1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 國際事務學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 美軍抵銷戰略之發展歷程
The Offset Strategy Evolution of US Military
作者 李建昇
Lee, Chien Sheng
貢獻者 鄧中堅
李建昇
Lee, Chien Sheng
關鍵詞 抵銷戰略
新視野
大規模報復
空地作戰
反介入與區域拒止
多領域作戰
Offset Strategy
New Look
Massive Retaliation
Airland Battle
Anti-Access and Areal Denial
Multi-Domain Operations
日期 2021
上傳時間 2-九月-2021 17:59:08 (UTC+8)
摘要 為因應日益嚴峻反介入與區域拒止的軍事威脅，美國國防部於2014年底執行「國防創新倡議」，要求全軍尋求以創新的思維與方法，針對當前國家安全的戰略環境，發展新的軍事戰略以為因應。美軍當前所推動的「國防創新倡議」也被稱作「第三次抵銷戰略」，主要是美軍過去曾經執行兩次相似的國防創新倡議，分別為1950年代的「新視野」與1970年代所執行「抵銷戰略」的發展。
1905年代艾森豪政府提出「新視野」政策的目的是為抵銷當時蘇聯在傳統軍事武力數量上具壓倒性的優勢地位，進而提出「大規模報復」的軍事戰略。1970年代卡特政府則為因應「大規模報復」的戰略優勢逐漸喪失，提出「抵銷戰略」的政策規劃，並據以發展出「空地作戰」的軍事戰略構想。目前美軍冀望借鏡之前兩次成功的經驗模式，以因應當前潛在敵手藉軍事現代化進程而發展日益精進「反介入與區域拒止」的軍事能力。
因此本論文藉文獻探討的方式探究美軍過去及當前抵銷戰略的發展過程與經驗，藉實施分析比較以瞭解其具體內涵，建立對美軍抵消戰略有全般性與更深入的瞭解。
To cope with advanced military threats, most notably anti-access and areal denial capabilities, U.S. DoD issued official document named “The Defense Innovation Initiatives,” and called for a broad, Department-wide initiative to pursue creative thinking and innovative ways to develop a game-changing strategy. The Defense Innovation Initiatives is called the third offset strategy because of the experiences of the formal period New Look in the 1950s and Offset Strategy in the 1979s.
In the 1950s, the United States Eisenhower Administration proposed “New Look” policy to offset the Soviet Union’s overwhelming superiority dominance of traditional military power and therefor to established “Massive Retaliation” strategy. In the 1970’s, in response to the gradual loss of the strategic advantage of Massive Retaliation policy, Carter Administration proposed “Offset Strategy” and developed a new military strategy concept called “Airland Battle”. Nowadays, US Military expects to borrow the lesson learned of previous two successful experience in order to respond to the current potential adversaries’ threats of increasingly sophisticated “anti-access and area denial” military capabilities which throughout the military modernization process.
Therefore, by conducting the method of documentary analysis, this thesis aims to establish comprehensive and farther understanding for U.S. current and past experiences and contexts of Offset Strategies.
參考文獻 中文部分
書籍
朱浤源主編，1999年，《撰寫博碩士論文實戰手冊》，台北市：正中書局。
周湘華，2008年12月30日。《遺忘的危機：第一次台海危機的真相》，台北市，秀威資訊。
易君博，1980年9月。《撰寫博碩士論文實戰手冊》第六版，台北市：三民書局。
袁方，2002年5月。《社會研究方法》，台北，五南書局。
鈕文英，2007年1月。《教育研究方法論文寫作》，台北：雙葉書廊。
陳偉華，2003年7月。《軍事研究方法論》，桃園，國防大學。
葉至誠、葉立誠合著，2001年。《研究方法與論文寫作》，台北，商鼎文化出版社。
國防部「四年期國防總檢討」編撰委員會，《中華民國102 年四年期國防總檢討》，台北，國防部，2013 年。
國防部「四年期國防總檢討」編撰委員會，《中華民國106 年四年期國防總檢討》，台北，國防部，2017年。
國防部「四年期國防總檢討」編撰委員會，《中華民國110 年四年期國防總檢討》，台北，國防部，2021年。
期刊論文
施正鋒，2009。〈美國在艾森豪總統時期（1953-61）的對台政策〉發表於台灣歷史學會舉辦「台灣涉外關係暨1940、1950 年代的台灣國際研討會」。台北，政治大學國際會議廳，6 月27-28 日。
李建昇，2013年2月。〈美軍「2015準則專案」簡介〉《陸軍學術雙月刊》（桃園龍潭），第49卷第527期，頁9～13。
碩博士學位論文
阮甫寬。〈中台日防空識別區現狀與釣魚台爭議解決可能性之研究〉。政治大學戰略與國際事務碩士班，碩士論文，2013年。
顧尚智。〈由美國西太平洋軍事戰略利益檢視釣魚台問題〉。政治大學戰略與國際事務碩士班，碩士論文，2013年。
張越思。〈中日東海爭議分析(1990-2010)：攻/守勢現實主義的驗證〉。政治大學國際事務學院東亞研究所，碩士論文，2012年。
網路資源
安太，2012/9/24。〈陸軍頭與「空海一體戰」唱反調〉，《新民晚報》，版B2，。
曾復生，2016/3/17。〈美國國防預算與軍事戰略最新情勢研析〉，《財團法人國家政策研究基金會國政研究報告》，。
黃日暉，2016/5/16。〈美最先進新戰艦宋瓦特驅逐艦將轉交海軍〉，《華視新聞網》，。
英文部分
專書
Alberts, David S., John J. Garstka, Frederick P. Stein, 1999/8. Network Centric Warfare: Developing and Leveraging Information Superiority. Washington, D.C.: DoD C4ISR Cooperative Research Program.
