U.S. Domestic and Foreign Security Challenges, 2012
Jeffrey D. McCausland, Phillip McCausland
February 13, 2012
| 3rd Brigade Combat Team (BCT), 82nd Airborne Division CREDIT: The U.S. Army |
The first month of the new year contained a remarkable number of developments and challenges for the United States, both domestically and internationally.
Domestic Security Issues
Defense Budget Cut and Budget Guidance
In early January. President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta presented a strategic outline that shifts greater attention to the Pacific theater while reshaping the uniformed services to become smaller, more agile, and cheaper in the years ahead. The eight page report, Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for the 21st Century, was initially short on specifics of just how the defense department would carry out the $450 billion in cuts over the next ten years (and potentially another half trillion dollars under sequestration), and neither the president nor the secretary were willing to provide any real details.
Panetta outlined that the cuts would follow four overarching principles:
- Maintain the world's finest military;
- Avoid hollowing out the force;
- Generate savings in a balanced manner with everything on the table, including politically sensitive areas; and
- Preserve a high quality All-Volunteer Force and not breaking faith with our men and women in uniform or their families.
In his remarks Secretary Panetta observed the "country is at a strategic turning point after a decade of war and, therefore we are shaping a joint force for the future that will be smaller and leaner, but will be agile, flexible, ready, and technologically advanced."
The full details likely won't be known until the President submits his budget request on 13 February. But it was abundantly clear that there would be major changes to nearly all facets of defense programs and forces—including end strength and personnel costs.
Pay and health care cuts are also likely part of the plan as the report calls for "reducing the growth of compensation and health care costs." It's safe to assume that some sort of pay freeze or reduced annual pay raises as well as health care fee increases will make their way into the February proposal. Panetta acknowledged in his opening statement that "savings...will likely provoke opposition from parts of Congress, industry, and advocacy groups." Still the secretary of defense argued that the coming round of defense budget cuts will differ from previous drawdowns, "where the threat kind of went away."
The new defense strategy guidance that President Barack Obama announced also underscored the growing strategic importance of Asia and the Pacific. Despite assurances from the U.S. president that Thursday's announced defense cuts will not come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific region, there was some nervousness in South Korea. Consequently, Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell travelled to South Korea to assure the Seoul government that there would be no U.S. troop reductions from the peninsula.
Later in the month the Pentagon did outline a plan for slowing the growth of military spending, including cutting the size of the Army and Marine Corps, retiring older planes, and trimming war costs. These reductions reflect the administration's plans to fulfill the obligations from the budget deficit-cutting deal Congress made last summer. As part of this agreement the Pentagon is committed to reducing projected spending by $487 billion over the next ten years. The plan presented by Secretary Panetta covers the first five years of that span and would cut a cumulative total of $259 billion in planned spending.
The announcement drew quick criticism from Republicans in Congress as well as those campaigning for the presidency. This signals the difficulty of scaling back defense budgets in an election year. Representative Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, was one of the loudest critics of these proposals, despite the fact that he voted for the bill last August that established the requirement for $487 billion in defense savings over five years.
Panetta said the administration will ask Congress for $525 billion to run the Pentagon in 2013—$6 billion less than the current budget. War costs, which are not considered part of the base budget, would decline from $115 billion to $88 billion, reflecting the completion of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.
The base budget would then increase in each year of the Pentagon's five-year plan, reaching $567 billion in 2017. A year ago the Pentagon had projected 2017 spending to reach $622 billion. The Pentagon counts those reductions in projected future spending as "defense savings." When Obama took office in January 2009 the Pentagon's base budget was $513 billion. In 2001 it was $297 billion.
In a bid to pre-empt election-year Republican criticism, Panetta said the plan begins to shift the Pentagon's focus from the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to future challenges in Asia, the Mideast and in cyberspace. More special operations forces like the Navy SEALs who killed Osama bin Laden will be available around the world, he said, and the Pentagon will stress improvements in cyberdefenses.
Under these proposals the Army would shrink from a peak of 570,000 to 490,000 within five years, and the Marines would drop by 20,000, to 182,000. Those are considerable declines, but both services will still be slightly larger than on 9/11, before they began a decade of war. Both will keep their footholds abroad, although the Army will decrease its presence in Europe and the Marines plan to increase theirs in Asia.
As part of the new strategy, the Pentagon announced that two brigade combat teams (BCTs) would be removed from Europe and likely leave the force. The Army also stated that it intends to rotate other units in their place to ensure the service maintains four BCTs in that part of the world.
