Discussed the evolution of the concept of US military readiness and its importance in national security strategy in the context of great power strategic competition. The Biden administration's National Defense Strategy places great power competition at a strategic level, emphasizing the close connection between the concept of readiness and national strategy, military culture, technology, economy, and social status quo. The lack of unified norms in the concept of combat readiness has led to problems such as hierarchical confusion and unclear boundaries when used across departments and fields, which affects the preparation of national defense budgets and the evaluation of combat readiness effectiveness. The 2018 US National Defense Strategy prioritizes restoring readiness, highlighting the central role of readiness in national defense strategy. The US Congress is also concerned about the ambiguity of the concept of readiness and its impact on decision-making. The research on combat readiness involves multiple dimensions, but further analysis is needed to clarify the conceptual differences when used across domains. This article explores the dynamic controversial characteristics and core essence of the concept of combat readiness by analyzing official materials such as CRS combat readiness reports and documents from the Ministry of National Defense. It analyzes the evolutionary characteristics of the US combat readiness concept and provides insights for China.

1、 The dynamic controversy and theoretical interpretation of the concept of US military readiness

The dynamic controversy and theoretical interpretation of the concept of US military readiness involve multiple levels. The US Department of Defense is responsible for military readiness construction, while Congress interprets and applies the concept of military readiness through the approval of resources, which affects defense budget allocation and military readiness funding decisions. The influence of think tanks and researchers on the concept of combat readiness cannot be ignored. The connotation of combat readiness has evolved over time. The US Department of Defense defines combat readiness as the ability of military forces to operate and complete missions, while Congress distinguishes between broad and narrow combat readiness. Think tanks and scholars have a more abstract and insightful understanding of war preparedness. There is controversy over the value assessment of combat readiness levels and elements, which affects the funding allocation of defense budget projects. The division between the broad and narrow concepts of military readiness is interdependent and closely related at the core, making it difficult to clearly distinguish the boundaries. There is no absolute separation or opposition between different levels, elements, and specific budget sub projects, and a diverse definition approach brings more comprehensive dialectical considerations.

2、 The reasons and essence of the dynamic evolution of the US military readiness concept

The dynamic evolution of the US military readiness concept is influenced by multiple factors, with its core being the formulation of national strategies and defense budgets. The openness and flexibility of the concept of combat readiness enable it to adapt to the needs of national strategic adjustments and resource allocation. War readiness not only involves the research and development of weapons, equipment, and technology, but also the integration and balance of all military force elements and their related factors. The US Congress adjusts the concept of readiness to achieve optimal allocation of resources and ensure national security. The controversy over war preparedness crisis reveals the essence of the controversial concept of war preparedness, which reflects practical challenges such as resource allocation, maintenance of global military advantages, and shortage of troops. The United States uses the controversial concept of war readiness to gather resources in order to maintain its global military advantage.

3、 Analysis of the Evolution Characteristics of the US War Preparedness Concept in Recent Years

In recent years, the analysis of the evolution characteristics of the concept of US military readiness points out that the focus of US military readiness research is mainly on narrow combat readiness, and even when it comes to broad combat readiness, it is mostly based on the implementation of narrow combat readiness. The proportion of narrow combat readiness elements such as operation and maintenance costs in the national defense budget remains stable and has slightly increased year by year, while the proportion of broad combat readiness elements such as military procurement costs has slightly decreased. The US Congress attempted to define military readiness through legislative means, but due to the dynamic adjustment of defense strategy, it is difficult to achieve in the short term. The discussion and construction of the concept of combat readiness presents a narrow characteristic, such as the "Basic Essentials of Combat Preparedness" describing the combat readiness process as the military department carrying out combat readiness construction and maintaining combat readiness level within a certain period of time, with the core being the military personnel who carry out combat tasks. The steps of war preparedness construction are decomposed into three basic parts: initial war preparedness, strengthened war preparedness, and maintenance of war preparedness, closely related to each link of narrow war preparedness, and the elements of the broad war preparedness concept have not been reflected. The proportion of narrow combat readiness elements in the national defense budget has shown a slight increase, and the budget proportion of operation and maintenance expenses as a traditional expenditure item is less affected by emerging combat readiness investment projects. The military and military families' preparedness has been comprehensively strengthened. The US Congress has passed legislation to regulate the preparedness of military families, including strengthening financial security protection for military families, promoting financial knowledge to military personnel and their families, and providing direct economic support to extremely low-income families and military families in need during national emergencies or when necessary. The US Congress actively seeks to clarify the concept of military readiness at the national legislative level, in order to better serve Congress' decision-making work on military readiness matters. Clarifying the concept of military readiness is beneficial for Congress to manage, constrain, and allocate defense resources, ensure the coordination and integration of various elements of military readiness, and more effectively respond and cooperate around national strategic intentions.

4、 The evolutionary characteristics of the US military readiness concept under the background of great power strategic competition provide me with inspiration

Analyzed the evolution characteristics of the concept of military readiness in the context of great power strategic competition in the United States and its implications for China. The focus of the evolution of the US military readiness concept lies in the adjustment of national resource allocation strategies, and its readiness concept continues to develop and evolve amidst controversy. The internal driving force for the United States to maintain global hegemony includes a strong sense of crisis and self correction ability, which is reflected in its military cultural genes, such as militarism, absolute security awareness, and strategic crisis awareness. The basic characteristics of US military readiness are relatively stable scale, intensive technological content, and richer connotation, reflected in budget support for cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence and the subdivision of the concept of military readiness sub levels. The new variable in the logic of US national security thinking is a greater focus on the human factor in combat readiness, emphasizing the improvement of military personnel's literacy to meet the demands of new high-end warfare. These characteristics inspire us to pay attention to the human element in the logic of American national security thinking, track the follow-up measures of the United States to increase investment in military personnel, and more comprehensively and profoundly grasp the winning texture of high-end wars.

conclusion

The controversy over the concept of combat readiness reflects the crisis awareness and unique combat readiness concept under the separation of powers in American military culture. The concept of combat readiness changes with the adjustment of national defense strategy, maintains dynamic balance, and serves national defense strategy and national security. Controversy endows war preparedness topics with openness and growth potential, which is an advantage of the US war preparedness system. It can use conceptual disputes to create public opinion, gather resources, and maintain global military superiority. Against the backdrop of escalating strategic competition among major powers, the evolution of the concept of US military readiness has shown adaptability, with a broader connotation and more specific and specialized sub level concepts, supporting the national will to combat readiness. The US military is increasing investment in the research and application of disruptive equipment, and improving the comprehensive literacy of military personnel is a key focus of future combat readiness research. Tracking the expansion of the connotation of US military readiness and resource allocation planning can provide reference for the strategic planning of major powers' military readiness and defense strategies.