Art, Robert J., 2012/8. Selective Engagement In The Era Of Austerity. Washington, D.C.: Center for New American Security.
Atta, Richard Van, Michael J. Lippitz, 2003/4. Transformation and Transition: DARPA’s Role in Fostering an Emerging Revolution in Military Affairs, Volume 1–Overall Assessment. Alexandria, Virginia: Institute for Defense Analyses.
Brimley, Shawn, December 2015. While We Can, Arresting the Erosion of America’s Military Edge, Washington D.C.: Center for New American Security.
Brodie, Bernard, 1959/1/15. Strategy in the Missile Age. Washington D.C.: The Rand Corporation.
Cardwell, Thomas A. III, 1992/12. Airland Combat: An Organization for Joint Warfare. Alabama: Maxwell Air Force Base.
Cliff, Roger, Mark Burles, Michael S. Chase, Derek Eaton, Kevin L. Pollpeter, 2007. Entering the dragon’s lair: Chinese anti access strategies and their implications for the United States. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Converse, Elliott V., 2012. Rearming for the Cold War, 1945-1960. Washington D.C.: Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Volume I.
Diver, Michael J., 1990/7/1. NATO`S Follow-on Forces Attack Concept (FOFA): Past. Present and Future. Carlisle Barracks, PA: U.S. Army War College.
Gaddis, John Lewis, 2005/6/23. Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy During the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hendrix, Henry J., 2013/3. At What Cost a Carrier? Washington D.C.: Center for a New American Security.
Hoag, Malcolm W., 1969/5. What New Look In Defense? Washington D.C.: The Rand Corporation.
Knight, Malcolm, Norman Loayza, and Delano Villanueva, February 1996. The Peace Dividend: Military Spending Cuts and Economic Growth. Washington, D.C.: Policy Research Department, The World Bank.
Larson, Eric V., David T. Orletsky, and Kristin Leuschener, 2001. Defense Planning in a Decade of Change: Lessons From the Base Force, Bottom-Up Review, and Quadrennial Review. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Leighton, Richard M., 2001. Strategy, money, and the new look, 1953-1956. Washington D.C.: Historical Office of the Secretary of Defense, Volume III.
Jeffery W. Long, 1991. The Evolution of U.S. Army Doctrine: From Active Defense to Airland Battle and Beyond. Kansas: Fort Leavenworth.
Mahon, Francis G., 1998. AirLand Battle 2000, Future Concepts or Jules Verne? Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania: U.S. War College.
Martinage, Robert, 2014. Toward A New Offset Strategy: Exploiting U.S. Long Term Advantages to Restore U.S. Global Power Projection Capability. Washington D.C.: Center for Strategy and Budgetary Assessments.
Melanson, Richard A., David Mayers, 1988/11/1. Reevaluating Eisenhower: American Foreign Policy in the 1950s, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
Rumsfeld, Donald H., 1977/1/17. Annual Defense Department Report Fiscal Year 1978. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
Skinner, Douglas W., 1988. Airland Battle Doctrine. Alexandria, Virginia: Center for Naval Analyses.
Tomes, Robert R., 2007. US Defense Strategy from Vietnam to Operation Iraqi Freedom: Military innovation and the new American ways of war, 1973-2003. New York: Routledge.
Watson, Robert J., 1998. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and National Policy, 1953-1954, Washington D.C.: Office of Joint History, Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, History of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Volume V.
Watson, Robert J., 1997. Into the Missile Age, 1956-1960. Washington D.C.: Historical Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Weinberger, Caspar W., 1981/5. Soviet Military Power 1981. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
Weinberger, Caspar W., 1983/3. Soviet Military Power 1983. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
Yanarella, Ernest J., 2002. The Missile Defense Controversy: Technology in Search of a Mission. Lexington, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky.
Vickers, Michael G., and Robert C. Martinage, 2004/12. The Revolution in War. Washington D.C.: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
專書論文
David Holloway, 2010. “Nuclear Weapons and the Escalation of the Cold War, 1945-1962,” in Odd Arne Westad and Melvin Leffler, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 376-397.
McMahon, Robert J., 2010. “US National Security Policy from Eisenhower to Kennedy,” in Melvyn Leffler and Odd Arne Westad, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, Volume I. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 288-311.

