The Center for Defense Information
Center for Defense Information
1779 Massachusetts Ave., NW * Washington, DC 20036
(202)332-0600 * Fax (202)462-4559 * www.cdi.org
| July 15, 1999 |
| July 15, 1999 |
F-22 Dealt Major Setback
Chris Hellman, Senior Analyst, chellman@cdi.org
Both supporters and opponents of the F-22 fighter program received a shock this week when members of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee voted unanimously to strike out $1.8 billion included in the Pentagon's annual spending request for procurement of six of the high-tech aircraft. While the Subcommittee did include the $1.2 billion requested for continued development of the F-22 and Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-CA) referred to the move as "a pause," many observers believe this could be the beginning of the end for this controversial program. The move came as a particular surprise given that both the House and Senate Defense Authorization bills as well as Senate Defense Appropriations bill -- each of which has already passed -- all include full funding for the program.
The F-22 has long been the Air Force's single highest priority program. Subcommittee members, however, cited other pressing Air Force needs -- personnel recruitment and retention; a shortage of "smart" munitions; increasing demand for operational support aircraft for reconnaissance, airlift and air refueling; and upgrades for existing fighter aircraft -- as the reason for the cuts.
In recent years growing concern about the program has focused on its whopping price tag. It has become increasingly hard to justify the cost of the program in an era where U.S. airpower is widely viewed as unrivaled anywhere in the world and where the U.S. no longer faces an enemy capable of developing sophisticated aircraft able to challenge U.S. supremacy. In an effort to control the spiraling cost of the F-22, Congress included language in the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 which capped the cost of the program at $62.7 billion for 339 aircraft.
Yet it is extremely unlikely that this cap can be met. The cap on the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) portion of the program is $18.9 billion, $1.7 billion above original Air Force estimates. Development costs alone are likely to continue to rise even before the $43 billion procurement program begins.
These increases have been in part the result of a number of technological problems. For example, the aircraft's first flight, originally scheduled for May, 1997, was delayed four months due to problems with the fuel system. Most recently, it was revealed in May of this year that Boeing, one of the aircraft's subcontractors, and the Air Force had discovered a structural problem in the tail section that could cause it to buckle. As a result, F-22 test aircraft have been flying at only 50% of their planned capability.
While DoD officials greeted the subcommittee's actions with surprise, expressions of concern about the health of the F-22 program have also come from the Pentagon in recent days. Last week Jacques Gansler, DoD's chief procurement officer, stated that the Pentagon was looking at ways to control the cost of the F-22 program. This would include purchasing additional numbers of the Joint Strike Fighter rather than buying all 339 F-22s. The Pentagon "always ought to have alternates," he said.
Ironically, this setback comes at a time when the Air Force is apparently interested in expanding the role of the F-22 and possibly increasing the buy. According to a story in "Jane's Defense Weekly," Lockheed-Martin officials have been approached by senior Air Force officers about the cost of 200 additional aircraft.
The subcommittee's action must still be approved by the full Appropriations Committee and then the House. If the funding is not restored, a battle is likely when House and Senate members meet later this summer to iron out differences in their respective versions of the spending package. It is difficult to know whether the cuts will hold up through the process, or even if the members of the subcommittee themselves are committed to defending their plan. But at the very least, F-22 supporters got one loud wake-up call.
For more information on the F-22 and the U.S. tactical aircraft modernization program, see CDI's new TACAIR Website.
Latin American Conference Addresses Child Soldiers
By Rachel Stohl, Research Analyst, rstohl@cdi.org
A conference aiming to highlight the plight and use of child soldiers around the world was held in Montevideo, Uruguay from July 5-8, 1999. The conference, organized by the International Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers in cooperation with the Inter-American Children's Institute of the Organization of America States, and hosted by the Uruguayan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, focused primarily on the use of child soldiers in Latin America. Participants included over 100 people from 19 countries representing Foreign Affairs and Defense Ministries, non-governmental organizations, representatives of inter-governmental organizations, and governments committed to ending the use of child soldiers. Because of its opposition to the 18-year standard, the United States was not invited.
Child soldiers are used in large numbers in Latin America, but public consciousness has not yet been raised about this problem. In countries like Colombia and Peru children as young as eight have been used by rebel movements and government sponsored paramilitaries. Colombia and Peru use child soldiers to the largest extent in Latin America, although many children participate in armed forces in Paraguay and Mexico. Reintegration of child ex-combatants is also a significant problem for many post-conflict societies in Latin America, such as El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Guatemala.
