WASHINGTON, July 5 (Xinhuanet) -- The Pentagon is re-evaluating the longstanding strategy that requires the armed forces to be prepared to fight two major wars at a time in an effort to devote more resources against terrorism and homeland security, The New York Times reported Tuesday.

    Senior officials who are doing a top-to-bottom review of Pentagon strategy are weighing whether to shape the military to mount one conventional campaign while preparing for the defense of American territory and antiterrorism efforts.

    The Quadrennial Defense Review, ordered by Congress every four years, will determine the future size of the military as well as the fate of hundreds of billions of dollars in new weapons. The review is expected to complete early next year.

    The two-war model provides enough people and weapons to mount a major campaign, like the Persian Gulf war of 1991 or the invasion of Iraq in 2003, while maintaining enough reserves to respond in a similar manner elsewhere.

    Civilian and military officials are trying to decide to what degree to acknowledge that operations like the continuing presence in Iraq - not a full-blown conventional war, but a prolonged commitment - may be such a burden that it would not be possible to also fight two full-scale campaigns elsewhere, the Times said.

    The current military strategy is known by a numerical label, 1-4-2-1, with the first number representing the defense of American territory. That is followed by numbers representing the ability to deter hostilities in four critical areas of the world, and to swiftly defeat two adversaries in near-simultaneous major combat operations.

    The final number stands for a requirement that the military retain the capability, at the same time, to decisively defeat one of those two adversaries, which would include capturing a capital and toppling a government.

    "We have 1-4-2-1 now, and we are going to look at that," said Ryan Henry, who serves as principal deputy under secretary of defense for policy. Asked where the military's heavy commitment tothe fight against terrorism fits into the current strategy formula, Henry told the Times, "It wasn't there when they came up with 1-4-2-1."

    After years of saying American forces were sufficient for a two-war strategy, "we've come to the realization that we're not," said another Defense Department official involved in the deliberations. "It's coming to grips with reality." Enditem