Reports a discussion of implications for U.S. security planning of small-scale crises and conflicts, held in October 1976 at RAND. The general recommendation that emerged from the discussion was that the United States should develop a capability to respond to such situations. Specifically: (1) The President should designate an organization to plan for crises by preparing contingency plans and identifying ranges of options. (2) The services should more fully develop capabilities for carrying out a variety of operations in crises short of war. (3) Friendly governments should be consulted to learn from their capabilities and to coordinate action. (4) The intelligence community should place greater emphasis on intelligence for low-level conflict. (5) The United States should continue working toward safeguards for nuclear materials as well as preventing proliferation of other sophisticated weapons. (6) The United States should promote international laws appropriate to low-level conflicts.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
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.
The RAND Corporation 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.