At the meeting's conclusion conference participants issued the Montevideo Declaration on the Use of Child Soldiers. Beyond calling for international action on the prevention of the use of children in conflict through international mechanisms such as the United Nations and International Criminal Court, the participants also urged the countries of Latin America and the Carribean to take specific steps to stop all recruitment of children under 18 or their use in armed conflict. Included among these were promoting a culture of peace; preventing the militarization of education; launching information and sensitization campaigns to demonstrate to civil society, the armed forces, and other armed groups the negative effects on minors of participation in armed conflicts; instituting early-warning mechanisms among vulnerable parts of the population to highlight signs of recruitment of children; adopting programs of demobilization and reintegration of child soldiers, including working at the community and local levels to ensure the reunification of families and full insertion into the formal system of education; and authorizing amnesties for child soldiers.
The Declaration also requests the various bodies of the OAS, including the Permanent Council, General Assembly, and Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, to adopt resolutions on eradicating the use of children in armed conflict. The Declaration further calls upon the Inter-American Development Bank to give priority to programs directed toward the economic, social, and cultural rights of children and their families, and toward the societal reintegration of those children affected by armed conflict.
One highlight of the conference was the release of a World Leaders' Statement on the Use of Child Soldiers. After outlining the horrors of the use of children as soldiers, the statement, "Call[ed] upon the current leadership of all nations and armed groups to immediately stop the use of children as soldiers, and establish and respect an international prohibition on the military recruitment or participation in armed conflict of any child under the age of eighteen." The statement, which was signed by 16 former heads of states including Jimmy Carter, Oscar Arias Sanchez, the former President of Coast Rica, Mikhail Gorbachev, the former President of the Soviet Union, and Shimon Peres, the former Prime Minister of Israel, called the use of child soldiers "reprehensible" and said that "the world community should no longer tolerate this practice."
The Latin America conference was the second regional conference on child soldiers organized by the International Coalition. The first was held in Maputo, Mozambique in April. (For more information about the Maputo Conference, see "Africa Reacts to Child Soldiers Problem," By Rachel Stohl, Weekly Defense Monitor, April 29, 1999. The next regional conference will be held in Berlin, Germany in October, 1999, followed by a conference in Asia in early 2000.
For more information about the Latin America Conference, check visit the website of the International Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers at or call Jo Becker at Human Rights Watch at (212) 216-1236.
Procurement And Personnel -- Or is It "Or"?
Colonel Dan Smith, USA (Ret.), Chief of Research, dsmith@cdi.org
In a stunning -- albeit possibly no more than a temporary -- setback, the House Appropriations defense subcommittee shifted $1.8 billion from the U.S. Air Force's most prized procurement program, the F-22 Raptor, into other aviation programs.
This action by the subcommittee comes on the heels of recent statements by the Pentagon's Acquisition Chief, Jacques Gansler, that the military ought to concentrate procurement spending on upgrading platforms and acquiring more smart munitions to enhance the lethality of current major weapons systems. Such a procurement philosophy would save a great deal of money, some of which could be returned to the Treasury and some of which could go to support the single most critical element of the military -- people.
Indeed, the military services are increasingly voicing concerns about the adverse effects of the personnel ceilings set in the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review. The just retired Commandant of the Marine Corps, General Charles Krulak, said the Corps needs about 177,000 Marines, 5,000 more than they now have. The Air Force says it needs at least 3,000 more men and women to implement its new Air Expeditionary Force concept which is designed to make deployments more predictable. The Navy says it needs more ships, which means more people.
But the Army is looking for the largest increase in numbers. The Army's new Chief of Staff, General Eric Shinseki, believes his service is under pressure because it's "a smaller Army, busier Army, downsized, reduced in budget" and has been given a "tremendous increase in mission requirements." General Shinseki reportedly is seeking an active Army of 500,000, 20,000 more than the QDR authorizes and some 32,000 above the actual active duty force at the end of May, 1999.
Just as there are alternatives to buying expensive new weapons platforms, there are alternatives to increasing end strength. The most obvious alternatives are to alter current warfighting plans and to reduce the current deployment sites and troop levels of U.S. military forces around the world.
The need for the Pentagon to reexamine plans and deployments was highlighted in recent congressional testimony when General Shinseki suggested that committing 7,000 Army troops to the Kosovo peacekeeping force might have a major impact on the Army's readiness to fight and win two major theater wars, the QDR benchmark. As has often been noted, the "need" to be able to carry out a two war scenario has no precedent either during the Cold War or in the eight years since -- including during the time of the 1991 Gulf War, tensions in the Far East between the two Koreas and between China and Taiwan, or during the just ended Kosovo operation.
If the Pentagon insists on holding on to its two war scenario until the 2001 QDR, it should at least reconsider its involvement, or the level of its involvement, in various theaters and operations.
After 50 years, the U.S. still has 37,000 troops in South Korea, including some 28,000 in two combat infantry brigades of the 2nd Infantry Division and two air combat (helicopter) brigades. An April, 1999 study by the Army War College suggested that the Army presence in the Far East could be reduced to one combat brigade, an engineer and a medical brigade, largely for humanitarian and disaster assistance (equivalent units are already in Korea), and a military intelligence and a military police brigade for essential combat support (the latter again is already in Korea).
