Independent panel calls Obama’s downsizing of military “dangerous”

Rowan Scarborough reports for The Washington Times that on July 30, 2014, an independent panel appointed by the Pentagon and Congress said Obama’s plan to downsize the armed services is too weak for today’s global threats.

The National Defense Panel called on Obama to dump a major section of his 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and write a broader strategy that requires the military to fight on multiple fronts at once.

It also said the downsizing of U.S. armed forces to fit strategy and budget cuts is a “serious strategic misstep on the part of the United States.” The forces’ numbers spelled out in the 2014 QDR are “inadequate given the future strategic and operational environment.”

Congress authorized the panel of outside experts to review the QDR, a strategy for shaping the active and reserve force. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel appointed the panel’s two co-chairmen:

• Former Defense Secretary William Perry, who served under President Bill Clinton.
• Retired Army Gen. John Abizaid, who ran U.S. Central Command during the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq.

The panel also included national security experts who were in the Pentagon when some of the Obama administration budget decisions were being made, including retired Marine Gen. James Cartwright, former Joint Chiefs vice chairman, and Michele Flournoy, who served as under secretary of defense for policy until 2012.

The panel’s report said the past several years of budget cuts and mandated reduction in personnel and weapons have stirred deep unease among allies who would count on the U.S. in a crisis: “Not only have they caused significant investment shortfalls in U.S. military readiness and both present and future capabilities, they have prompted our current and potential allies and adversaries to question our commitment and resolve. Unless reversed, these shortfalls will lead to a high-risk force in the near future. That in turn will lead to an America that is not only less secure but also far less prosperous. In this sense, these cuts are ultimately self-defeating.”

The report calls the defense cuts “dangerous” as “global threats and challenges are rising,” and points to China’s and Russia’s new territorial claims, nuclear proliferation by Iran and North Korea and al Qaeda’s rapid rise in Iraq.

The panel also criticizes Obama’s QDR for reducing the military’s global mission from being able to defeat two enemies nearly simultaneously to defeating one and denying the objectives of a second. The report says the international security environment has deteriorated since the release of the 2014 QDR earlier this year. “In the current threat environment, America could plausibly be called upon to deter or fight in any number of regions in overlapping time frames.”

On the two-war requirement, the panel said: “We find the logic of the two-war construct to be as powerful as ever and note that the force sizing construct in the 2014 QDR strives to stay within the two-war tradition while using different language. But given the worsening threat environment, we believe a more expansive force sizing construct — one that is different from the two-war construct but no less strong — is appropriate.”

It proposes a new overriding strategy of taking on and stopping adversaries in multiple theaters of war.

The panel also maintains both the Navy and the Air Force are too small. Cuts in the number of Army soldiers “go too far,” while “The Air Force now fields the smallest and oldest force of combat aircraft in its history yet needs a global surveillance and strike force able to rapidly deploy to theaters of operation to deter, defeat or punish multiple aggressors simultaneously.”

Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-CA) said the independent review shows the QDR is more concerned with justifying budget cuts than meeting global security needs: “It is the same conclusion many Americans have already reached. There is a cost when America does not lead, and there are consequences when America disengages. What the president fails to understand — which the report points out — is that a strong military underwrites all other tools our nation has for global influence.”

Click here for the PDF of the Department of Defense’s Quadrennial Defense Review 2014.

See also:

• Obama admin to reduce US military to pre-WWII level
• Obama admin removes all battle tanks from Europe
• Commander says U.S. military not prepared for coming cyber war
• Pentagon official: U.S. budget will not allow an Asia pivot
• Obama’s Pentagon lays off thousands of military officers, incl. active duty
• US Marine Corps commandant openly blasts CIC Obama
• Former U.S. defense secretary: Obama incompetent; suspicious of military
• Former Air Force captain sounds alarm on crisis in U.S. military
• Obama admin wants $3.7 billion for illegals, but US troops in Afghanistan now gets only 2 hot meals a day
• Obama ignored advice of military & CIA against Bergdahl prisoner swap
• Obama admin actively recruits transgenders for the military
• Obama at West Point: speech panned by media; 25% standing ovation

~StMA