Townhall...
Gates Turns Off the
Lights
By Frank Gaffney
6/1/2011
I have been in Washington now for nearly forty years and, in all that
time, I can’t recall seeing anything quite like Robert Gates’ ongoing
farewell to arms.
In a series of speeches over the past few days - at Notre Dame, at the
American Enterprise Institute and at the Naval Academy - the outgoing
Secretary of Defense has sounded a series of warnings that the ship of
state, or at least the carrier battle group that protects it, is headed
for the rocks.
That is surely so. But, welcome as his alarm is, the course is one Mr.
Gates has largely charted himself. Of late, President Obama has simply
ordered “full steam ahead,” with encouragement from some in both
parties on Capitol Hill.
Secretary Gates has particularly warned against a “hollowing out” of
the military, a not-so-implicit criticism of the $400 billion Mr. Obama
has announced that he intends to cut from Pentagon accounts. This
reduction would come on top of the roughly $178 billion already being
excised by the Gates team.
In so doing, Mr. Gates recalls the mistake made twice during my decades
in this town - first by Presidents Ford and Carter, then by Presidents
Bush ‘41 and Clinton: Yielding to the ever-present-temptation to meet
contemporary budgetary exigencies by cutting the nation’s investment in
its armed forces, leaving them without the modern equipment, realistic
training, adequately sized forces, up-to-date facilities and
development of the future technologies needed to deter and, if
deterrence fails, to prevail in tomorrow’s wars.
It took an immensely expensive buildup under Ronald Reagan to rectify
the first of these perilous mistakes. Thanks in part to the Gates
legacy, the second has still not been remedied. The effect has been to
condemn the armed services - currently in the midst of three far-flung
military campaigns - to an unwise and unsustainable reliance for the
foreseeable future on obsolescing tanks, ships, aircraft and missiles
purchased during the Reagan years (if not before).
A couple of examples illustrate the problem we already have, let alone
what will come if President Obama has his way:
In his recent speeches, Secretary Gates has emphasized the need to
modernize the military’s various air forces with the F-35, a “stealthy”
fifth-generation aircraft that has run into production delays and
increased costs. The risks associated with the attendant slowing-down
of deliveries of this plane have been greatly compounded by Mr. Gates’
insistence on the premature shutting down of the production line for
the far more capable F-22 - one of 30 Pentagon modernization programs
he has eviscerated.
The effect of falling for the old bird-in-the-bush gambit was
predictable (and predicted): They are never as good, cheap or readily
available as we are told they will be. Worse yet, as the Washington
Times’ Bill Gertz reported in his “Inside the Ring” column last week,
senior officers are now warning that, as a result, we are ominously
ill-prepared to contend with growing challenges to our historic air
superiority from Communist China.
Mr. Gates says President Obama’s projected cuts will preclude the
modernization of two legs of our strategic “Triad.” For those who share
the Commander-in-Chief’s zeal for the U.S. leading the way to “a world
without nuclear weapons,” the accelerating atrophying of our land-based
missile and bomber forces is not only of no concern; it is a desirable
thing. For the rest of us who worry about the wisdom of America being
the only nuclear power (actual or wannabe) that is systematically
engaged in denuclearization, however, the prospect of a future
strategic “Monad” is alarming.
The Defense Secretary is rightly concerned about the ability of an
all-volunteer force to continue to maintain the operational tempos that
have characterized the past decade. Regrettably, the military may
confront no-less-daunting requirements in the next decade, too,
especially if enemy perceptions that the United States “lost” Iraq
and/or Afghanistan translate into expensive new conflicts. Cut the
numbers of troops in the Army and Marines, cut their pay andbenefits -
both of which Mr. Gates says are in prospect if the President has his
way with the Pentagon budget - and that problem becomes infinitely
worse.
That could be the effect, as well, if Mr. Gates and outgoing Joint
Chiefs Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen certify before leaving office
that the military is ready to accept avowed homosexuals. Both have
pushed hard for this top Obama agenda item; both know the President
wants to get this done in time for June’s
Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Month festivities.
Yet, both men must appreciate that their successors should be allowed
to take a fresh, hard look at the impact this action will actually have
on readiness, unit cohesion and retention. Such would be the case
especially if that it proves to be as bad as careful analysis of the
data predicts - particularly among the combat arms. In that event, the
contribution made during Mr. Gates’ tenure at the Pentagon to the
hollowing-out of the armed forces will be even more severe.
Mr. Gates’ warnings about the Obama agenda are indeed welcome. One can
only wish he had done less to enable it to date, and pray that he does
not make matters worse still before leaving office four weeks from now.
Read it at Townhall
|