Similarly, the U.S. maintains 100,000 troops in Europe where there no longer is a major threat. The Army alone has four ground brigades with supporting forces assigned to Germany (approximately 47,000 troops, although some of these are in the former Yugoslavia now) plus another 6,000 in other NATO nations.
The Army still sends approximately 1,000 troops to the Sinai Desert as part of the 17 year old Multinational Force of Observers (MFO) established to monitor violations of the Israeli-Egyptian peace accord.
The Army rotates approximately 1,500 soldiers into Kuwait every calendar quarter for exercises with Kuwaiti armed forces. There are also approximately 20,000 other American service personnel in the Gulf region on board Navy ships or stationed ashore in connection with Operation Southern Watch, the "no-fly" zone over Iraq. (This does not include 1,200 largely Air Force personnel in Turkey who conduct Operation Northern Watch over the Kurdish areas of Iraq.)
The Army commitment to SFOR (Stabilization Force) in Bosnia is currently 6,200 personnel but may well drop to 4,000 with the proposed reduction in SFOR from 32,000 to 16,500.
Almost 6,000 Americans are in Central America and the Caribbean helping with Hurricane Mitch relief, countering drug trafficking, or in Haiti helping with the multinational peacekeeping effort.
While Hurricane Mitch relief is a worthy and unexpected mission, many of the longstanding commitments may no longer be needed. In Europe the European Union finally seems prepared to assume more responsibility for defense and security affairs on the continent. While this will not happen overnight, the U.S. should encourage this initiative, which when successful would permit a further decrease in permanently stationed U.S. forces on the continent.
The road map for Korea has been laid out in the War College study.
In the Persian Gulf, the U.S. should continue to harmonize relations with Iran and work with our Gulf allies who are already seeking to reintegrate Iraq into the region's affairs. A cooperative Gulf would permit a significant cut in air and ground forces in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the Gulf emirates and a reduced naval presence. Elsewhere in the Middle East, we should end the MFO mission in the Sinai.
Despite some realistic possibilities to reduce standing commitments, the temptation in the present personnel "crunch" is to conclude that the only solution is more people even though the major problem lies with more specialized units that have a high OPTEMPO (that is, are being so frequently deployed that morale and retention are being affected). A more effective solution might be to create more of these "in demand" units by shifting people from specialties not in such heavy demand. Only after this step has been carefully weighed and commitments reviewed should Congress take a look at the QDR personnel ceilings.
Report on Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction Released
Laura Beers, Research Intern, lbeers@cdi.org
After a year and a half of investigation and deliberation, the congressionally appointed Commission to examine proliferation threats involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD) released its final report.
The Commission advocates a major overhaul of the United States' counter-proliferation infrastructure. Specifically, it proposes streamlining the myriad counter-proliferation programs administered by the Departments of State, Defense, Energy, Commerce, and other agencies by bringing them under a new council specifically focused on WMD proliferation.
The twelve person panel, formally titled the Commission to Assess the Organization of the Federal Government to Combat the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, was chaired by former CIA chief John Deutch and vice-chaired by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) who three years ago sponsored the legislation creating the Commission. Commissioners were appointed in January 1998. In the process of compiling their report, the commissioners interviewed over 200 officials from Secretary of State Madeline Albright and former Presidents George Bush and Jimmy Carter to experts within the foreign policy community from both the United States and abroad.
The 170 page report advocates the creation of a National Director for Combating Proliferation. The Director would sit on the National Security Council (NSC) and head a new Combating Proliferation Council comprised of senior officials from each agency involved in WMD counter-proliferation. He or she would also be in charge of preparing an annual budget that would allocate funds to the various programs.
In addition to the role played by the Director in focusing executive attention on WMD proliferation, the Commission recommends an expanded role for the Vice President in supervising counter-proliferation programs. Should the Vice President be given a special mandate to oversee WMD counter-proliferation initiatives, counter-proliferation would have two strong advocates on the NSC, guaranteeing the issue high visibility.
The Commission's report comes at a time when national attention is increasingly focused on the threat from chemical and biological weapons proliferation. At a press conference announcing the report's release on Wednesday, Mr. Deutch contended that "terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States is a very real possibility." Former Nebraska Senator J. James Exon, a Commission member, stressed the threat to the United States from WMD. "While a nuclear threat by a foreign state remains a major concern," he said, "the threat of biological and chemical weapons -- particularly biological weapons -- is the most imminent near term threat to the interests of the United States." The commissioners believe that the need for action is so pressing that the President should intervene and establish the new agency by executive order instead of waiting for Congress to act on the Commission's suggestions.