Dulles, John Foster, 1989/5/1. “The Evolution of Foreign Policy,” in Philip Bobbitt, Lawrence Freedman, Gregory F. Treverton eds., US Nuclear Strategy: A Reader. London: The Macmillan Press, pp. 122-130.
Holloway, David, 2010/9. “Nuclear Weapons and the Escalation of the Cold War, 1945-1962,” in Odd Arne Westad and Melvin Leffler, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 376-397.
Robert Dorff, 2001. “A Primer in Strategy Development,” in J. R. Cerami and J. F. Holocomb, eds., U.S. Army War College Guide to Strategy. Carlisle, Pennsylvania, U.S. Army War College Press, 2001, p. 11.
期刊論文
Kristensen, Hans M. and Robert S. Norris, 2013/11/18. “Global nuclear weapons inventories, 1945-2013,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp. 75-81.
Grant,Rebecca. 2016 July. “The Second Offset,” Air Force Magazine, Vol. 99, No. 7, pp. 33-41.
Grier, Peter. 2016 June. “The First Offset,” Air Force Magazine, Vol. 99, No. 6, pp. 54-60.
Wells, Samuel F., 1981/Spring. “The Origins of Massive Retaliation,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 96, No. 1, pp. 31-52.
Atta, Richard Van, 2008/7/18. “Fifty Years of Innovation and Discovery,” Arlington, Virginia: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 50 Years of Bridging the Gap, pp. 20-29.
Perkins, David G., 2017/ September-October. “Preparing for the Fight Tonight: Multi-Domain Battle and Field Manual 3-0,” Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: Military Review. pp. 8-13
Powell, Jon S., 1985/May-Jun. “Airland Battle: The Wrong Doctrine for The Wrong Reason,”Maxwell AFB, Alabama: The Air University Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 15-21.
Waltz, Kenneth N., 2000. “Structural Realism after the Cold War,” International Security, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 5-41.


研討會論文
Perry, William J., 2003/4/7-8. “ Technology and National Security: Risks and Responsibilities,” paper presented at the Conference on Risk and Responsibility in Contemporary Engineering and Science. Washington D.C.: France-Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, pp. 1-12.
官方文件
Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1982/12. FM 100-5 Operations. Washington D.C.: Headquarters Department of the Army, pp. 7-1 to 7-17.
Army Training and Doctrine Command, 2017/10/6. FM 3-0 Operations. Washington D.C.: Headquarters Department of the Army, pp. 1-4 to 1-8.
Army Training and Doctrine Command, 2017/2/24. The Multi-Domain Battle: Combined Arms for the 21st Century white paper. Washington D.C.: Headquarters Department of the Army, pp. 1-4.
Brown, Harold, 2003/4/8. Technology and National Security: Risk and Responsibilities, France-Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, pp. 2-4.
Central Intelligence Agency, 1951/9/24. Special Estimate: Probable developments in the world situation through Mid-1953, pp.1-4.
Congressional Budget Office, 1997/12. Assessing the NATO/Warsaw Pact Military Balance, Washington D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 24-36.
Congressional Budget Office, 1982/3. Building A 600-Ship Navy: Costs, Timing, and Alternative Approaches. Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 1-24.
Congressional Budget Office, 1986/12. The Army of Nineties: How Much Will It Cost? Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. x-xiii.
Congressional Budget Office, 1985/9. Future Budget Requirements for The 600-Ship Navy. Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 11-15.
Congressional Budget Office, 1991/12. The Costs of the Administration’s Plan for the Navy through the Year 2010. Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 1-5.
Lay, James S., 1953/10/30. A Report to the National Security Council on Basic National Security Policy, NSC 162/2, pp. 5-10.

Gertler, Jeremiah, 2016/4/14. Air Force B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber. Congressional Research Service, pp. 1-6.
Gertler, Jeremiah, 2014/4/29. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program. Congressional Research Service, pp.16-27
Ochmanek, David, 2014/12/2. The Role of Maritime and Air Power in DoD’s Third Offset Strategy. Washington, D.C.: The RAND Cooperation, pp. 1-2.
Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lorna A. Jaffe, 1993/7. The Development of the Base Force 1989-1992, pp. 11-14.
Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1996. Joint Vision 2010 America¬’s Military: Preparing for Tomorrow. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. 16-27.
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, 2014/3. United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request: Overview. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. A3-A4.
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, 2015/2. United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request: Overview. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. A10-A11.
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, 1977/1/17. Department of Defense Annual Report Fiscal Year 1978. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. 1-27, 112-114.
Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, 1981/1/19. Department of Defense Annual Report Fiscal Year 1982. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. iii-x.
The Executive Secretary of National Security Council, 1950/4/14. NSC68: United States Objectives and Programs for National Security, pp. 19-51.
The White House, 2012/1/3. Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, pp. 1-6.
The White House, December 2017. National Security Strategy, pp. 45-53.
