Why the Heat Is on Robert Gates Over the Pentagon's Big-Ticket Weapons
Earlier this year, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates invited freshman members of Congress over to the Pentagon for a meeting. At one point during the visit, a congressman wondered aloud whether it was possible that the Pentagon was so focused on two counterinsurgency wars that it wasn't preparing for more conventional battles.
Gates "bristled" at this notion, according to Rep. Mike Coffman, a Colorado Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, and answered that he was well aware of the need to maintain strategic deterrence against big powers while fighting wars on two fronts. Gates then made what many considered to be a striking remark. He pointed out, by Coffman's account, that the considerable job of assembling a defense budget that balances these demands might be easier if members of Congress didn't have a list of weapons systems manufactured in their districts "always" at the ready "in their back pockets."
The exchange offers some insight into the upcoming budget showdown between the Pentagon and Congress. President Obama made it clear in his prime-time press conference yesterday that changing the way the Pentagon buys its expensive weapons systems will be one key way to cut the deficit "by a couple trillion dollars." To that end, the administration is pressing the Defense Department, historically no enemy of bloated weapons systems, to make cuts in programs that carry big costs into future years. At the same time, as Gates pointed out, lawmakers often fight these cuts (sometimes for programs that eventhe Pentagon says it doesn't need) to keep jobs in their districts. Now, some big-ticket items are on the chopping block. This includes the Air Force's prized F-22 advanced fighter jet, which has more than a few friends on Capitol Hill.
In a sign of how much of a front-burner issue defense spending has become, Gates's team put out word earlier this monththat he will skip a NATO summit in April, where allies are slated to discuss critical issues in Afghanistan, to concentrate on his budget battles at home. "Given the fact that the U.S. will be well represented, the work that still has to be done back here on what is arguably probably one of the most challenging budget reviews that has taken place in a number of years, he just felt that it's best that he remain here and work on that," said Bryan Whitman, a DOD spokesman.
It is such a sensitive process that Gates asked participants in the Pentagon process, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to sign confidentiality agreements. That's in large part because he is preparing to take on some powerful lobbying forces. Defense contractors have in turn been buying ads and hiring consultants to write opinion pieces for major newspapers touting various weapons systems.
With the economy in tatters, Gates has asked Congress to set aside its parochial interests, insisting that no program is off limits for serious cuts or even elimination. Such comments tend to create no small measure of anxiety on Capitol Hill. Defense contractors take care to spread production of expensive weapons systems widely throughout a number of congressional districts, often providing scarce jobs in struggling local economies. Driven by these considerations, no fewer than 44 senators signed a letter to President Obama last month extolling the virtues of the F-22 Raptor stealth fighter. Critics have charged that the Pentagon plane is ridiculously expensive and has not proved as useful as manufacturer Lockheed Martin had advertised. Gates offered his own critique of the aircraft during a hearing earlier this year. "The reality is we are fighting two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the F-22 has not performed a single mission in either theater," he pointed out.
The recent letter from Congress, however, warned of "layoffs" if production shuts down. It noted that manufacturing the plane "provides over $12 billion of [annual] economic activity to the national economy."
- 1
- 2
- Next Page >
Reader Comments
Typical and expected
First, I agree that the f-22 from what I've seen and know insures OUR air superiority for the forseable future. It is an awesome and expensive aircraft and I'm glad WE have it.
Second, I was wondering how long it would take Obama to call for defense cuts. I remember some of the USA's darkest days under Jimmy Carter when we couldn't even fly 2 helicopters across the desert to attempt to rescue our people from our new buddies in Iran. But hey, we're all one big happy world.
Right?
The F-22
Anna Mulrine,
what Air Force pilot complained that the F-22 has limited maneuverability? You obviously know nothing about this aircraft or what pilots think of it. You have obviously also never even seen this aircraft fly. You should probably revise this article, as asserting that the F-22 has poor maneuvering capability, and that its pilots complain about this, is about as far from the truth as you can get. Anyone who knows even a slight amount about the aircraft, or military aviation in general, knows this. This glaring error invalidates your entire argument by betraying your lack of expertise on the matter.
Military procurement, the ultimate conundrum
The military/industrial/political complex is inherently flawed but probably unfixable. Contractors have been filching governments since the first caveman needed someone else to manufacture clubs for him to arm his friends. The issues are so complex that they defy solution. If Boeing goes broke to whom do we turn to build aircraft in the event of all-out war? Do MRAPS have a purpose in a traditional war? How much bang do we expect for our bucks? Are military planners wrong for trying to develop super sophisticated weapons systems? If they don't, and many warfighters become casualties, who will absorb the political flak that will appear in the media as we have seen repeatedly these past five years. If factories close what happens to skilled technicians, designers, and scientists without whom a rapid expansion of our industrial base would prove difficult if not impossible to rebuild. The more you peel back the onion the more complex it becomes. Add to all of the above the natural desires of politicians to get reelected and also serve the interests of the people they represent. I wish Gates lots of luck but I fear his only tangible result will be an ulcer.
advertisement
