Pentagon Must Handle Spending Slowdown Responsibly, Lynn Says

NEW YORK, May 11, 2011 — Man­ag­ing a slow­down in defense spend­ing respon­si­bly will take more than being more effi­cient, Deputy Defense Sec­re­tary William J. Lynn III said here tonight.
As the keynote speak­er for the Roy­al Bank of Cana­da Defense and Aero­space Con­fer­ence, Lynn told an audi­ence at the Intre­pid Sea, Air and Space Muse­um that the Defense Depart­ment must find ways to spend sig­nif­i­cant­ly less, even in the midst of two active con­flicts and numer­ous oth­er com­mit­ments and threats.

“It would be desir­able to defer this chal­lenge until a some­what lat­er date, after the tran­si­tion in Iraq is com­plete and we are clos­er to hand­ing off the com­bat mis­sion in Afghanistan to local forces,” Lynn said. “But the deficit cri­sis does­n’t allow us that lux­u­ry. We need to get our fis­cal house in order, and we need to do it expe­di­tious­ly.” The deficit cri­sis, he said, is a mat­ter of nation­al security. 

“Our secu­ri­ty begins with a strong econ­o­my,” he explained. “Our abil­i­ty to exert glob­al influ­ence [and] pro­tect inter­ests abroad is threat­ened if we’re not able to reduce the deficit and to keep our nation­al debt with­in sus­tain­able bounds. No great pow­er can project mil­i­tary force with­out a sound econ­o­my. … Deficits are now approach­ing 10 per­cent of our econ­o­my, and aus­ter­i­ty mea­sures are required to have long-term health.” 

Pres­i­dent Barack Oba­ma has made clear that painful cuts in fed­er­al spend­ing are nec­es­sary, Lynn said. “Every­thing has to be on the table: rev­enues, enti­tle­ments, domes­tic dis­cre­tionary spend­ing and defense spend­ing,” he told the audi­ence. “The defense bud­get alone can­not solve our deficit cri­sis. But it’s hard to envi­sion an over­all solu­tion — either eco­nom­i­cal­ly or polit­i­cal­ly — that does not include some con­tri­bu­tion from the 20 per­cent of gov­ern­ment spend­ing that goes toward defense.” 

For the Defense Depart­ment to accom­plish this draw­down while engaged in Afghanistan and tran­si­tion­ing secu­ri­ty respon­si­bil­i­ty in Iraq — while still remain­ing ready to inter­vene else­where when nation­al secu­ri­ty inter­ests are at risk — pol­i­cy mak­ers and indus­try exec­u­tives alike will need to per­form “a high-wire act,” Lynn said. 

“For [the Defense Depart­ment], how to slow defense spend­ing respon­si­bly while retain­ing the most effec­tive fight­ing force in the world is the cen­tral task,” he said. “For indus­try, how to adjust to a less-robust defense mar­ket while main­tain­ing tech­no­log­i­cal prowess is their cen­tral task. 

“Togeth­er,” he con­tin­ued, “we must man­age our resources with­out hol­low­ing out our armed forces and with­out jeop­ar­diz­ing our indus­tri­al base. We must accom­mo­date fis­cal changes with­out under­cut­ting our mil­i­tary effec­tive­ness, now or in the future.” 

The deputy sec­re­tary told the audi­ence that that nation has reached the fifth inflec­tion point in post-World War II defense spend­ing. The first three draw­downs came at the end of con­flicts: World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. 

“The fourth draw­down came in the mid-1980s, and was some­what anal­o­gous to the one we face today,” Lynn said. “Deficits dur­ing the ear­ly Rea­gan admin­is­tra­tion caused Con­gress to impose spend­ing caps, which led to defense reduc­tions, and those reduc­tions were accel­er­at­ed as the Cold War end­ed and the Sovi­et Union broke up.” All of the tran­si­tions had some­thing in com­mon, Lynn said: each time, the Defense Depart­ment suf­fered a dis­pro­por­tion­ate loss of capa­bil­i­ty and sub­se­quent­ly had to rebuild those capa­bil­i­ties, often urgent­ly and at great cost. 

“And each time, the indus­tri­al base strug­gled to reverse course,” he added. “So in oth­er words, we’re 0‑for‑4 in man­ag­ing draw­downs to this point. To improve the play­ing field, we have to do bet­ter on this drawdown.” 

