011, President Obama announced that the United States would turn its attention to the Asia-Pacific region and make the U.S. presence there a top priority. Rebalancing to the Pacific became strategic guidance that informed military planning. By the end of 2015, DOD published strategy documents that included references to the rebalance to the Pacific or related concepts. In February 2018, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs stated that while DOD continues to prioritize the Asia-Pacific region, the rebalance to the Pacific is no longer U.S. policy. DOD has published the 2018 National Defense Strategy, which establishes an objective of maintaining a favorable regional balance in the Pacific region, among other regions.
Prior to the change in policy, House Report 114-102 included a provision for GAO to review matters related to the U.S. rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region. GAO evaluated the extent to which DOD developed strategy documents to guide the rebalance to the Pacific that included desired elements of an effective national strategy.
GAO analyzed six DOD strategy documents that officials identified as providing guidance for the rebalance to the Pacific to determine whether, as a set, they included desired elements associated with an effective national strategy. DOD had no comments on this report.

What GAO Found

Department of Defense (DOD) strategy documents that collectively guided the rebalance to the Pacific included most of the desired elements of an effective national strategy. The U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), which is responsible for the Asia-Pacific region, used DOD strategy documents to implement the President's direction to rebalance to the Pacific, which generally refocused U.S. efforts to that region. PACOM officials told GAO that there was no single rebalance-specific strategy document. Instead, officials identified a number of strategy documents published since 2012 that guided activities associated with the rebalance to the Pacific, including: Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense ; Quadrennial Defense Review ; National Military Strategy ; Guidance for the Employment of the Force ; Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan ; and the PACOM 2015 Theater Campaign Plan (DRAFT) .
Based on GAO's analysis, DOD's six strategy documents that guided the rebalance to the Pacific included 24 of the 31 desired elements of an effective national strategy. However, two key elements were missing from the group of strategy documents: (1) a definition of the rebalance to the Pacific, and (2) the identification of the overall results desired, or end state, for the rebalance. DOD officials also could not identify a definition for the rebalance to the Pacific in the strategy documents or provide a definition that was used consistently across the department.
According to a DOD official with performance management responsibilities, defining the rebalance to the Pacific and identifying the initiative's strategic objectives, or end state, were important for establishing accountability and measuring progress. For instance, a clear definition of rebalance could have helped those charged with implementation to distinguish activities essential to operationalizing the strategic guidance from activities that were peripheral to that effort. Similarly, knowing the end state could have helped management make the best use of resources, enable the assessment of progress, and facilitate the development of strategic and military objectives. In moving forward in the Asia-Pacific region, considering the identification of strategic end states as well as other missing elements could help position DOD to achieve its objectives in the region.