Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Jeff Emanuel offers some insights into President Obama's military cutbacks, announced today at a press conference. As Emanuel notes, it wasn't really a press conference, since the president ducked out after initial remarks. He writes:
There’s no question that an agile, flexible, etc. military has its benefits, particularly in an age of widely-diffused, rapidly-emerging threats; however, just how that more agile military is designed and arrived at is an important issue, particularly in light of how stretched the total force has been over the last decade. Though long-term counterinsurgency operations will likely be avoided as much as possible in the near future (particularly by the current administration), and though unmanned ISR and offensive operations are being conducted with greater and greater frequency, there is clear danger in drawing down our nation’s force too far too fast, as well as in indiscriminately slashing defense funding.
Personally, I am concerned Obama's solution in this case isn't up to the challenge. You can't rebuild a force by cutting out troops - like it or not, we're still a nation at war, and as such, a better approach would be working to give the force we need more rest and longer lull time, rather than reducing numbers and increasing the strain on those who serve.
Here's the rub: While the language of "leaner and more agile" sounds good in principle, what does it really mean? Distinguishing between cutting out fat and cutting out brigades is the important aspect of this. Obama is describing a goal, and perhaps a worthy one, but getting there is the problem. Our experience over the past decade has shown us that small and agile forces work great for the first punch, but they can't do the security or counterinsurgency operations our political leaders have demanded afterwards.
It appears that this move marks the true end of the counter-insurgency approach engineered by General Petraeus. Despite the set-backs in Afghanistan, COIN was hugely successful in Iraq, and is really only just beginning to permeate military doctrine in a meaningful way at the training level. But in this case, it is reduced to the ninth strategy point, and its relegation is obvious. From the accompanying strategy document:
In the aftermath of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States will emphasize non-military means and military-to-military cooperation to address instability and reduce the demand for significant U.S. force commitments to stability operations. U.S. forces will nevertheless be ready to conduct limited counterinsurgency and other stability operations if required, operating alongside coalition forces wherever possible. Accordingly, U.S. forces will retain and continue to refine the lessons learned, expertise, and specialized capabilities that have been developed over the past ten years of counterinsurgency and stability operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, U.S. forces will no longer be sized to conduct large-scale, prolonged stability operations.
To my eyes, this looks like a true abandonment of COIN as envisioned by Petraeus. As Vice Chairman Winnefeld wrote recently:
“We are not likely to have as our next fight a counterinsurgency," he said. While America has been teaching its troops Arabic and other regional languages, training them how to win friends and influence people at the village and provincial levels, "the world has changed," Winnefeld said. America's enemies and competitors are "coming up with new asymmetric advantages. They've been studying us closely...," he said. So, "we need to avoid the temptation to look in our rear view mirror.”
And this extends beyond the Army’s thresholds—hence this comment from the Marine Corps Commandant: “I’m pretty confident … that over the next 12 months that we can transition from what you would call classic counterinsurgency operations to ... training and advising.” This sentiment applies not just to the changing mission in Afghanistan, but also to the overarching purpose of the Marine Corps, which is looking to reclaim its individual mission from that of the Army or other services.
The difficulty for the Army is the lack of training capability on either of these fronts—either on the Big Army tactics pre-Petraeus (which have been largely ignored at the training level for some time now) or on the hybrid that is likely to come next. With these latest announcements, it appears likely that General Petraeus's legacy will drift away into the sands.
One last aside: In general, I favor cuts in Defense, but targeted at the tail, not the tooth. The challenge of bringing down the costs of defending the country are increasingly about the cost of post-service entitlements, one that is extremely difficult politically. There's an important distinction to be made here between general entitlements and military benefits earned through service and sacrifice. If such a differentiation can be made, it might make steps such as reform of Tricare (which retains absurdly low copays) more palatable.
Perhaps not. But even so, that's where cuts must be made, along with reassessing weapons systems and bureaucratic bloat. Our goal in funding defense needs to be simple: every dollar spent must be focused on supporting the warfighter as the first priority. How we get there will take real leadership - the hard kind, not the press conference kind.
- Comment (41)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Aug '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Carter II Sigint is a clue.
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Yes. And: Oh no.
Aug '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
"Leaner and more agile..."