Four broad lessons from pri­or draw­downs should apply this time around, Lynn said. The first, he said, is to make hard deci­sions early. 

“Things are not going to get bet­ter,” he said. “There’s going to be less, not more, mon­ey in the future, and even well-man­aged pro­grams expe­ri­ence some cost growth. So if we can­not afford it now, we cer­tain­ly won’t be able to afford it when funds are tight. Giv­en our bud­get chal­lenges, it is irre­spon­si­ble to embark on pro­grams that we sim­ply can­not afford. We need to live with­in the resource lev­els that we’re going to have, and to do that we need to make the hard deci­sions now.” The sec­ond les­son, Lynn said, is that pure effi­cien­cies alone can­not gen­er­ate the need­ed savings. 

“By pure effi­cien­cies, I mean doing the same mis­sion, the same thing, just at less cost,” he explained. “We can gen­er­ate some sav­ings in that way. Cloud com­put­ing, I think, offers the poten­tial to hold down or even reduce infor­ma­tion tech­nol­o­gy costs while giv­ing us greater capa­bil­i­ty. But we’re not going to find enough of those pure effi­cien­cies to get the required savings.” 

That means elim­i­na­tion of pro­grams that are valu­able, but not valu­able enough to sus­tain in the fore­see­able bud­get envi­ron­ment, Lynn said. “The ’nice-to-haves’ must go,” he added. “We have to pare back to our core mis­sions, to the essen­tial goals the depart­ment needs to main­tain.” The third les­son from past draw­downs, the deputy sec­re­tary said, is the need to bal­ance reductions. 

“Reduc­tions focused on just a sin­gle area like oper­a­tional accounts hol­low out the force by depriv­ing it of the need­ed train­ing and main­te­nance resources,” he said. “Sim­i­lar­ly, dis­pro­por­tion­ate cuts in the invest­ment accounts just pro­duce a pro­cure­ment hol­i­day, which we then have to buy back at great cost at a lat­er time, prob­a­bly with some urgency.” To avoid that, Lynn said, bal­anced reduc­tions across force struc­ture, oper­at­ing accounts and invest­ment accounts are required. “We do not want to end up the process with a force of the same size that could do all of the things that we do now, just not as well,” he said. “We need to choose the capa­bil­i­ties we’re going to retain and choose the ones that we’re not going to retain.” 

The final les­son from pri­or draw­downs is not to cut too much too fast, espe­cial­ly from core mis­sion mis­sions, Lynn said. “Rebuild­ing capa­bil­i­ties five, 10, 15 years from now comes with a cost mul­ti­pli­er, and cost is not the only price that we pay,” he said. “We pay for these deci­sions with the lives and wel­fare of our troops.” 

Lynn cit­ed the post-World War II draw­down as an exam­ple, not­ing it caused U.S. forces to pay a high price in the ini­tial stages of the Kore­an con­flict. “We don’t want to make cuts today that we’re going to regret in the near or midterm future,” he said. 

Defense Sec­re­tary Robert M. Gates antic­i­pat­ed the sit­u­a­tion and shift­ed the Pentagon’s fis­cal and strate­gic approach in accor­dance with the lessons from pre­vi­ous draw­downs, Lynn said. 

“In the past two years, we have been mak­ing tough deci­sions and we’ve been been mak­ing them ear­ly,” he said, not­ing the depart­ment end­ed pur­chas­es of F‑22 fight­er jets and C‑17 trans­ports and ter­mi­nat­ed the pres­i­den­tial heli­copter pro­gram, which was over cost, behind sched­ule and had require­ments that exceed­ed its mis­sion needs. 

The Defense Depart­ment also is clos­ing less-essen­tial orga­ni­za­tions, such as U.S. Joint Forces Com­mand, Lynn said, and has pro­posed con­di­tions-based reduc­tions in the Army and the Marine Corps begin­ning in fis­cal 2015 and 2016. Offi­cials are phas­ing the reduc­tions in over sev­er­al years, he added, to avoid pre­cip­i­tous cuts. 

“If we con­tin­ue this same approach and take seri­ous­ly the lessons of his­to­ry,” he said, “we can avoid going 0‑for‑5 in man­ag­ing defense drawdowns.” 

U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs) 

Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →