The Transformation of Defense and
Nonproliferation Policy After Sept. 11

Special Carnegie/CDI Conference: Comments from Rear Adm. (Ret.) Stephen H. Baker, CDI Senior Advisor

Good Morning

I'll start off by saying I'm in awe at the brain power in this room, I think that if we put it all together we can certainly make the world better.

I'm going to make some remarks concerning our Quadrennial Defense Review and the ongoing process. I thought it would be appropriate to start off with some very current words from our commander in chief. "For the mission that lies ahead you'll have everything you need. Every resource, every weapon, every means to assure full victory for the United States, our allies, our friends and the cause of freedom." He said that at the Pentagon last week at a memorial ceremony.

Another, and the last, quotable quote is from our senior analyst Chris Hellman, "This year everybody gets a get out of jail free card and no one in the Pentagon is going to be cutting anything."

The final Quadrennial Defense Reviews submitted three weeks ago provides Congress simply with a broad outline for it's security strategy. The most difficult questions concerning implementation of that strategy are completely unresolved at this time, and a lot of the questions remain flat out unanswered. The tragic events of 9/11 have raised fundamental questions about the shape and composition of our future U.S. forces. We do have a book that's available outside Reforging The Sword that points out a road map for substantially restructuring the U.S. military to counter new threats in the first quarter in the 21st century. I'll also add that the two authors are here in the audience and will gladly talk to you 24/7 about any of the issues in that paper.

Asymmetric warfare is talked about at length. The need for an overarching strategic direction to focus on is more important than ever. The challenge confronting America is how to deal with this fundamental alteration in the rules of war. We will have to find a way to decisively subdue a remorseless foe that believes that unlimited violence unencumbered by pity or compassion is justified in the name of religious rage. The events of 9/11 certainly, I think, demand a shift in our priorities. The decision made yesterday by the Pentagon approving Northrop Grumman Corporation's bid to purchase Newport News Shipbuilding over General Dynamics, I think, was a surprise to some, and I think the events of 9/11 might have helped tip the nod towards Northrop Grumman as decision-makers saw an increasing budget in DoD and recognized the need to keep the spirit of competition healthy in that area.

QDR issues centered around the question of what must be done in the near term to have an impact on the long-term transformation efforts, as well as what is "almost ready" that should be accelerated to our forces. The list will grow and be debated. I feel it is safe to say that the first draft will be wrong and need refinement. Not one program has been cancelled yet. Even the B-1, for example, was considered by some very vocal and even irate senators as a program that should have no numbers reduced at all. Such a mindset makes a strategy-based policy extremely difficult. "Reforging the Sword" looks at some of the recommendations for that transformation.

I think that revolution and transformation is not just required, it is mandatory. I would just like to mention some areas that we at CDI will continue to look at very closely because of the importance to a smart transformation process.

No. 1: Sea and airlift. We need to enhance and improve our transportability [through] continued upgrades and expansion of the sealift and fixed wing airlift fleets. Our air-to-air refueling capabilities currently can only be described as in horrible shape. Upgrading and improving security of domestic transportation and port facilities needs a lot of attention, just as our forward-staged supplies overseas do.

No. 2: Choices of weapons precision-guided munitions and their platforms. This month, CINCLANTFLEET [commander in chief, U.S. Atlantic Command] Adm. [Robert J.] Natter, when asked about his thoughts, his desires, his visions of the QDR, said that he had three words if anyone asked him about the QDR: weapons, weapons, weapons.

The Joint Strike Fighter decision will be announced by 17:00 this Friday. It will be winner take all. It's a $400 billion program; if you look at the support, the training and that entire package, it approaches $1 trillion. It certainly will be one of the most major events in this decade in DoD acquisition. The question that will be debated and has been recommended by some is do we need to accelerate the Joint Strike Fighter to the Navy. The thought of a 70 percent Joint Strike Fighter using spiral acquisition to get the last 30 percent of its capabilities as it matures should be discussed and looked at, and possibly makes sense.

The QDR does not make any of these decisions concerning weapons platforms. Case-by-case, not strategy-driven, decisions are certainly in the making here. A year ago in the midst of budget debates in the DoD, working with a very small checkbook, if it wasn't about the F-22, or the Joint Strike Fighter or DD-21, then those programs lacked funding and support. Now, such programs as our top five precision-guided munitions - Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW), Stand-Off Land Attack Munition - Extended Range (SLAM-ER), Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), Tactical Tomahawk, and the Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-Off Weapon (JASSM) - plus the Small Diameter Bomb program are all on the table. All will be looked at as to whether it makes sense for us to press forward and to what degree that we need to.

No. 3: ISR - intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Certainly, I think Uninhabited Combat Vehicles (UAVs/UCAVs) - and we only have a handful right now - as well as the concept of Space-Based Radar are probable growth industries. The Air Force and the Army need, I think, to get on board with Network Centric Warfare more so than their current progress. You'll see in the [Washington] Post today the Secretary of the Air Force James Roach said in an interview that spending billions in more B-2 bombers would be a serious mistake. He wants to upgrade the sensors and data networks that link aircraft, and I think that is right on the mark.

Upgrading and making more F-22s at a price tag of around $200 million per aircraft is a whole different issue, and I think a debate could exist. Do you want one specially configured air-to-ground F-22,or for the same price do you want six to eight Joint Strike Fighters? People should probably take a look at that one.

The bottom line: we must improve our capabilities to share information, battle space awareness and knowledge of commander intent. That includes one of the weakest areas in our intelligence community: human intelligence or HUMINT. Those capabilities have to be enhanced simply to improve our knowledge and understanding of foreign cultures, and that is one weak link that needs to be strengthened. This, as well, is mentioned in "Reforging the Sword" - the importance of human intelligence. The process of time critical targeting - getting sensor to shooter information in a matter of minutes - will have to be improved. A superb example is a program ongoing at Patuxent River involving a common fiber optic backbone of two aircraft as test beds to create a system of quickly finding the moving targets in the air, on the land, or under the water, and that architecture integrates onboard sensing and fusing of sensors, as well as off board sensors, computers, communications and targeting technologies to weapons platforms. We need more of this.

No. 4: Interoperability. Inter-agency procedures have to be improved for military units to collaborate more with civilian agencies. I think that's s loud and clear in the fall of 2001, and that's across all governmental agencies. A high level of effort is needed to assess how military, non-military, international (and non-government) organizations can best work together to address the complex issues that lay ahead.

There is substantial potential for improved collaboration with allied or friendly forces and interoperability is certainly a factor. Of prime importance as well, and looking back on some fairly painful lessons learned from yesteryear, is the assurance of interoperability amongst our services. We have to do better. (Again, pointed out in "Reforging the Sword.")

You'll see a 'wish list' out in the back that we have put together. It's something we will continually update as the QDR process matures, and the current broad based guidance is sharpened to a more focused strategy. It's available for anyone who would like that. The primary areas to where the initial money will specifically go, I think, are in the following areas - and it's a matter of insuring that we remain focused on the proper priorities to do this smartly. Five categories: increased worldwide posture, increased situational awareness, enhanced forced protection, offensive counter-terrorism, and improved command and control. These certainly are key areas of our transformation efforts.

A major concern (and it kind of relates to the last part of this video that you saw) is that our progress will resemble the movement of a glacier, rather than the moderate pace that we need right now. Thank you.

Rear Adm. (Ret.) Stephen H. Baker CDI Senior Advisor sbaker@cdi.org

View Standard Version

BACK TO THE TOP    TERRORISM PROJECT HOME    LINKS    CDI HOME