August 15: Analysts of various political stripes can find common ground on places to cut defense spending as part of a larger budget reduction effort. Military personnel costs, including pay and medical benefits, housing and living stipends and subsidies, and retiree benefits are huge expenses that have been rising. Service members, for instance, pay a small price for their family health insurance plan, just $460 a year. “That hasn’t changed one penny in 15 years,” said Todd Harrison, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment. President George W. Bush once proposed a fee increase “and it got knocked down hard by Congress.” Defense Spending Cuts Decried as Severe, but They’re Meant to Stave off Worse, Fort Worth Star-Telegram
August 14: But many defense analysts say that, even in the age of long-range missiles, the flexibility of deploying Marine forces from Navy ships for humanitarian, training and combat missions remains invaluable. The problem is that it is expensive, said Dakota Wood, a retired Marine and senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “It is no small feat to build a sizable amphibious ship and to field the type of force that you would put inside that ship, with the skill set needed to organize and execute an amphibious operation,” he said. “It’s a fairly complex military operation. It takes a lot of time and expertise to do it well.” Marine Corps Could Shrink, Gates Predicts, Sign On San Diego News
August 13: “Congress could potentially throw a wrench into any of it if they were inclined to do so,” said Todd Harrison, a senior fellow for defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington. “In the current fiscal environment, it is increasingly difficult for Congress to force DoD to spend money on things it has publicly identified as wasteful and unnecessary.” Gates Urges Congress to Avoid ‘Mistake’ of Harmful Cuts in Military Budget, Bloomberg News
August 11: “Any base closings we’d see would probably be minimal,” Todd Harrison, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, told me yesterday. “Another major round of closings would have to coincide with significant changes in force structure, and Gates is resisting that so far.” Off-base offices and even smaller defense facilities will get a closer examination, and workers outside of Joint Forces Command could end up having their desks moved. But Harrison said he thinks other budget cutting proposals from the Defense Business Board, such as changes in retirement pay and reduction of permanent-change-of-station moves, are move likely targets for savings in the months to come. Those could end up having an even larger impact on troops in the long run. Could Gates’ Cuts Lead to Another BRAC Round? Stars and Stripes
August 11: [A]nother whip smart former Marine, CSBA’s Dakota Wood, told me, penetrating an enemy anti-access network is one thing. Operating inside it is something else. The real contest will come in close contact with enemy forces where short range GRAMM systems may take us back to attrition warfare, he said. That’s exactly what the Israelis, long the undisputed masters of maneuver warfare, ran into against Hezbollah in 2006.The Future of the Marines and Forcible Entry in a Battle Network Regime, Defense Tech
August 9: “[The gusher] is not off yet, so I don’t think it will sink in at all levels of DoD until it’s actually shut off and some sacrifices have to be made,” said Todd Harrison, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a think tank focusing on defense issues. Harrison said at least a handful of the board's recommendations —such as closing the Networks and Information Integration directorate in the Office of Secretary of Defense and reducing the frequency of duty station moves — stand a good chance of being realized. “If they can show that it's a shared sacrifice and for a good reason, I think they might have a little more success in getting this through,” he said. Big Fights Await DoD Cuts, Federal Times
August 7: By essentially paying for such assertive global leadership with IOU’s passed to future generations of Americans, the United States has recklessly spent itself into a hole of strategic proportions, contended Andrew Krepinevich, president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.“And as a result of devoting so much real and political capital to health care in his first year, President Obama has continued digging,” Krepinevich added. As the problems of the global era grow and shift in ways that neutralize U.S. military power, he said, the United States will be increasingly constrained in its ability to mount large-scale responses. The 13th Crisis, National Journal
August 5: Insurgents may have other motivations for the IED attacks on civilians, said Andrew Krepinevich, of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. These include restricting travel to certain roads to coercing young men to join the insurgency, he said. Afghans Killed by IEDs on Rise in 2010, USA Today
August 4: Work’ presentation, however, drew some pointed comments from Dakota Wood of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments - where Work was a senior analyst before moving into the administration. (Like Work, Wood is a Marine.)The Marine Corps, Wood said in a panel session after Work’s talk, “is encumbered by an acquisition program that seems to be untenable.” Wood pointed to several challenges in the way of a post-Afghanistan Corps, equipped to deploy troops in potentially hostile areas, in an era when the opposition has guided weapons. Amphibious Ops Under Fire, Aviation Week
August 4: Gates hasn’t said the program should be scrapped - but has said “just enough to make the Navy nervous,” Todd Harrison, a senior fellow for defense budget studies at the CSBA, told Morning D. Harrison says as the Navy pushes for more ships, defending the Ohio Class becomes harder and harder. One plan, to modify the Virginia Class subs by stretching them out may not be a viable cost-savings plan, Harrison says he has heard. “It’s not clear that there really are less expensive alternatives, so that puts the onus back on the Navy to see why these subs are projected to be so expensive.” Ohio Class Subs Get a Hearing, Politico's Morning Defense
