Mr Gates' Epiphany

General Vallely (Ret.)

When President Obama announced his National Security Team of Clinton, Gates and Jones we were absolutely delighted for his selection of these three experienced Americans. Unfortunately, this europhia was very short lived when Mr. Gates announced his 2010 budget on April 6, 2009. Reasonable people have asked when he had this epiphany and yet the threat has increased. Reasonable people have asked when he had this epiphany and yet the threat has increased. We should have suspected something was adrift when he made senior military leaders sign Non-Disclosure Agreements, so that the Service Chiefs could not discuss details with their staffs. This included the Service Vice Chiefs who run the staffs on a daily basis. Mr. Gates who describes himself as the Secretary of War then ensured that the decision process was incumbent upon the Service Chiefs skills to convince him versus the more complete analysis of the staffs. This is a first time this has happened in our history and it was a dramatic departure from his last two budgets. Again what drove this epiphany?

His experience gained in the CIA was now being implemented to ensure as he said” leaks could not be sent to the Hill before he wanted them disclosed”. It became even more apparent to us why the former Secretary of the Air Force, Mike Wynne and Chief of Staff Buzz Moseley had to go, as both were skilled, knowledgeable infighters who had dominated the last QDR (Quadrennial Defense Review) . Since Mr. Gates was using the Air Force budget as a bill payer, he had to change out the more experienced team and the Minot nuclear incident was a perfect storm. So when the 2010 budget was announced during the Easter Recess with the Congress out of town, the average citizen and Congressman did not realize that this was the most dangerous budget since the end of World War II. It decimates our Air Force, and long range Missile Defense capability, scales down our Naval Striking Forces and the Army’s future mobility capabilities even before the QDR was started. Normally the QDR drives the budget process but this time the budget is driving the QDR. What was even more surprising was that this budget was not coordinated with the Services for military advice prior, which again was a first. The normal transparency of the budget system was missing completely. By Mr. Gates own admission he did not consider the impact on the industrial base which is profound and which he is charged to maintain. Quite an epiphany!

All the cuts have been described under the guise of Irregular Warfare, which we applaud, but also budget constraints, which we disagree for the following reasons. The president signed a $787 B stimulus that nobody read so why didn’t Mr. Gates ask for 10% or $79 B to recapitalize the Services that have basically deployed for 19 years in Bosnia, Kosovo and the Middle East. We are not short of funds but the Obama Administration has placed a low priority on defense. The stimulus addition to defense could have created 500 thousand jobs, which should be his priority, plus recapitalized a worn out military, which should be Mr. Gates’ top priority.

Now one of the most surprising things was that the Secretary did not get all of his facts right on the programs he cancelled. This is one of the dangers of a small tightly controlled group. For instance his cancellation of the Presidential Helicopter program was based on using the projected costs during increment 2 whereas the current program is basically on cost and on schedule with 9 helicopters delivered. The problem is that the White House, Secret Service and Navy have added a host of gold plated requirements on increment 2. Congressmen Murtha and Senator Schumer plus others just want realistic requirements. So why cancel the program and throw away $4B. The Marine and Navy pilots are very happy with the performance of the helicopter so let us look at the business case versus outright cancellation as the Italian defense Minister said in letter to Mr. Gates on 28 May.

With respect to terminating the F-22 the Air Force Chief of Staff has said his requirement is 243 but understands the affordability number is 187. Mr. Gate’s termination decision at 187 means that we will have only about 65 combat coded fighters on any given day that would be the smallest air superiority force since WWI. This number will also not equip each of the Air Expeditionary Forces that make up the deployable Air Force nor will the smaller number provide sustainable combat power for the Combatant Commanders. This short-sighted decision is beyond reasonable against the developing threat we will be facing in Iran and North Korea. Mr. Gates will not let the F-22 be deployed into the Middle East for unknown reasons but never fails to say that they have not been used in combat. You figure? His over confidence in the F-35 to be the savior misses the point that we planned to have a mix of F-22s and F-35s because the F-35 does not have the same survival capabilities against the advanced Surface to Air Missile Systems that are about to be deployed into Iran and even North Korea. His rationale that “exquisite,” dominating combat systems are not required by American aviators…and, that the services should be equipped with aircraft that “will do” is just not embraced by the fighter pilots that actually fly into harm’s way or knowledgeable analysts that study actual lessons learned and contemporary threats and long term trends. This “just getting-by” logic of his will be costly in lives, in treasure and certainly in our ability to influence or deter, as we will never be able to field the numbers that potential threats have available to them. Hence, each aircraft (or other combat system) has to be the absolute best that can be produced and delivered – especially the aircraft tasked to perform the “predicate mission” of air dominance throughout the combat area of responsibility. So, why would we terminate the most advanced fighter in the world, as the production is reaching optimum price and delivery schedule for a less capable, unproven, unfielded design that would not win in a fly off? The F-22 would have a 100 to 0-success rate against the F-35. It makes no sense at all. Ask the Captains and Majors what they want? They will have to fly them in combat at the risk of their lives and their joint forces.

The cancellation of the Combat Search and Rescue Helicopter - CSAR for the Air Force 30 days before the winner was to be announced is seemingly based on Mr. Gates saying that a single service requirement was not necessary as we had lots of helicopters to do this mission. Unfortunately the clique of sycophants around the Secretary did not realize that we have tried this before in “real” combat and it has always failed. True combat search and rescue is a time critical, high intensity, high risk mission area that demands pilot and aircrew core competencies, focused training, specific equipage and an assigned service responsible to the overall joint team for the organizing, training and equipping of this mission area. In short, as the previous Air Force Chief of Staff (General Buzz Moseley) has stated – “this is a ethical and moral imperative to pick our people up…all our people…across the full joint spectrum of operations. If we are going to send them out to fight…we must have the capability to recover them in distress.” Mr. Secretary we expect you to provide resources to recover our aircrews in combat and peacetime! Since 2001 our CSAR crews have rescued over 3,000 people. United States Air Force, CSAR forces are Joint Forces working for the Joint Force Air Component Commander.

