The Department of Defense has become increasingly focused on competition with China and Russia and the possibility of great power war. RAND researchers generated four plausible near-term war scenarios and assessed how they could shape the postwar strategic environment. These scenarios show the complex relationship between wartime and postwar goals, highlighting the importance of considering postwar outcomes in prewar planning.

Alternative Futures Following a Great Power War

Volume 1, Scenarios, Findings, and Recommendations

Miranda Priebe, Bryan Frederick, Anika Binnendijk, Alexandra T. Evans, Karl P. Mueller, Cortez A. Cooper III, James Benkowski, Asha Clark, Stephanie Anne Pillion

ResearchPublished May 9, 2023

Cover: Alternative Futures Following a Great Power War
Download PDF
Additional Downloads

Includes Research Summary

The U.S. Department of Defense has been increasingly focused on competition with Russia and China and, in the extreme, the possibility of great power war. To inform thinking about what might follow such a war, RAND researchers generated four hypothetical near-term great power war scenarios and assessed how the postwar strategic environment would change in each scenario. These scenarios offer planners and decisionmakers plausible narratives about future great power wars with different features to help them examine assumptions and think about how wartime choices could affect postwar U.S. objectives.

The scenarios in this report illustrate the complex relationships between wartime and postwar goals. They show how a U.S. victory could provoke a stronger alignment between China and Russia or lead to greater determination and hostility in the recently defeated adversary. A U.S. defeat, meanwhile, could enhance U.S. efforts to recruit allies and partners, while also increasing the likelihood of nuclear proliferation among U.S. allies and partners. Indeterminate war outcomes could heighten the risk of a quick return to conflict while sapping alliance cohesion. The complexity and variability of these results highlight the importance for U.S. policymakers of considering postwar outcomes in prewar planning.

Key Findings

  • Wartime victory might not produce a favorable postwar setting. For example, victors will be weakened relative to noncombatant states and could face stronger balancing coalitions.
  • A U.S. victory could provoke deeper Sino-Russian military and economic cooperation — or even a mutual defense pact.
  • A great power war, even one with Russia, could sharpen the U.S. focus on the Indo-Pacific. Postwar resource constraints would create incentives to prioritize China as the most significant potential threat to the United States.
  • Although wars can strengthen bonds between allies, postwar alliance cohesion could suffer from wartime disagreements and how allies respond to the changed strategic environment.
  • Allied contributions to a U.S.-led war with Russia or China might vary across and even within scenarios, suggesting the importance of plans that are robust to changes in access.
  • U.S. allies and partners might face new incentives to pursue nuclear weapon programs after a great power war that degrades U.S. power.

Recommendations

  • Assess the potential postwar consequences of a war that goes according to planners' assumptions (as well as those that do not) to evaluate whether existing war plans are likely to support long-term U.S. interests.
  • Consider setting a futures game in a period following a great power war to assess whether proposed capabilities would be appropriate in an unfamiliar strategic context.

Topics

Document Details

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Priebe, Miranda, Bryan Frederick, Anika Binnendijk, Alexandra T. Evans, Karl P. Mueller, Cortez A. Cooper III, James Benkowski, Asha Clark, and Stephanie Anne Pillion, Alternative Futures Following a Great Power War: Volume 1, Scenarios, Findings, and Recommendations. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2023. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA591-1.html.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

The research reported here was commissioned by Headquarters Air Force, Directorate of Strategy, Posture, and Assessments and was conducted within the Strategy and Doctrine Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.