TRADOC Pamphlet 525-5, 1994/8/1. Force XXI Operations: A Concept for the Evolution of Full-Dimensional Operations for the Strategic Army of the Early Twenty-First Century. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, pp. 3-1 to 3-24.

TRADOC PAMPHLET 525-3-0, 2012/12/19. The U.S. Army Capstone Concept. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, pp. 10-15.
TRADOC PAMPHLET 525-3-1, 2014/10/31. The U.S. Army Operating Concept：Win in a Complex World. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, pp. iii-vi, 12-14, 17-20.
United States Congressional Research Service, John McCain, July 1993. Going Hollow: The Warnings of Our Chiefs of Staff, pp. 1-8.
United States Department of Defense, 2012/1/17. Joint Operational Access Concept, Version 1.0. p. i.
United States Department of Defense, 2017/1/17. JP 3-0 Joint Operations. pp. V-1 to V-11.
United States Department of Defense, 2014/3/4. Quadrennial Defense Review 2014, pp. 1-12.
United States Department of Defense, 1953. Semiannual Report of the Secretary of Defense and the Semiannual Reports of the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of the Air Force, January 1 to June 30, 1953, Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, p. 3.
United States General Accounting Office, 1993/1. Force Structure: Issues Involving the Base Force, p. 2.
United States Secretary of Defense, 2014/11/15. The Defense Innovation Initiatives, pp. 1-2.
United States Department of Defense, 2012/1/17. Joint Operational Access Concept, Version 1.0, pp. 6-11.
United States Department of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2012/9/10. Capstone Concept for Joint Operations：Joint Force 2020, Version 1.0, pp. 4-8.
United States Department of Defense, 2012/1. Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, pp. 3-4.
United States Department of Defense, 2010/2. Quadrennial Defense Review Report, pp. 31-34.
United States Department of Defense, 2013/5. Air-Sea Battle: Service Collaboration to Address Anti-Access and Area Denial Challenges, pp. 1-13.
United States Department of Defense, 2014/3/4. Quadrennial Defense Review 2014, pp. 31-34.
United States Office of Management and Budget, 1993/2/17. A Vision of Change for America, Washington, D.C., p. 22.
網路資源
AeroWeb, 2021. “DoD Defense Spending Section,”
Bevill, Paola, 2008. “Origins of the Cold War, U.S.-Soviet Relations to 1945, Allies in World War II, Postwar Cooperation–the U.N. Satellite States in Eastern Europe,” Slide Player, .
Clinton, Bill, 1991/12/12. A New Covenant for American Security. Georgetown University, .
Lendon, Brad, 2016/05/15. “ U.S. must beware China’s ‘Guam killer’ missile,” CNN Politics, .
Judson, Jen, 2018/10/9. “From Multi-Domain Battle to Multi-Domain Operations: Army evolves its guiding concept,” Defense News, .
Kimmons, Sean, 2019/10/15. “Army to build three Multi-Domain Task Forces using lessons from pilot,” Army News Service, .
McLeary, Paul, 2015/1/24. “New US Concept Melds Air, Sea and Land,” Defense News, .
Pellerin, Cheryl, 2016/3/30. “Work: Great-Power Competition Aims for Deterrence, Not War,” DoD News, Defense Media Activity, .

Plumer, Brad, 2013/1/7. “America’s staggering defense budget, in charts,” The Washington Post, .
United States Department of Defense, 2014/8/5. “Deputy Secretary of Defense Speech: National Defense University Convocation,” .
United States Department of Defense, 2014/9/3. “Secretary of Defense Speech: Defense Innovation Days Opening Keynote,” .
United States Department of State Office of the Historian, “Milestones: 1945–1952, NSC-68, 1950,”.
United States Department of Defense, 2016/2/25. “ Secretary of Defense Testimony: Submitted Statement -- House Appropriations Committee - Defense FY 2017 Budget Request,” .
United States Department of Defense, 2011/11/9. “Background Briefing on Air-Sea Battle by Defense Officials from the Pentagon,” .
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班
102922005
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0102922005
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 鄧中堅zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) 李建昇zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Lee, Chien Shengen_US
dc.creator (作者) 李建昇zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Lee, Chien Shengen_US
dc.date (日期) 2021en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2-九月-2021 17:59:08 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 2-九月-2021 17:59:08 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-九月-2021 17:59:08 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0102922005en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/137106-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 102922005zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 為因應日益嚴峻反介入與區域拒止的軍事威脅，美國國防部於2014年底執行「國防創新倡議」，要求全軍尋求以創新的思維與方法，針對當前國家安全的戰略環境，發展新的軍事戰略以為因應。美軍當前所推動的「國防創新倡議」也被稱作「第三次抵銷戰略」，主要是美軍過去曾經執行兩次相似的國防創新倡議，分別為1950年代的「新視野」與1970年代所執行「抵銷戰略」的發展。
1905年代艾森豪政府提出「新視野」政策的目的是為抵銷當時蘇聯在傳統軍事武力數量上具壓倒性的優勢地位，進而提出「大規模報復」的軍事戰略。1970年代卡特政府則為因應「大規模報復」的戰略優勢逐漸喪失，提出「抵銷戰略」的政策規劃，並據以發展出「空地作戰」的軍事戰略構想。目前美軍冀望借鏡之前兩次成功的經驗模式，以因應當前潛在敵手藉軍事現代化進程而發展日益精進「反介入與區域拒止」的軍事能力。
因此本論文藉文獻探討的方式探究美軍過去及當前抵銷戰略的發展過程與經驗，藉實施分析比較以瞭解其具體內涵，建立對美軍抵消戰略有全般性與更深入的瞭解。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) To cope with advanced military threats, most notably anti-access and areal denial capabilities, U.S. DoD issued official document named “The Defense Innovation Initiatives,” and called for a broad, Department-wide initiative to pursue creative thinking and innovative ways to develop a game-changing strategy. The Defense Innovation Initiatives is called the third offset strategy because of the experiences of the formal period New Look in the 1950s and Offset Strategy in the 1979s.