Overall this decision appears to be just the first step in a larger, working plan that could cut ten BCTs from the service's active force. In the face of the pending budget cuts, the Army is considering cutting five heavy BCTs and five infantry BCTs, shrinking its ground force from 45 to 35 BCTs, according to a senior Army official.
Currently, the Army's active ground force is made up of 22 infantry BCTs, 15 heavy BCTs, seven Stryker BCTs and the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which has been designated to transform into another Stryker BCT. For now, the Army plans to retain all of its Stryker BCTs. Stryker units are the largest in the BCT structure, with three maneuver battalions. It's still unclear which of the five heavy and five infantry BCTs the Army will cut from the active force, but combat capability and strategic location inside the U.S. and abroad are some of the considerations.
One option to achieve the total reduction is to look at cutting headquarters elements from some BCTs and attaching the maneuver battalions to other BCT formations. Another option places greater emphasis on the National Guard and Reserve units. A recent study by the Institute for Defense Analysis recommended that that Army move some of its heavy BCTs to the National Guard. But this is not a popular solution inside the Pentagon, since many argue that it would take longer to bring a heavy unit in the Guard up to deployment readiness.
Secretary of Defense Panetta also announced the following reductions:
- The Air Force would retire some older planes, including about two dozen C-5A cargo aircraft and 65 of its oldest C-130 cargo planes.
- The Navy would keep a fleet of 11 aircraft carriers, but retire seven cruisers earlier than planned. It also would delay purchase of some other ships, including a new Virginia-class submarine.
- Purchase of F-35 stealth fighter jets (JSF), to be fielded by the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps, would be slowed. Panetta is expected to formally announce a long-telegraphed 40 precent reduction of planned U.S. procurement of the JSF while it is still in development. Some experts expect the Pentagon to eventually announce a procurement plan of 244 jets in the period 2013-17 versus a plan of 423 one year ago. International sales for the same period should be about 230 jets and could actually surpass U.S. annual purchases by FY (Financial Year) 2016.
- Current plans for building a new generation of submarines that carry long-range nuclear missiles would be delayed by two years. The current fleet of nuclear-capable bombers and land-based nuclear missiles would be left unchanged.
- Military pay raises will remain on track until 2015, when the pace of increase will be slowed by an undetermined amount.
- President Obama will ask Congress to approve a new round of domestic base closures, although the timing of this was left vague and there is little chance that lawmakers would agree to this in a presidential election year.
Secretary of Defense Panetta also announced that the STOVL (Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing) JSF, the Marines' F35B, is off "probation." He made this announcement during a visit to the Naval Aviation Development Command at Patuxent River, Maryland which is the site of half of the JSF testing. This means that the aircraft will continue normal developmental testing along with the Air Force F35A and Navy F35C and is in no apparent danger of cancellation. After slow test progress in 2010, former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates placed the most complex and expensive of the three variants in the unofficial category one year ago, purposely sending strong signals that development of the variant could be dropped to simplify the Department of Defense's largest procurement program.
The announcement is reportedly based on a very successful initial at-sea trial period last fall when the STOVL demonstrated that it could safely operate from a large deck amphibious ship. The plane also had a strong 2011 test performance where it completed 12 percent more test points than planned to include over 270 vertical landings. The Marines have planned to buy 340 of the aircraft over the next ten years. Italy is the only current international customer of the STOVL, planning to buy about 60. Panetta's announcement could help sales with other potential customers who are enticed by the variant's ability to operate from short (4000') and damaged runways.
Guard Bureau Chief Joins Joint Chiefs of Staff
The chief of the National Guard Bureau now is a statutory member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Air Force General Craig R. McKinley became a member of the Joint Chiefs on 31 December, when President Barack Obama signed the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. Overall the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act provided $670 billion in spending for Defense Department programs and Energy Department nuclear weapons programs. Other provisions that affected the National Guard include re-establishing the position of vice chief of the National Guard Bureau at the three-star level while rescinding the two-star position of director of the bureau's joint staff. Additionally, the new law also requires that National Guard general officers be considered for command of U.S. Army North and U.S. Air Force North, and it authorizes funding for the National Guard's State Partnership Program.
Important Dates for Defense Planning
Here is an estimated timeline of when important actions will occur in the second session of the 112th Congress:
Mid February: The president will submit his annual budget proposals to Congress. On or before this date we'll find out exactly what the Pentagon and Administration will propose in order to cut $450 billion in defense spending over the next decade. Pay freezes, manpower cuts, TRICARE fee increases, retirement changes, and more could be included in the proposal.
