Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA)
Special: Defense
Sense
PDA, in conjunction with Chris Preble and Benjamin Friedman, has
released a report which outlines $17-20 billion in national security savings
this fiscal year. Some of the
recommendations included in the report resemble amendments being offered to the
National Defense Authorization Act this week.
For a summary of the report, click here. (5/15/12)
State of Play
Legislative: The National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is being considered by the full House this
week. President Obama has already issued
a veto threat for the legislation due to concerns about detainee language as
well as impediments to implementation of the New START treaty. The White House has also raised concerns that
the bill, as currently drafted, is $4 billion above the President’s budget
request. This is especially ironic, given that the administration’s request is itself
$4 billion above the spending caps put into law by the Budget Control Act. As a result, both spending proposals would
violate current law. In issuing its veto
threat, the administration chastised House Republicans for adding additional
unneeded aviation assets; “Retaining large numbers of under-resourced aircraft
in the fleet in today’s fiscally constrained environment would significantly
increase the risk of a hollow force.” Meanwhile,
HASC’s Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) fired
off a letter to the Defense Department rebutting Secretary Panetta’s
earlier criticism of the House NDAA. McKeon’s
Senate counterpart, SASC Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI), has said that he
intendeds to adhere to the BCA spending caps in the Senate version of the
NDAA.
Today, the full House Committee on Appropriations approved the
annual defense appropriations bill, which would provide more than $5.3 billion
in procurement funding above the President’s budget request. Overall, the measure is $3.1 billion above
the Defense Department’s request for FY13.
Notably, the bill would block the proposed mothballing of the Global
Hawk Block 30 drone fleet, add an additional DDG-51 destroyer, and prevent the
administration from retiring three Navy cruisers. The bill
would also add 11 more F/A-18E/Fs and seven additional C-130s. For a summary of items added by the committee
to the President’s budget request, click
here.
Speaker of the House John Boehner has called
on Congress to extend the statutory debt limit before the November
elections and is again insisting on spending cuts and “reforms” as a means of
offsetting the debt limit increase.
Boehner specifically said that tax increases could not be used as an
offset. President Obama, meeting with
Congressional leaders yesterday, reportedly
insisted that Congress send him a “clean” debt limit extension free of spending
cuts or tax increases.
Executive: A panel
led by retired Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. James
Cartwright, has issued a report
that recommends an 80 percent reduction in the United States’ nuclear arsenal,
bringing the total number of weapons down to 900, as well as the elimination of
all nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles. The head of the Air Force, Gen. Norton
Schwartz, seems to disagree
with Cartwright's assertions. And an
anonymous, senior aerospace official has published a report
on the Lexington Institute’s website, which recommends defense acquisition and
regulatory reforms as an alternative to sequestration.
The Washington Post’s Greg Jaffe reports
that the head of NATO forces in Afghanistan, U.S. General John Allen, will be
leaving his current post early next year to take the helm of U.S. European
Command. Following a 60 Minutes
interview, in which two pilots discussed why they are refusing to fly the F-22,
Secretary Panetta has instituted
new restrictions on Raptor flights and training missions and has ordered
the expedited instillation of new backup oxygen supply systems. During testimony before the Senate Armed
Services Committee, Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford warned
that sequestration cuts would force the services to cut 50 ships from the current
fleet-size of 285 vessels.
At a discussion held at AEI this week, former Pentagon under secretary
Michèle Flournoy described the United States as being at a “strategic
inflection point” where hard choices have to be made. Though she was vague on
details, Flournoy made it clear that when it came to the administration's
attitude toward defense savings, no program was considered sacred. She also noted
that she wasn’t aware of any planning on behalf of the administration to budget
for sequestration cuts, even though the Office of Management and Budget has
said it will begin issuing sequestration directives by the end of this summer
unless Congress takes significant action to nullify the automatic cuts.
Polling: Last week, the Stimson Center hosted
an event to discuss the results of a recent Internet survey on defense spending. The survey, carefully designed
to be as balanced as possible, was administered to 665 people, including
Republicans, Democrats, and independents. Of respondents, 66 percent of
Republicans and almost 90 percent of Democrats were in favor of military
reductions. On average, respondents supported reducing the military
budget by $103 billion this year, while a majority of those surveyed supported
reductions of at least $83 billion. Both
figures are substantially higher than the recommendations outlined in a new
report by PDA, Chris Preble, and Benjamin Friedman, entitled Defense Sense,
which recommends 18 national security cuts that could achieve $17-20 billion in
savings this fiscal year, as well as the $55 billion in sequestration cuts
scheduled to take effect next year.
