There may or may not be more "small wars" in the future. But as a matter of politics it doesn't seem likely to me that policymakers will willingly engage in them anymore, except in the most limited fashion which will probably be special operations and air power.
Additionally, small wars may be more likely, but that doesn't necessary mean the DoD should dramatically change course toward fighting small wars. Small wars are are not likely to be existential conflicts for the US - therefore it makes sense (to me at least) to keep the military focused on potential existential conflicts. It's also important to point out that the US has significant military alliances where it is expected to come to the aide of those allies should they be attacked. A force structure optimized for small wars won't, for instance, be up to the tasks of defending the Korean Peninsula, countering a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, or preventing the Iranians from closing the strait of Hormuz. As long as those interests and alliances remain, the US will require power projection capabilities such as bombers, subs, DDG's, nukes, carriers etc.
Of course, we are putting the cart before the horse. What is the US strategy? How relevant are those alliances today? We need a sense of where we're going if we hope to determine what we'll need when we get there. Right now I don't think the US really has a strategy beyond trying to maintain the status quo.
Bookmarks