We also see his decision severely curtail and limit the production and fielding of the C-27J that has been supported by not only the Air Force and the Army senior leadership, but also the National Guard Bureau leadership and the entire acquisition process from the Joint Resources Oversight Council into the DOD staff. This aircraft was to equip many active duty Air Force and National Guard Bureau units, replace aging and combat worn aircraft. The C-27J was also planned to provide not only additional combat power in any world-wide theater…but, was key in future planning for disaster relief and the ability of Governor’s to respond to a variety of challenges, as well as the ability to provide less expensive consequence management airlift capability…without having to fund and operate the more expensive larger mobility aircraft. The “more affordable” C-27J was also on tap to be one of the major keystones in future engagement with a larger number of key allies and coalition partners. Like equipage of an affordable aircraft like the C-27J would provide – for the first time ever – significantly more options to operate together, to train together, to exchange pilots and crews and to actually meet the demands of strategic partnering as mandated by the last QDR. The original approved number of C-27Js would also open the door to a production facility within the United States with the attendant jobs and technical skills provided! So, what happened?

The most egregious errors were his testimony canceling the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) in which the Lexington Institute’s Dan Goure pointed out in an excellent issue paper on 14 May, six major factual errors in his rationale for canceling the program of a long-range interceptor. Yet he would not recant on this important decision on missile defense. On 28 May former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohn pointed out in an OP ED in the Washington Times that now is not the time to cut $1.4B out of long range missile defense with North Korea and Iran increasing their long range missile capabilities. We quite agree with Secretary Cohen’s recommendation.

Mr. Gates is delaying the Initial Operational Capability of the Next Generation Bomber (NGB) for more study, which is just slow rolling. The fact of the matter is this “taking of the money” and “delay for additional study” will effectively kill the effort to develop and deliver a lethal, penetrating, persistent, survivable long range strike aircraft that is required to provide the President the true global reach and global strike necessary to deter and dissuade (or deliver strategically paralyzing, decisive blows) throughout the 21st Century. The fact of the matter is this shortsighted decision leaves us with 5 B-2s on any given day and very obsolete, non-penetrating B-52s and B-1s to solve our long range strike missions over the next 20 years. Surely American industry can do better for the President and for the pilots and crews who fly.

Another factual error was Mr. Gates rejection of Mr. Murtha’s proposal to the 2009 Defense Supplement of including the Dual Procurement of the Tanker replacement program that has been locked up in politics. He said it would cost from $7-14 B more to do Dual Procurement when in fact it would save the Air Force over $50B during the life cycle by getting rid of these 50 year old Eisenhower Era Tankers and having enduring competition. No one in the Office of the Secretary of Defense has been able to explain where these costs came from. It appears that the additional 98,000 jobs and 4 new factories Dual Procurement would provide do not interest the Obama Administration or the Secretary.

The Navy saw its carrier battle groups reduced from 11 to 10, which means that they will now end up with 9 Air Wings. This will put us at greater risk at a time that we see an increasing emerging threat in North Korea and Iran. One must ask the question why is the Obama administration taking such risk?

The Army had their Future Combat System vehicle modernization program cancelled and General Casey, the Army Chief, said “I supported it, I did not agree with it” which goes back to our introduction and the GAG orders that our senior military leaders were forced to live with for the first time in history. Not Good!

It also appears that the Obama Administration is quietly killing the Two Way Street Initiatives without NATO Allies which the Bush Team had implemented . Cancellation of the Presidential Helicopter and the cancellation of the favored selection of the CSAR helicopter to the Lockheed Augusta Westland Team, the C-27 Reductions and finally the delay of the Tanker Award and rejection of Congressman Murtha’s amendment for Dual Procurement all point to dramatic changes by a union dominated White House. Europe Beware!

In summary, Mr. Gates still has great credibility on Capitol Hill and we are still great admirers of all he is trying to do especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, but most members do not understand the dangers of this budget. There has been little focus on the dislocating impacts on the American, aerospace industrial base and what happens when we are effectively down to an absolute minimum of production capabilities. But, more alarming is this budget appears to all observers to be a step towards unilateral disarmament. For the first time in modern history, the Administration will not publish the five-year defense program. Very worrisome, so we need an informed dialogue because the cuts are profound.

North Korea detonated a second nuclear weapon on Labor Day and continues to fire ballistic missiles specifically to send a signal to the Obama Administration. It was immediately followed by President Ahmadinejad of Iran saying they would continue their nuclear development program. I hope our readers do not think that this is a coincidence. We are facing some very challenging, very lethal and very technologically advanced threats and now is not the time for crippling the aerospace industrial base or for unilateral disarmament. Only our members of Congress can stop this dangerous budget now. Resources are not the problem but priorities are. Our troops fighting today and our troops that will certainly fight tomorrow deserve nothing less.
What epiphany did we miss?

Tom McInerney (LT GEN USAF RET) and Paul Vallely (MAJ GEN USA RET) are co-authors of Endgame, The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror and Baghdad Ablaze. Both are or have been Fox News Military Analyst’s and authors of numerous articles and appear regularly on numerous radio shows. McInerney was former assistant Vice Chief of Staff USAF and Vallely was former Deputy Commander Army Pacific.


Paul E. Vallely