Project on Defense Alternatives
Perspective: The integrity of the deficit reduction process depends on not
allowing accounting measures to give a false impression of savings or to
arbitrarily shield any corner of discretionary spending from mandated
reductions. The 2013 Overseas
Contingency Operations (OCO) fund, which is exempt from the caps in the Budget
Control Act, includes a plus up for personnel cost of $4.5 billion dollars from
the 2012 level of $1.6 billion even though the ratio of OCO deployments to
total end strength has declined steadily in recent years. Thus we conclude there is no legitimate
reason to increase personnel spending in OCO.
Clearly, the Pentagon wishes to account for more of its personnel costs
in OCO (not subject to caps) simply to free up more money in its base budget
(subject to caps) for other things. This
is not legitimate accounting and should be overturned. When we add this illegitimate transfer
between accounts to the $4 billion above BCA spending caps already in the
administration’s FY2013 request, the administration and Congress need to find
an additional $8 billion to cut from national security accounts in order to comply
with BCA.
Highlights
Highlighting
the new report, Defense Sense, Chris
Preble argues that military spending reductions are prudent, possible, and
would not entail any changes in the United States’ strategic posture. Preble highlights five key recommendations: Reductions
of military personnel in Europe, reduction of active-component military personnel,
a refocusing on proven missile defense technologies, and cancellation of the F-35B
variant and Littoral Combat Ship programs. (5/15/12)
AOL Defense: Cartwright
Targets F-35, AirSea Battle; Warns of $250B More Cuts (5/15/12)
"While
we squeal a lot about that reduction, we were heading that way anyway,"
Hoss Cartwright, former Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told an
audience at the annual Joint Warfighting Conference. Cartwright predicts that $250 billion or more
in military spending reductions will occur even if sequestration is
nullified. Cartwright also expressed
fears that the F-35, the Pentagon's most expensive program, might prove
vulnerable to enemy cyber-attacks. (5/15/12)
Battleland: Budget
Brain Freeze
Reporting
on recent defense developments, in particular HASC Chair Buck McKeon’s letter to Panetta, Mark Thompson concludes that the defense
budget mess will only get messier. Thompson notes that McKeon’s comments
regarding the unpopular nature of defense reductions run contrary to the
findings of a recent survey. In
response to McKeon and fellow HASC member Rep. Randy Forbes’ (R-VA) assertions
that the defense budget is dropping to a point where it can’t guarantee
security, Thompson notes: “Leadership is about assessing risk, and putting the
always-limited funds where they will do the most good. (5/14/12)
Other News and Commentary
Stars and Stripes: Cost
to relocate Marines off Okinawa a moving target
In an
agreement reached last month, five thousand U.S. Marines will be relocated from
Okinawa, Japan to a site on Guam. Estimates
put the move’s total cost for U.S. taxpayers at $5.8 billion, while Japan is
offering to cover an additional $2.8 billion. However, GAO has found that a 2006 agreement
to transfer 5,000 Marines off the island cost $13 billion more than the
original $10.27 billion estimate. (5/15/12)
National Interest: Why
Americans Are Less Hawkish than Their Leaders
In a
piece on National Interest, Benjamin Friedman examines leadership
decisions in the context of a recent defense spending survey, in which 90
percent of Democrats and two-thirds of Republicans supported military spending
reductions. Friedman points to Gallup records which indicate that “substantially more
Americans say that we spend too much on defense than say we spend too little.” Friedman
suggests that the opinion gap, or “slack”, between decision makers and the
general public is a product of relative power. This relative power also results
in a national defense policy that is relatively unaffected by voters or
international politics. (5/15/12)
The Aviationist: The
mysterious U.S. F-15E Strike Eagle detachment in Djibouti. Are they conducting
covert air strikes in Yemen?
David
Cenciotti surmises that eight F-15E Strike Eagles, which have been stationed in
the Horn of Africa for ten years, may be participating in airstrikes in Yemen
along with Reaper drones. Yemeni
residents reported airstrikes on a town in mid-March for which the government
claimed responsibility, even though, at the time, Yemeni pilots were on strike.