Late March: Six weeks after the president delivers his budget to Congress, congressional committees are required to submit their "views and estimates" of spending and revenues within their respective jurisdictions to the House and Senate Budget Committees.
April: House and Senate Budget Committees draft and mark up concurrent resolution on the budget, which sets spending limits for the year. April 15 is the deadline for completion of action on the budget resolution (though partisan and fiscal differences have precluded approval of a formal budget resolution in recent years, and that may prove true again in 2012.)
May: The House and Senate Armed Services Committees will likely begin work on the FY2013 Defense Authorization Bill, including any changes that may be imposed by budget resolution spending limits.
May to July: Full House and Senate pass their respective versions of the defense bill.
July-October: House and Senate negotiators resolve differences between their respective versions.
October-December: Final Defense Authorization Bill passed by House and Senate and becomes law.
November 6: Presidential and Congressional elections.
December 31: Deadline to pass an alternative debt reduction plan in order to avoid the sequestration process that will cut another $600 billion from defense spending over the next decade.
President's State of the Union Address
Not surprisingly, the President's State of the Union Address primarily focused on the nation's economy. It was interesting, however, that he started and ended with comments about national security. He suggested that the Congress could take a lesson from the military that focuses on the mission and what is best for the nation.
President Obama observed at the very onset of his remarks that there are now no American troops in Iraq. While this is true for combat forces, a sizeable American contingent does remain to secure our embassy which is the largest one the U.S. has on the planet and to conduct a security assistance mission with the Iraqis. He further pointed out that for the first time in over 20 years Osama bin Laden does not pose a threat to American security.
With respect to Afghanistan, the President claimed that the Taliban's momentum had been halted. Some might take exception to this claim based on the National Intelligence Estimate (discussed below) which was released a few days after his remarks. He further reiterated the plan to reduce American forces in Afghanistan to roughly 67,000 by the fall of 2012. This will be followed by the Afghan security forces assuming a greater degree of responsibility for the security of their nation.
He also touched briefly on a number of disparate security issues. For example, President Obama argued that energy independence was now a national security issue and indicated that the Department of Defense was committed to reducing its energy demands. The president further stated quite firmly that President Assad of Syria has no future and should step down.
The president spent a bit more time on the issue of Iran. He argued that the world was much more united today in opposition to Iran's aspirations to acquire nuclear weapons. He further underscored his belief that Tehran is more isolated in the international community and that the new sanctions imposed on Iran were having a significant effect. He concluded this section of his remarks by reiterating his support for Israel and noted that cooperation between Israel and the United States was closer than at any time in history.
International Security Issues
National Intelligence Estimate on Afghanistan
The U.S. intelligence community says in a classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that the war in Afghanistan is mired in stalemate, and warns that security gains from an increase in American troops have been undercut by pervasive corruption, incompetent governance and Taliban fighters operating from neighboring Pakistan. This sobering judgment appeared at odds with recent optimistic statements by Pentagon officials, and has deepened divisions between U.S. intelligence agencies and American military commanders about progress in the decade-old war.
The detailed document runs more than 100 pages and represents the consensus view of the CIA and 15 other U.S. intelligence agencies. Similar in tone to an NIE prepared a year ago, it challenges the Pentagon's claim to have achieved lasting security gains in Taliban strongholds in southern Afghanistan, according to American officials who have read or been briefed on its contents. In a section looking at future scenarios, the NIE also asserts that the Afghan government in Kabul may not be able to survive, as the U.S. and its NATO allies steadily pulls out their troops and reduces military and civilian assistance.
Although the review gives the U.S. military and its allies credit for driving the Taliban out of some areas last year, it says the gains were not enough to bolster the weak central government in Kabul, haven't diminished the Taliban's will to keep fighting, and haven't instilled confidence among Afghans in much of the country. As a result, the NIE warns that the overall difficulties could jeopardize the Obama administration's plans to withdraw most U.S. troops and hand over responsibility for the war to the Afghan government by 2014.
The findings prompted a sharp response from Marine Corps General John Allen, the U.S. commander of Western forces in the war, and Ryan Crocker, the American ambassador to Afghanistan. They filed their objections in a one-page written dissent. The comment was also signed by Marine Corps General James Mattis, commander of Central Command, and Admiral James Stavridis, supreme allied commander of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Military and Pentagon officials argued that assumptions used by intelligence agencies were flawed. They noted that the NIE called for a more rapid drawdown in support to the Afghan government than planned. Military officials also cited what they claim are gaps in the intelligence agencies' understanding of the Taliban leadership's thinking, the officials said. Army General David H. Petraeus wrote a dissent to last year's NIE when he was U.S. commander in the war. He is now CIA director, and he pledged during his Senate confirmation hearings not to allow his personal views as a former commander to color the CIA's analysis.