August 2: According to Todd Harrison, even after the State Department takes over, and U.S. forces are gone, the military will still be absorbing costs of the Iraq war. Many U.S. troops have been permanently disabled. And today, President Obama said the government will spare no expense taking care of them. U.S. Combat Presence in Iraq Will Withdraw on Aug. 31, Marketplace Public Radio
August 2: “There are clear and straightforward ways to deal with most of the concerns that have been raised by Romney and other treaty critics. As a first step, the administration should provide the treaty’s negotiating record on the key points of contention. This will allow the Senate to judge the intent of the parties and to understand better the reasons the treaty emerged as it did. It will also help the Senate in crafting an instrument of ratification that protects future U.S. security needs.” Fix the Treaty (Op-ed By Eric Edelman and Robert Joseph), National Review
July 30: CSBA’s whip smart strategist Jim Thomas contends that as precision targeting and guided weapons proliferate, both high-end and low-end wars will unfold in far less “permissive” operating environments. Battlefield advantage has swung back in favor of the defender, he says, with the further maturation of reconnaissance-strike networks warfare may be entering the “post-power projection era.” The weapons acquisition choice, Thomas said, is either to go cheap and disposable, with drones, long range missiles and robots that can be thrown at an enemy’s missile magazines without much regret, or ultra-costly, high-end and stealthy and try to slyly maneuver your way past an enemy’s defenses. Stand-Off Precision Strike Or Stealthy Penetrating Aircraft; Israel Debates, Defense Tech
July 29: The problem with so many of these various exercises masquerading as strategic thinking is they do their best to maintain a force that was designed to fight a massive land and sea war against a monolithic, hyper-militarized Soviet Union. Here is an analysis of the 1993 BUR by two of this nation’s foremost strategic thinkers, Andrew Krepinevich and Bob Work contained in A New U.S. Global Defense Posture for the Second Transoceanic Era: “Although the BUR cautioned against planning for the last war, it proceeded to do just that. In essence, it used Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm to help explain and justify a regionalization of the Cold War military problem of forward defense along the inner German border and the demilitarized zone that separated North and South Korea.” Independent QDR Panel Recommends Buying More of Everything, Increasing Defense Budget, Defense Tech
July 26: In a recent presentation at Princeton University's Center for International Strategic Studies, Andrew Krepinevich, of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, reminded Washington defense policymakers of the importance of thinking strategically. Viewing the current mismatch between Defense Department desires and available resources, Krepinevich, took issue with those who see providing additional resources or creating efficiencies as the sum total of the solution set. “There is an opportunity here, if the Obama administration is willing to seize it. It involves exploring all available options for diverting the country from its path toward a declining military posture, and doing so within the context of an overall integrated strategy,” Krepinevich said. Strategic Thinking Critical to U.S. Global Leadership, Defense News
July 26: Bethesda-based Lockheed Martin has announced that it is forming a new business unit by combining two information-systems units with a simulation and training unit, and Northrop Grumman said this month it would close one of its seven shipbuilding yards and may sell or spin off its entire naval business. “I think there’s a lot of concern in the industry if they don’t adapt . . . they might get left behind,” said Todd Harrison, a defense analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Lawrence Prior's Move to BAE Signals Changes for Defense Contractors, Washington Post
July 24: The reduction in bombing comes amid debate about rules restricting the use of overwhelming firepower for troops in combat. Some military analysts, including Barry Watts, who flew combat missions in Vietnam, say the rules have increased risk to ground forces fighting the Taliban. “My sort of gut reaction is that there is frustration about the rules of engagement,” said Watts of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. “It looks to me like it’s gone a little too far in terms of limiting (civilian casualties).” Coalition Eases up on Afghan Airstrikes, McClatchy-Tribune News
July 24: In terms of costs per warrior, the current wars appear to be the most expensive ever, according to Todd Harrison, a senior fellow for defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Working independently of the Pentagon and of the Congressional study, and using computations based on the number of troops committed to the actual conduct of war at any one time, he estimates that the annual cost today is $1.1 million per man or woman in uniform in Afghanistan versus an adjusted $67,000 per year for troops in World War II and $132,000 in Vietnam. Although technology is the driving factor, along with the logistical expense of moving equipment over the treacherous and landlocked Afghan terrain, costs per soldier have also risen because of the price of maintaining a better-trained and higher-paid force. “We’re not just pulling random guys off the street and sending them off to war like we did in the past,” Mr. Harrison said. The War: A Trillion Can Be Cheap, New York Times