(5/11/12)
Lt. Gen. James
Kowalski, who heads Air Force Global Strike Command, recently noted during a
breakfast-event that Air Force plans for an “optionally manned” bomber could
prove unaffordable under current budgetary constraints. Kowalski proclaimed that, given price
limitations, regular operational capability and manned operability would take
precedent over the need for developing a nuclear capable, unmanned platform. (5/11/12)
Chuck
Spinney explicates the military-industrial-congressional complex bluntly in a
critique of its failure to properly prioritize military interests. Spinney refers to the F-22 as “the
poster-child” for the malevolence of the MICC where “factional politics place
its interests ahead the national interest by enforcing political decisions that
spend other people’s money and spill other people’s blood.” Spinney critiques
the value system of the MICC, in which people should be prioritized, but
hardware inevitably wins out. (5/15/12)
The Will and the Wallet: Walk
the Talk
Matthew
Leatherman notes that while Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) may receive criticism
for the topline amount authorized by the NDAA, currently $8 billion above the
BCA spending cap, the Chairman is remarkably consistent. Leatherman suggests that McKeon has leverage
over the administration on this issue, because the President’s budget request
is also above the spending caps placed in law by BCA. (5/15/12)
Navy Times:
$2.2M sub mishap was ‘avoidable,’ report says
Sam
Fellman reports on a submarine crew error, which left the USS Georgia out of commission for three
months. Evidently, the cause of the
mishap was a bolt accidentally left in the submarine’s gear housing during a
routine inspection. As a result, the submarine
was sidelined right before it was needed for action in Libya early last year. (5/14/12)
Los Angeles Times: Afghan
police units tangled in criminal activity
David
S. Cloud and Laura King report that a U.S.-backed effort to recruit Afghan
police has not only failed to curtail violence, but has also resulted in increasing
amounts of corruption. According to a
recent RAND Corporation report, “insurgent activity in most of the 78 areas
patrolled by the local police is not significantly different than in areas
without the units.” These numbers
contradict the Pentagon’s assertions that the police programs have been a
success. (5/14/12)
Center for American Progress: The
Top 10 Things to Know About Military Compensation
Larry
Korb, Alex Rothman, and Max Hoffman identify potential steps to reduce military
personnel costs without “breaking faith with the men and women who are serving
or have served.” They explain that
personnel costs have nearly doubled during the last decade, and propose a
series of reforms outlined in a recent CAP report. The
authors note that these reforms are all based around pay, healthcare, and
retirement, and would not affect active-duty personnel. (5/11/12)
Gordon
Adams asserts that regardless of how dramatic the conflict in Washington over
defense spending may appear, Republican-proposed increases in defense spending
will never pass in the Democratically-controlled Senate. Adams refers to the
drama as “shadow-play” conceived for an election year and maintains that sequestration
should never have been taken seriously. Gordon also argues that the Republican
platform, built around “defending defense,” is both ill-conceived and
ill-advised. Adams concludes that the American public gets it: “We built
up, we are strong, the war is over, and it is time for Pentagon discipline.” (5/10/12)
Reports
Government Accountability Office:
Warfighter
Support: Army Has Taken Steps to Improve Reset Process, but More Complete
Reporting of Equipment and Future Costs Is Needed (5/15/12)
Government Accountability Office:
State
Partnership Program: Improved Oversight, Guidance, and Training Needed for
National Guard's Efforts with Foreign Partners (5/15/12)
Congressional Research Service: NATO’s Chicago Summit (5/14/12)
Congressional Budget Office: H.R. 4310, Preliminary estimate of
the direct spending effects of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2013 (5/11/12)
Congressional Research Service: Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons:
Proliferation and Security Issues (5/10/12)
Congressional Research Service: Understanding China’s
Political System (5/10/12)
Congressional Research Service: Afghanistan Casualties:
Military Forces and Civilians (5/10/12)
Strategic Studies Institute, U.S.
Army War College: Disjointed
Ways, Disunified Means: Learning from America's Struggle to Build an Afghan
Nation (5/10/12)
Global Zero U.S. Nuclear Policy
Commission: Modernizing
U.S. Nuclear Strategy, Force Structure and Posture (May, 2012)
The Lexington Institute: Meeting
the DoD Sequestration-Level Cost Cuts Without Cutting Strategy, Programs or
Readiness (April, 2012)
Events
5/21/12: The Cato Institute: The
Future of the U.S. Navy Surface Fleet
At 12:00 pm on May 21, 2012, the Cato Institute will host a
discussion on the future of the U.S. naval surface fleet featuring Robert O.
Work, Under Secretary of the Navy; Eric J. Labs, Senior Analyst for Naval
Forces and Weapons, Congressional Budget Office; Ben Freeman, National Security
Fellow, Project on Government Oversight; Christopher Preble, Vice President for
Defense and Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute; moderated by Benjamin
Friedman, Senior Fellow in Defense and Homeland Security Studies, Cato
Institute. The discussion is likely to
focus on Freeman's latest study on the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), with
response from Under Secretary of the Navy Robert Work. Work has emerged as one of the most outspoken
advocates for the LCS. To RSVP, click
here.
Compiled and submitted by:
Ethan R. Rosenkranz, program associate
Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA)
http://www.comw.org/pda/
202-316-7018
Ethan R. Rosenkranz, program associate
Project on Defense Alternatives (PDA)
http://www.comw.org/pda/
202-316-7018