The recent NIE does agree with the military that Afghan Taliban fighters have found safe haven in Pakistan's tribal areas. After a six-week lull, CIA drone strikes resumed in North Waziristan, but U.S. officials warned that drone strikes alone cannot prevent Afghan insurgents from regrouping there.
The Taliban has suffered heavy losses, particularly in southern Afghanistan, but it also has gained ground in the country's east, near Pakistan, according to officials briefed on the NIE. But the intelligence community is not convinced that military gains in the south can be maintained once large numbers of U.S. forces withdraw.
The Afghan army, and in particular, the police, face enormous problems contending with the insurgency as U.S. assistance declines, the document concluded. But it also raised doubts about whether Afghan civilian ministries can govern successfully in the south and other areas.
Pentagon planners assume that a residual force will remain to train and assist the Afghans, but the White House has yet to sign off on that. The Obama administration is negotiating a long-term military alliance with the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
It is worth remembering that national intelligence estimates often carry significant weight in U.S. policy circles, although they are hardly immune from errors. Most famously, the 2002 NIE on Iraq judged with high confidence that Saddam Hussein was secretly amassing chemical and biological weapons, and trying to build a nuclear bomb. The George W. Bush administration repeatedly cited that NIE before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, but it ultimately was proved inaccurate in almost every respect.
Talks with the Taliban?
Afghan Taliban negotiators have been holding meetings with U.S. officials in Qatar aimed at building trust between the two sides prior to commencing actual peace talks. The administration's top negotiator, Marc Grossman, has also spent a significant amount of time building support for talks among regional allies such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia prior to actual discussions with Taliban representatives. It appears that the Pakistani government has also endorsed this effort. The Taliban officials were issued travel documents and flew from Islamabad to Qatar. In the immediate aftermath of the initial report of these discussions the Pakistani foreign minister travelled to Kabul for discussions with the Karzai government.
As part of this process the Taliban will soon announce opening of an office in Qatar that will serve as coordinating point for these discussions. The U.S. has set clear conditions, however, for opening this office. These included assurances that the Taliban will not to use it for fundraising or propaganda, or to run insurgent operations.
The Obama administration has expressed new confidence that talks with the Taliban offer the best chance yet to end the ten-year-old war in Afghanistan. This is despite warnings from the intelligence community that the Taliban is more interested in continuing fighting than making peace. To guard against the Taliban using the talks to boost its standing, while delivering little in return, the U.S. has laid out confidence-building measures or specific steps that the U.S. and the insurgents agree to take ahead of formal talks. These include renouncing international terrorism and the release of at least one American soldier who is believed to be still in Taliban custody.
The Taliban has also suggested that the United States should reciprocate and release three to five Taliban detainees now held at Guantanamo. These prisoners would be transferred to Qatar and held under house arrest. This could pose particular problems for Washington. It would require the secretary of defense to certify to Congress that the government of Qatar has agreed to control them in fashion that the U.S. finds acceptable and not allow them to become a threat to the United States in future.
It is widely believed that Afghan President Karzai is still uneasy with the pace and direction of talks. The Afghan government will not be a direct participant in these negotiations at the onset. Consequently, Karzai is worried that the United States will strike a deal with the Taliban and force that deal on his government. There are reports that Karzai has approached the Saudi Arabian government about the possibility of them hosting parallel negotiations between the Karzai government and the Taliban on Saudi territory.
The diplomatic, military and intelligence branches of the U.S. government differ, however, over the value of talks with the Taliban or whether now is the right time to so publicly shift focus away from the ongoing military campaign that primarily targets Taliban insurgents. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and some uniformed military leaders recently have sounded some of the strongest notes of caution, especially on when to grant Taliban requests for the transfer of several of its prisoners from Guantanamo.
The U.S. intelligence assessment predicts the likely outcome of two strategies: Moderate engagement, in which the U.S. continues special operations raids against key Taliban leaders, and village outreach to strengthen local government, while conventional forces train Afghanistan's army and police force. Limited engagement, in which the U.S. would continue economic and political support, and some Afghan security training, but most troops would withdraw. Both strategies can weaken the Taliban, but ultimately neither course of action is likely to stop the continued weakening of the Afghan state according to intelligence experts.