In the 1950s, the United States Eisenhower Administration proposed “New Look” policy to offset the Soviet Union’s overwhelming superiority dominance of traditional military power and therefor to established “Massive Retaliation” strategy. In the 1970’s, in response to the gradual loss of the strategic advantage of Massive Retaliation policy, Carter Administration proposed “Offset Strategy” and developed a new military strategy concept called “Airland Battle”. Nowadays, US Military expects to borrow the lesson learned of previous two successful experience in order to respond to the current potential adversaries’ threats of increasingly sophisticated “anti-access and area denial” military capabilities which throughout the military modernization process.
Therefore, by conducting the method of documentary analysis, this thesis aims to establish comprehensive and farther understanding for U.S. current and past experiences and contexts of Offset Strategies.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與研究目的 1
第二節 文獻探討 6
第三節 研究途徑與方法 20
第四節 研究範圍與限制 22
第五節 研究架構與章節安排 25
第二章 1950年代｢新視野｣戰略之發展歷程 28
第一節 國際安全與戰略環境 28
第二節 美國政府的因應作為 30
第三節 「大規模報復」之軍事戰略構想 34
第四節 政策後續影響 38
第三章 1970年代「抵銷戰略」之發展歷程 42
第一節 國際安全與戰略環境 42
第二節 美國政府的因應作為 46
第三節 「空地作戰」之軍事戰略構想 48
第四節 科技研發與戰術運用密切整合 52
第五節 政策後續影響 53
第四章 當前第三次抵銷戰略之發展歷程 58
第一節 國際安全與戰略環境 58
第二節 美國政府的因應作為 69
第三節 發展「全球公域介入與機動之聯合概念」之新軍事戰略構想 74
第四節 政策後續發展 80
第五節 美軍未來的挑戰 94
第五章 歷次抵銷戰略之分析比較 99
第一節 同為「戰後」所面臨的國家安全戰略 100
第二節 軍事科技與軍事戰略的發展相輔相成 103
第三節 承擔價格昂貴的現代化武器裝備 104
第四節 面臨平衡各軍種建軍需求資源分配的挑戰 108
第五節 小結 111
第六章 結論 115
第一節 研究發現 115
第二節 對我國國防安全的影響與建議 118
參考文獻 125		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 7798391 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0102922005en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 抵銷戰略zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 新視野zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 大規模報復zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 空地作戰zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 反介入與區域拒止zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 多領域作戰zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Offset Strategyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) New Looken_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Massive Retaliationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Airland Battleen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Anti-Access and Areal Denialen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Multi-Domain Operationsen_US
dc.title (題名) 美軍抵銷戰略之發展歷程zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Offset Strategy Evolution of US Militaryen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分
書籍
朱浤源主編，1999年，《撰寫博碩士論文實戰手冊》，台北市：正中書局。
周湘華，2008年12月30日。《遺忘的危機：第一次台海危機的真相》，台北市，秀威資訊。
易君博，1980年9月。《撰寫博碩士論文實戰手冊》第六版，台北市：三民書局。
袁方，2002年5月。《社會研究方法》，台北，五南書局。
鈕文英，2007年1月。《教育研究方法論文寫作》，台北：雙葉書廊。
陳偉華，2003年7月。《軍事研究方法論》，桃園，國防大學。
葉至誠、葉立誠合著，2001年。《研究方法與論文寫作》，台北，商鼎文化出版社。
國防部「四年期國防總檢討」編撰委員會，《中華民國102 年四年期國防總檢討》，台北，國防部，2013 年。
國防部「四年期國防總檢討」編撰委員會，《中華民國106 年四年期國防總檢討》，台北，國防部，2017年。
國防部「四年期國防總檢討」編撰委員會，《中華民國110 年四年期國防總檢討》，台北，國防部，2021年。
期刊論文
施正鋒，2009。〈美國在艾森豪總統時期（1953-61）的對台政策〉發表於台灣歷史學會舉辦「台灣涉外關係暨1940、1950 年代的台灣國際研討會」。台北，政治大學國際會議廳，6 月27-28 日。
李建昇，2013年2月。〈美軍「2015準則專案」簡介〉《陸軍學術雙月刊》（桃園龍潭），第49卷第527期，頁9～13。
碩博士學位論文
阮甫寬。〈中台日防空識別區現狀與釣魚台爭議解決可能性之研究〉。政治大學戰略與國際事務碩士班，碩士論文，2013年。
顧尚智。〈由美國西太平洋軍事戰略利益檢視釣魚台問題〉。政治大學戰略與國際事務碩士班，碩士論文，2013年。
張越思。〈中日東海爭議分析(1990-2010)：攻/守勢現實主義的驗證〉。政治大學國際事務學院東亞研究所，碩士論文，2012年。
網路資源
安太，2012/9/24。〈陸軍頭與「空海一體戰」唱反調〉，《新民晚報》，版B2，。
曾復生，2016/3/17。〈美國國防預算與軍事戰略最新情勢研析〉，《財團法人國家政策研究基金會國政研究報告》，。
黃日暉，2016/5/16。〈美最先進新戰艦宋瓦特驅逐艦將轉交海軍〉，《華視新聞網》，。
英文部分
專書
Alberts, David S., John J. Garstka, Frederick P. Stein, 1999/8. Network Centric Warfare: Developing and Leveraging Information Superiority. Washington, D.C.: DoD C4ISR Cooperative Research Program.