Whether President Clinton follows the Commission's advice remains to be seen. In the meantime, several agencies have already taken steps to restructure and streamline their counter-proliferation programs. Last year the Department of Defense established the new Defense Threat Reduction Agency, bringing under one umbrella five formerly independent weapons proliferation and arms controls programs. While the Commission's report lauds DoD's efforts to prioritize non-proliferation, it states, "In spite of these developments, responsibility for proliferation-related issues remains so diffused as to make it impossible to determine who -- below the Deputy Secretary -- has the authority and the responsibility to integrate plans, policy, requirements and programs. That," the report reads, "is a serious problem."
Mr. Deutch spoke more positively about the recent restructuring within the Department of State. This past spring, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) was integrated into the State Department. John Holum, ACDA's chief, assumed the title of Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs; he will oversee diplomatic policy on arms control and proliferation issues. Deutch referred to the restructuring as "a positive step," but emphasized that even more work was needed.
Addressing questions about the report, Deutch, Specter and Exon continually emphasized the need to bring order to the government's woefully chaotic counter-proliferation infrastructure. According to Senator Specter, 96 agencies are involved in counter-proliferation in one capacity or another. The report describes these assistance programs as "Balkanized" and contends that the different agencies "do not appear to work closely with each other."
Senator Specter noted that there has been "considerable interest" in the Congress surrounding the Commission's recommendations. Among others, Senator John Warner (R-VA), Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has approached Specter regarding possible hearings on the issue before his committee some time this autumn.
Whether counter-proliferation reform begins in the Congress or in the Oval Office remains to be seen, but the Deutch Commission report gives ammunition to those who say that something needs to be done. What the commission hopes will be the outcome of its proposals is increased preparedness for and capability to react to a WMD attack from a terrorist group or rogue nation.
FMS Sales to Egypt Reported -- The Department of Defense has announced two possible weapons sales to Egypt. The government of Egypt has requested a possible sale of two UH-60L VIP Blackhawk utility helicopters and other related equipment in a sale valued at $38 million. According to DoD, Egypt, which already possesses US-made Blackhawk helicopters, "will use these helicopters to expand their intra-country transportation requirements, including the movement of their National Command Authority." A separate deal to foster "communicative interoperability" consists of radio sets, radar equipment, and other related materials and is valued at $50 million.
Inspections fail to find F-16 engine cracks -- An Air Force report released last week concluded that special inspections of F-16 afterburners failed to detect cracks that caused two crashes earlier this year. This occurred despite the fact that the Air Force was keeping close watch on the afterburners. In both crashes, which occurred in February and March and involved student pilots at Luke AFB in Arizona, the tail section caught fire. In each case the pilot ejected safely. The Air Force report described the special inspection procedure as "ineffective."
Navy: Puerto Rico Bombing Range Critical for Readiness -- According to the U.S. Navy, the bombing range on the island of Vieques in Puerto Rico is necessary to insure the readiness of its forces. Vieques is the only Atlantic range where the Navy can conduct full-scale live fire carrier exercises. The Puerto Rican government is demanding that the Navy leave Vieques, which has been closed since April 19 when a Navy-employed civilian security guard was killed during an accidental bombing. A panel appointed by President Clinton to make recommendations about Vieques is scheduled to release its report in August.
GAO: Humanitarian Missions Erode Fighting Skills -- In a report released this last week the General Accounting Office found that Operations Other Than War (OOTW) such as humanitarian assistance can erode the fighting skills of combat troops. Focusing on the Bosnia mission, the GAO noted that this erosion occurs most frequently in Army and Air Force combat units, but less so in support units. Marine Corps and Navy units, which are routinely forward deployed, are also less effected. The GAO recommended that if the number of OOTW missions is not reduced additional units should be restructured to perform peacekeeping missions.
This week on America's Defense Monitor: "War for Oil in the Former
Soviet Union?"
The U.S. maintains troops in the Middle East in order to preserve easy access to oil. Today, control of vast energy resources in the Caspian Sea region pits former republics of the Soviet Union against Russia and eachother. Questions about the U.S./NATO mission in Yugoslavia have led some to suspect a connection between the Balkans and Caspian oil. What, if any, is the role of the U.S. military in this area?
Airs in Washington, DC on Sunday, July 18 at 12:30 p.m. on Channel 32.
Airs in NYC on Friday, July 19 on Channel 25 at 8:30 p.m., and on
Saturday, July 20 at 7:00 a.m. on Channel 13.
For air dates in other cities, check your local listings.
Visit our Website for transcripts, CDI resources, RealVideo, and related
links.
E-mail adminfo@cdi.org with "subscribe" in the body of the message for
automatic updates on new videos.
Regular Price: $39 each
INTERNET PRICE: $29
Order at 800-CDI-3334, or on the web.