Syria
The situation in Syria continues to worsen. A senior United Nations official says 400 people have been killed in Syria since an Arab League monitoring mission deployed there in January. The Russian foreign minister gave a speech in which he said that Moscow would veto any attempt by the Security Council to use military force against the Assad government. Moscow has continued to live up to this claim, as it appears poised to block any effort in the UN Security Council. Some experts now believe that over 5000 people have died in the violence in Syria which could be more people than were killed in the Libyan conflict.
Iran
The Iranian currency hit an all time low against the U.S. dollar of over 18,000 rials to one dollar. The Obama administration appears to be working with key allies and others to coordinate the new effort to dramatically reduce Iran's ability to export oil. Senior discussions have occurred with European leaders as well as those in South Korea, Japan, and China on the enforcement of new sanctions.
Both the United States and Israel did attempt to make definitive statements with respect to their policies towards Tehran. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak stated that any decision on whether to attack Iran's nuclear program is "very far off." A senior U.S. State Department official also said that the Obama administration does not seek regime change in Tehran. Still rumors about a possible attack by Israel against Iran's nuclear facilities appear frequently.
Media Security Issues
The following is a brief summary of the other major national security issues that the media focused on during the month of January.
French Operations in Afghanistan
President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that France was considering the suspension of all joint combat operations and training programs for Afghan troops after an Afghan National Army soldier apparently shot and killed four French soldiers and wounded many others in eastern Afghanistan. Later in the month Sarkozy announced that France would pull the majority of its forces out of Afghanistan by the end of 2012. This caused some unease in Washington, as some officials worried that this might result in more NATO partners announcing similar withdrawals. Most observers attributed the announcement by Sarkozy to the fact that his primary opponent in upcoming national elections has firmly indicated his desire to remove all French forces from Afghanistan.
Marines Defiling Taliban Dead
A video appeared on YouTube that appears to show four Marines urinating on dead Taliban insurgents. Both Washington and the command in Afghanistan were quick to respond. General John Allen condemned the behavior, and Secretary of Defense Panetta announced a full investigation in an effort to contain the damage both in the United States and abroad. The Marine Corps subsequently announced that LTG Thomas Waldhauser would oversee the investigation which will be conducted in concert with a criminal probe by the Naval Criminal Investigation Service. The Marines were members of the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines, which had conducted operations in Helmand province for seven months and returned to its base at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina in September.
New "Commando" Ship
It is reported that the Pentagon is rushing to send a large floating base for commando teams to the Middle East. This is in response to new tensions with Iran, the threat posed by al-Qaeda in Yemen, and the continuing problem of Somali pirates. This is in response to requests from the U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East. The Navy is converting an aging warship it had planned to decommission into a makeshift staging base for the commandos. Unofficially dubbed a "mothership," the floating base could accommodate smaller high-speed boats and helicopters commonly used by Navy SEALs. This is also consistent with the administration's desire to place greater emphasis on special operations forces.
It is unclear, however, where it will be deployed in the Middle East. It does appear that the Navy is moving with unusual haste to complete the conversion and send the "mothership" to the region by early summer. A market survey proposal from the Military Sealift Command, dated December 22 and posted online, states that the floating base needed to be delivered to the Persian Gulf. Other contract documents do not specify a location but say the "mothership" would be used to "support mine countermeasure" missions. Defense officials have said that if Iran did attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz, it would rely on mines to obstruct the waterway.
General Observations
As we look ahead I would make the following final comments:
The Defense Budget
The president will deliver his defense budget for fiscal year 2013 on February 13th. This will be hotly debated, as many Republicans have already indicated their opposition to the President's new strategy. In the background is also the issue of "sequestration." It is very likely that many in Congress will attempt to reverse the legislation that was passed last autumn that created the so-called "Supercommittee." This agreement between the White House and Congress called for an additional $500 billion if defense cuts if the "Supercommittee" failed to agree on $1.2 trillion in budget reductions.
Syria
The situation in Syria continues to deteriorate. The Arab League has now removed its observer team, and it appears any action by the UN is unlikely due to both Russian and Chinese opposition. The Assad regime does not seem willing or interested in any negotiations. A full scale civil war seems likely, and this could have serious repercussions in the region.
Iran
The situation with Iran appears to be worsening. Secretary Panetta commented in January that DoD analysts believe Tehran could develop a nuclear weapon within one year. The recent visit by IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspectors to Iran was clearly a failure, and there have repeated reports of a possible attack by Israel on Iran's nuclear facilities.
Read More: Afghanistan War, Armed Conflict, Iraq War, U.S. Foreign Policy, War on Terror , Middle East, Asia, Global, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, United States
