Campaigning for Change: Organizational Processes, Governmental Politics, and the Revolution in Military Affairs

THE 1990s HAVE USHERED in an era of rapid change, both in America's employ­ ment of its military forces and in its sense of its defense needs for the next century. A revo lu tion in military affairs (RMA) looms: some ob serv ers claim that De sert Storm's stra ­ te gic air cam paign her alded ad vances in tech ­ nol ogy and doctrine that will funda men tally re shape future warfare. Today, the RMA is an ex plic itly stated goal, enjoy ing the full support of Secre tary of Defense William Cohen. How ever, its success ful imple men ta tion is not foreor dained. Similarly, there was no guar an tee that a single air commander would di rect the Desert Storm air campaign, despite the concept's endorse ment by senior leaders. The rea sons for this gap be tween stated pol icy and certain imple men ta tion are twofold. First, just as the air campaign's or gan iza tional en abler, the unified air commander, was not in grained in military doctrine and practice prior to Desert Storm, neither is the RMA guar an teed to take hold throughout today's de fense organi za tions. Second, unless the ra­ tional basis for the strategy is translated into an overarch ing vision, the RMA faces obsta­ cles in the form of power ful, change-resistant bu reau cratic forces. 1 This state of affairs should concern us, because even if pursu ing the RMA reflects a ra­ tional choice (as US defense leaders claim), DISTRIBUTION A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.