Sunday, November 8, 2009

Nation

Budget Constraints at Pentagon Could Affect National Security

The Defense Department starts its yearlong review of strategic priorities

Posted May 4, 2009

Last week, the Pentagon embarked on a yearlong review of its strategic priorities. In the months to come, defense officials will be facing some exceptionally painful choices about where to focus their limited resources in the wake of the economic crisis and the ever-rising tab for seven years of war. The Defense Department got used to being on the receiving end of blank checks to fight tough military campaigns on two fronts, but money is tight now.

Indeed, budget constraints are making it increasingly difficult for the U.S. military to project power to hot spots around the globe, with an alarming and growing effect on national security, some longtime military analysts say.

The Pentagon is currently preparing its Quadrennial Defense Review, the closely watched blueprint for addressing what the military considers to be the chief threats it faces in the coming years. Michele Flournoy, President Obama's policy chief at the Pentagon and the Department of Defense's third-highest-ranking civilian, outlined the administration's key priorities this week. They include a renewed focus on training U.S. troops for irregular, as opposed to conventional, combat, she says, particularly given the dearth of conventional military threats on the horizon.

Senior defense officials echo this need, stressing that radical Islamist groups pose the most immediate challenge to America and that the U.S. military still needs to be better positioned to "defeat or at least suppress them," Andrew Krepinevich, president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments and a longtime military strategist, told Congress last week.

But despite the high level of concern about irregular warfare and terrorist attacks, the Pentagon still faces a number of conventional threats, including Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons and China's development of submarines to "stalk" American carriers and form "picket lines" close to U.S. bases near Guam, according to Krepinevich.

The Pentagon is facing some "very difficult choices" as it assesses how best to balance strategic risk, says Flournoy. "In a world in which resources are limited, particularly in economic crisis, we have to be very specific about how we do this," she added.

Indeed, the consequences of growing budgetary constraints, coupled with the rise of powers such as Iran and China and the accelerating diffusion of sophisticated military technologies, are considerable, and such trends are making it increasingly difficult for the U.S. military to project its power in strategically pivotal parts of the world, according to some military analysts, who also voice concerns that the Pentagon is not placing enough emphasis on conventional military threats.

"Washington will likely find it progressively more expensive—and perhaps prohibitively expensive" to project power in some vital regions, says Krepinevich. "Even forces able to deploy forward successfully are liable to find it increasingly difficult to defend what they have been sent to protect," he said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The U.S. Navy, for example, patrols in confined waters such as the Persian Gulf. Operating in these areas close to shore, however, gives them little warning time to respond to threats such as high-speed, sea-skimming antiship cruise missiles, as well as high-speed suicide boats packed with explosives that are able to hide easily among commercial ships. Both "are proliferating and becoming far more difficult to detect than those that plagued the U.S. fleet in the First Gulf War," Krepinevich said.

In addition, mines have the potential to slow ships' movement and restrict their maneuverability, making them "easier prey for missiles and suicide craft." Krepinevich added that Iran is also actively trying to master the operation of quiet diesel submarines in the Gulf's noisy waters. "All this," he said, "suggests that the Persian Gulf, the jugular vein of the world's oil supply, risks gradually becoming a 'no go' zone for the U.S. Navy."

The challenge emerging from China is even more formidable, according to Krepinevich. The Chinese People's Liberation Army is "aggressively developing capabilities and strategies to degrade the U.S. military's ability to project power in the region," says Krepinevich. "Senior Chinese political and military leaders decided it would be foolhardy to challenge the U.S. military head-on for strategic dominance." Rather, he says, China combines "Western technology with Eastern stratagems."

  • Print  |
  • Subscribe  |
  • |
  • |
  • Sphere: Related Content

Reader Comments

More money needed to fight the last war

We need to dump yet more money to keep the military in old toys, like us at the start of WW2 keeping battleships that were useless and the Russians having a plethora of worthless tanks. Rumsfeld was right, the military are arrogant, self-serving ninnies!

$$

There doesn't seem to be much reason to our defense/aggression policies. Could probably save megabucks.

1. We have 10,000 nuclear devices, so we need not fear conventional aggression.

2. NATO is a relic of the cold war. Why we commit ourselves to defend innumerable nations who offer nothing for our benefit is perplexing. In the case of conflicts such as Gulf I, we have to form ad hoc alliances anyway since NATO was designed to defend against the no longer existent Soviet Union. I believe George Washington stated this very well about avoiding entangling alliances and forming ad hoc alliances as needed.

3. Our problems with Moslems and terrorism result mostly from AIPAC influence in Congress and the resulting one-sided and unfair policies in the Middle East. More of an influence problem than a military one. George Washington gave great guidance on this subject also.

Washington's Farewell Address 1796

"So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation."

4. The big security problem relating to terrorism is without doubt Washington holding the borders open to bring in millions of illegal aliens along with whoever else wants to get in the country, including thousands of illegals from terrorist countries. I'm a bit dubious about chamberpot immigration also. Many of the new immigrants I've talked to like from Iran, Haiti, and South America hate the US and come here solely to make money.

5. Fighting the unnecessary was in Iraq may have been partly a result of spending too much money on "defense." People who are naturally bullies and control freaks like Cheney and Rumsfeld start thinking in terms of "we're the only world's superpower" and can take over the Middle East in a series of Blitzkrieg attacks.

6. Do we really need to be the "policeman of the world"?

Piece by Piece

obammy is stripping us one section at a time on all ends of our defense. He does this verbally and physically. Our enemies must be in their glory that Bush is gone and we have this windbag of a president doing everything in his power to help them.

God help us.

Add your thoughts

Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

advertisement

Crossword Puzzle

Do You Like Crosswords?

We've added a new feature to our weekly digital magazine: an exclusive crossword puzzle!

advertisement

Barack Obama

Obama's Inner Circle

Get to know close advisers, cabinet officials, and more.

Your Photos

President Barack Obama speaks about combat troop level reductions in Iraq as he addresses military personnel at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune.

Obama in Your Town

Has the president visited your town? Send your photos to obamaphotos@usnews.com, and we'll post our favorites online.

Courtesy Greg Meinert

Thousands cheer as Obama becomes the 44th president.

Your Inauguration Photos

Thanks for sending us such great shots from this historic event.


A baby kissing an Obama poster for Washington Whispers.

Your Campaign Photos

We asked to see your personal election pictures and you delivered.

Public Poll

Do you fear losing your job in this market?

View Results

Washington Whispers

Washington Whispers

Irony in Jarrett Trip to Chamber of Commerce

Adviser Jarrett should watch for trap doors at Chamber of Commerce, a group she has slapped.

advertisement

Put U.S. News on Your Site

Keep up with the latest headlines by adding our news widget to your website.
Get this widget ยป


Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
Make USNews.com your home page.