The U.S. armed services, widely recognized as the world’s most ready
and mobile military, is painting a picture of itself as a stagnant force
trapped at home under automatic spending cuts just three weeks away.
Army brigades won’t be ready to fight. Navy aircraft carriers won’t be deployed. The Air Force won’t be able to operate radar surveillance 24 hours a day.
The dire scenarios are contained in a series of memos sent to Congress and obtained by The Washington Times. They stir memories of the late 1970s, when the Army declared itself a “hollow force” because depleted combat units could not perform in a war.
(SEE RELATED: Navy to clip Blue Angels’ wings if sequester hits)
In the current instance, an Army
memo uses the physiological term “atrophy” to underscore a warning that
it will not be able to command brigade combat teams that can respond to
hot spots outside of Afghanistan and South Korea.
“The
strategic impact is a rapid atrophy of unit combat skills with a
failure to meet demands of the National Military Strategy by the end of
this year,” the Army wrote in a recent memo to Capitol Hill.
The Pentagon’s warnings are intended to prod Congress
and President Obama to reach a deal that averts “sequestration” —
automatic, across-the-board spending cuts set to begin March 1 that
would remove up to $500 billion from the projected 10-year defense
budget.
The debate moves to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, when the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testify in person on what their memos predict.
The Pentagon
already has cut more than $480 billion from its 10-year budget and is
operating under a continuing resolution that holds spending at 2012
levels. Under sequestration, the Pentagon would have to cut an additional $42 billion by Sept. 30 and as much as $500 billion over the next 10 years.
(SEE RELATED: Navy delays aircraft carrier deployment to Middle East)
If
sequestration were to occur briefly before politicians finally reach a
deal that kills it, the damage to military training and forces would be
minimal. But if it were to remain in place for several years, the
smaller military budgets would squeeze out ships, planes and troops.
“What it would mean is a smaller military,” said Todd Harrison, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment.
“It would be a military that would not be able to do all the missions
it is supposed to be able to do today. That’s the bottom line.”
Perhaps the Air Force’s quick review of a sequestered budget is the scariest. In its “Sequestration Implementation Plan,” the Air Force notes a lack of trained employees to manage “the nuclear enterprise,” referring to its arsenal of atomic missiles and bombs.
To meet a nearly $14 billion shortfall this year, the Air Force
would reduce worldwide military communications, stop testing some
weapons and cut flying hours, which would produce a less-ready fighter
and bomber fleet.
“Mitigating [overseas operations] shortfall and sequestration will have drastic/long lasting impacts,” the Air Force states.
No comments:
Post a Comment