Art, Robert J., 2012/8. Selective Engagement In The Era Of Austerity. Washington, D.C.: Center for New American Security.
Atta, Richard Van, Michael J. Lippitz, 2003/4. Transformation and Transition: DARPA’s Role in Fostering an Emerging Revolution in Military Affairs, Volume 1–Overall Assessment. Alexandria, Virginia: Institute for Defense Analyses.
Brimley, Shawn, December 2015. While We Can, Arresting the Erosion of America’s Military Edge, Washington D.C.: Center for New American Security.
Brodie, Bernard, 1959/1/15. Strategy in the Missile Age. Washington D.C.: The Rand Corporation.
Cardwell, Thomas A. III, 1992/12. Airland Combat: An Organization for Joint Warfare. Alabama: Maxwell Air Force Base.
Cliff, Roger, Mark Burles, Michael S. Chase, Derek Eaton, Kevin L. Pollpeter, 2007. Entering the dragon’s lair: Chinese anti access strategies and their implications for the United States. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Converse, Elliott V., 2012. Rearming for the Cold War, 1945-1960. Washington D.C.: Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Volume I.
Diver, Michael J., 1990/7/1. NATO`S Follow-on Forces Attack Concept (FOFA): Past. Present and Future. Carlisle Barracks, PA: U.S. Army War College.
Gaddis, John Lewis, 2005/6/23. Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy During the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hendrix, Henry J., 2013/3. At What Cost a Carrier? Washington D.C.: Center for a New American Security.
Hoag, Malcolm W., 1969/5. What New Look In Defense? Washington D.C.: The Rand Corporation.
Knight, Malcolm, Norman Loayza, and Delano Villanueva, February 1996. The Peace Dividend: Military Spending Cuts and Economic Growth. Washington, D.C.: Policy Research Department, The World Bank.
Larson, Eric V., David T. Orletsky, and Kristin Leuschener, 2001. Defense Planning in a Decade of Change: Lessons From the Base Force, Bottom-Up Review, and Quadrennial Review. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Leighton, Richard M., 2001. Strategy, money, and the new look, 1953-1956. Washington D.C.: Historical Office of the Secretary of Defense, Volume III.
Jeffery W. Long, 1991. The Evolution of U.S. Army Doctrine: From Active Defense to Airland Battle and Beyond. Kansas: Fort Leavenworth.
Mahon, Francis G., 1998. AirLand Battle 2000, Future Concepts or Jules Verne? Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania: U.S. War College.
Martinage, Robert, 2014. Toward A New Offset Strategy: Exploiting U.S. Long Term Advantages to Restore U.S. Global Power Projection Capability. Washington D.C.: Center for Strategy and Budgetary Assessments.
Melanson, Richard A., David Mayers, 1988/11/1. Reevaluating Eisenhower: American Foreign Policy in the 1950s, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
Rumsfeld, Donald H., 1977/1/17. Annual Defense Department Report Fiscal Year 1978. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
Skinner, Douglas W., 1988. Airland Battle Doctrine. Alexandria, Virginia: Center for Naval Analyses.
Tomes, Robert R., 2007. US Defense Strategy from Vietnam to Operation Iraqi Freedom: Military innovation and the new American ways of war, 1973-2003. New York: Routledge.
Watson, Robert J., 1998. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and National Policy, 1953-1954, Washington D.C.: Office of Joint History, Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, History of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Volume V.
Watson, Robert J., 1997. Into the Missile Age, 1956-1960. Washington D.C.: Historical Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Weinberger, Caspar W., 1981/5. Soviet Military Power 1981. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
Weinberger, Caspar W., 1983/3. Soviet Military Power 1983. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
Yanarella, Ernest J., 2002. The Missile Defense Controversy: Technology in Search of a Mission. Lexington, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky.
Vickers, Michael G., and Robert C. Martinage, 2004/12. The Revolution in War. Washington D.C.: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
專書論文
David Holloway, 2010. “Nuclear Weapons and the Escalation of the Cold War, 1945-1962,” in Odd Arne Westad and Melvin Leffler, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 376-397.
McMahon, Robert J., 2010. “US National Security Policy from Eisenhower to Kennedy,” in Melvyn Leffler and Odd Arne Westad, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, Volume I. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 288-311.

Dulles, John Foster, 1989/5/1. “The Evolution of Foreign Policy,” in Philip Bobbitt, Lawrence Freedman, Gregory F. Treverton eds., US Nuclear Strategy: A Reader. London: The Macmillan Press, pp. 122-130.
Holloway, David, 2010/9. “Nuclear Weapons and the Escalation of the Cold War, 1945-1962,” in Odd Arne Westad and Melvin Leffler, eds., The Cambridge History of the Cold War, vol. 1. Stanford, CA: Cambridge University Press, pp. 376-397.
Robert Dorff, 2001. “A Primer in Strategy Development,” in J. R. Cerami and J. F. Holocomb, eds., U.S. Army War College Guide to Strategy. Carlisle, Pennsylvania, U.S. Army War College Press, 2001, p. 11.
期刊論文
Kristensen, Hans M. and Robert S. Norris, 2013/11/18. “Global nuclear weapons inventories, 1945-2013,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp. 75-81.
Grant,Rebecca. 2016 July. “The Second Offset,” Air Force Magazine, Vol. 99, No. 7, pp. 33-41.
Grier, Peter. 2016 June. “The First Offset,” Air Force Magazine, Vol. 99, No. 6, pp. 54-60.
Wells, Samuel F., 1981/Spring. “The Origins of Massive Retaliation,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 96, No. 1, pp. 31-52.
Atta, Richard Van, 2008/7/18. “Fifty Years of Innovation and Discovery,” Arlington, Virginia: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 50 Years of Bridging the Gap, pp. 20-29.
Perkins, David G., 2017/ September-October. “Preparing for the Fight Tonight: Multi-Domain Battle and Field Manual 3-0,” Fort Leavenworth, Kansas: Military Review. pp. 8-13
Powell, Jon S., 1985/May-Jun. “Airland Battle: The Wrong Doctrine for The Wrong Reason,”Maxwell AFB, Alabama: The Air University Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 15-21.
Waltz, Kenneth N., 2000. “Structural Realism after the Cold War,” International Security, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 5-41.


研討會論文
Perry, William J., 2003/4/7-8. “ Technology and National Security: Risks and Responsibilities,” paper presented at the Conference on Risk and Responsibility in Contemporary Engineering and Science. Washington D.C.: France-Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, pp. 1-12.
官方文件
Army Training and Doctrine Command, 1982/12. FM 100-5 Operations. Washington D.C.: Headquarters Department of the Army, pp. 7-1 to 7-17.
Army Training and Doctrine Command, 2017/10/6. FM 3-0 Operations. Washington D.C.: Headquarters Department of the Army, pp. 1-4 to 1-8.
Army Training and Doctrine Command, 2017/2/24. The Multi-Domain Battle: Combined Arms for the 21st Century white paper. Washington D.C.: Headquarters Department of the Army, pp. 1-4.
Brown, Harold, 2003/4/8. Technology and National Security: Risk and Responsibilities, France-Stanford Center for Interdisciplinary Studies, pp. 2-4.
Central Intelligence Agency, 1951/9/24. Special Estimate: Probable developments in the world situation through Mid-1953, pp.1-4.
Congressional Budget Office, 1997/12. Assessing the NATO/Warsaw Pact Military Balance, Washington D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 24-36.
Congressional Budget Office, 1982/3. Building A 600-Ship Navy: Costs, Timing, and Alternative Approaches. Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 1-24.
Congressional Budget Office, 1986/12. The Army of Nineties: How Much Will It Cost? Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. x-xiii.
Congressional Budget Office, 1985/9. Future Budget Requirements for The 600-Ship Navy. Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 11-15.
Congressional Budget Office, 1991/12. The Costs of the Administration’s Plan for the Navy through the Year 2010. Washington, D.C.: The Congress of the United States, pp. 1-5.
Lay, James S., 1953/10/30. A Report to the National Security Council on Basic National Security Policy, NSC 162/2, pp. 5-10.

Gertler, Jeremiah, 2016/4/14. Air Force B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber. Congressional Research Service, pp. 1-6.
Gertler, Jeremiah, 2014/4/29. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program. Congressional Research Service, pp.16-27
Ochmanek, David, 2014/12/2. The Role of Maritime and Air Power in DoD’s Third Offset Strategy. Washington, D.C.: The RAND Cooperation, pp. 1-2.
Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lorna A. Jaffe, 1993/7. The Development of the Base Force 1989-1992, pp. 11-14.
Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1996. Joint Vision 2010 America¬’s Military: Preparing for Tomorrow. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. 16-27.
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, 2014/3. United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request: Overview. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. A3-A4.
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, 2015/2. United States Department of Defense Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request: Overview. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. A10-A11.
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, 1977/1/17. Department of Defense Annual Report Fiscal Year 1978. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. 1-27, 112-114.
Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, 1981/1/19. Department of Defense Annual Report Fiscal Year 1982. Washington, D.C.: Department of Defense, pp. iii-x.
The Executive Secretary of National Security Council, 1950/4/14. NSC68: United States Objectives and Programs for National Security, pp. 19-51.
The White House, 2012/1/3. Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, pp. 1-6.
The White House, December 2017. National Security Strategy, pp. 45-53.
TRADOC Pamphlet 525-5, 1994/8/1. Force XXI Operations: A Concept for the Evolution of Full-Dimensional Operations for the Strategic Army of the Early Twenty-First Century. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, pp. 3-1 to 3-24.

TRADOC PAMPHLET 525-3-0, 2012/12/19. The U.S. Army Capstone Concept. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, pp. 10-15.
TRADOC PAMPHLET 525-3-1, 2014/10/31. The U.S. Army Operating Concept：Win in a Complex World. Fort Monroe, Virginia: United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, pp. iii-vi, 12-14, 17-20.
United States Congressional Research Service, John McCain, July 1993. Going Hollow: The Warnings of Our Chiefs of Staff, pp. 1-8.
United States Department of Defense, 2012/1/17. Joint Operational Access Concept, Version 1.0. p. i.
United States Department of Defense, 2017/1/17. JP 3-0 Joint Operations. pp. V-1 to V-11.
United States Department of Defense, 2014/3/4. Quadrennial Defense Review 2014, pp. 1-12.
United States Department of Defense, 1953. Semiannual Report of the Secretary of Defense and the Semiannual Reports of the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of the Air Force, January 1 to June 30, 1953, Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, p. 3.
United States General Accounting Office, 1993/1. Force Structure: Issues Involving the Base Force, p. 2.
United States Secretary of Defense, 2014/11/15. The Defense Innovation Initiatives, pp. 1-2.
United States Department of Defense, 2012/1/17. Joint Operational Access Concept, Version 1.0, pp. 6-11.
United States Department of Defense, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 2012/9/10. Capstone Concept for Joint Operations：Joint Force 2020, Version 1.0, pp. 4-8.
United States Department of Defense, 2012/1. Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, pp. 3-4.
United States Department of Defense, 2010/2. Quadrennial Defense Review Report, pp. 31-34.
United States Department of Defense, 2013/5. Air-Sea Battle: Service Collaboration to Address Anti-Access and Area Denial Challenges, pp. 1-13.
United States Department of Defense, 2014/3/4. Quadrennial Defense Review 2014, pp. 31-34.
United States Office of Management and Budget, 1993/2/17. A Vision of Change for America, Washington, D.C., p. 22.
網路資源
AeroWeb, 2021. “DoD Defense Spending Section,”
Bevill, Paola, 2008. “Origins of the Cold War, U.S.-Soviet Relations to 1945, Allies in World War II, Postwar Cooperation–the U.N. Satellite States in Eastern Europe,” Slide Player, .
Clinton, Bill, 1991/12/12. A New Covenant for American Security. Georgetown University, .
Lendon, Brad, 2016/05/15. “ U.S. must beware China’s ‘Guam killer’ missile,” CNN Politics, .
Judson, Jen, 2018/10/9. “From Multi-Domain Battle to Multi-Domain Operations: Army evolves its guiding concept,” Defense News, .
Kimmons, Sean, 2019/10/15. “Army to build three Multi-Domain Task Forces using lessons from pilot,” Army News Service, .
McLeary, Paul, 2015/1/24. “New US Concept Melds Air, Sea and Land,” Defense News, .
Pellerin, Cheryl, 2016/3/30. “Work: Great-Power Competition Aims for Deterrence, Not War,” DoD News, Defense Media Activity, .

Plumer, Brad, 2013/1/7. “America’s staggering defense budget, in charts,” The Washington Post, .
United States Department of Defense, 2014/8/5. “Deputy Secretary of Defense Speech: National Defense University Convocation,” .
United States Department of Defense, 2014/9/3. “Secretary of Defense Speech: Defense Innovation Days Opening Keynote,” .
United States Department of State Office of the Historian, “Milestones: 1945–1952, NSC-68, 1950,”.
United States Department of Defense, 2016/2/25. “ Secretary of Defense Testimony: Submitted Statement -- House Appropriations Committee - Defense FY 2017 Budget Request,” .
United States Department of Defense, 2011/11/9. “Background Briefing on Air-Sea Battle by Defense Officials from the Pentagon,” .		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202101371en_US