Wasn't that Rumsfeld's idea of the future of the military?
Dec '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Ben, I think it's time we stopped the pussey footing and took the gloves off. This man in the White House is a fifth column. He literally is sabotaging the defense, the economic health and the moral structure of this nation. He will strip the military of fighting capability. We will not be able to project the power we need in this chaotic world.
The other evening I tried to get an indepth conversation started with Byron Horatio's post on Asymetrical Fantasy. I wanted to know what real military people think our needs will be in the future. We got some interesting discussion going but not enough.
I am particularly interested in the F35. I know someone you might say was the bean counter's bean counter. He is giving the F35 a very hard time. He seems harmless enough in person. I think he has been seduced by the left wing limelight that his stand creates for him. Always a hard working wonk, now he has a chance to look heroic to the lefties by spearing the F35. (cont.)
Edited on Jan 5 at 8:22pmRe: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Nathaniel Wright: "Leaner and more agile..."
Wasn't that Rumsfeld's idea of the future of the military? · Jan 5 at 8:16pm
Yes, Emanuel makes that point in his piece.
Dec '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
(cont. from #4)
I more recently talked to this other guy. He is real airforce. Middle level he did a lot of training all over the world. He thinks the F35 is a good plane. It's expensive as hell he says but it's worth it.
Frankly Scarlet, I just may upset the bean counter's bean tray the next time I see him.
Edited on Jan 5 at 8:27pmSep '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Um... could you elaborate, please? I'm too dull to figure this out.
Feb '11
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
I agree totally. I wish the Republican candidates would stop their idiotic petty sniping at each other and start directing their fire at the real problem - Barack Obama and everything he believes in. This election should be a political Mariana Turkey Shoot with Obama leading the first enemy wave. Instead, we've got a circular firing squad.
Edited on Jan 5 at 9:03pmDec '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Snow, we are going to have quite a year. 2012 here we come.
Jun '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
I think you've hit it on the head. Tricare and the money siphoned off for the Post-9/11 GI Bill are killing us.
First, an example of the education black hole: I fall under the old MGIB. I get paid a flat rate per month while enrolled in college to pay tuition, books, fees, etc. I can maximize my value by going to a community college or state school so that I don't have to get a job to cover rent and other expenses, or I can work something out with the school. I'm a Soldier, managing my own affairs shouldn't be too difficult. It can be tight, but it works. Under the new system, however... yippee! The Army sends a check for pretty much the full tuition rate to the college and sends the veteran a monthly check for E-5 with dependents BAH rate based on the zip code of the college he's attending. Pretty sweet for the college, huh? Not so great for the taxpayer.
Jun '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
How this would come out for the college I attend looks like this:
MGIB: $1,473/month per semester, full course load.
Post-9/11: $21,000 tuition paid directly to the school, plus $995/month to the veteran.
Multiply that by several hundred thousand and you'll see why we can run into problems.
Regarding Tricare, I now pay cash when I visit my primary care physician and optometrist because neither one can afford to see Tricare recipients anymore. I've been seeing my optometrist since I was a child and I grew up with my physician's kids, and they're both fantastic doctors, so the extra money is worth it. But they're both about to have to drop Medicare patients, as well, and for the same reason. It's insane.
Jul '11
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Casey, front page drudge report has certain specialties going broke. It's nice to see loyalty though. This all seems like obama's middle finger to the summer budget fiasco. Somewhere he's smirking right now. Obama knows the military just hates him and he's done his best to hate them back. He is a petty, spiteful man.
Edited on Jan 5 at 10:44pmOct '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Ben Domenech
Nathaniel Wright: "Leaner and more agile..."
Wasn't that Rumsfeld's idea of the future of the military? · Jan 5 at 8:16pm
Yes, Emanuel makes that point in his piece. · Jan 5 at 8:21pm
Who has ever promoted the idea that what we need is our military to become "fatter and more lumbering"? This rhetoric has never meant anything except whatever the speaker wants it to mean. Usually it translates into "do the same or more with less resources." Having said that, Rumsfeld understood that only by cutting the gargantuan Combatant Command and Component Command staffs could you gain significant personnel savings, and that this is the expense that drives budgets into the ground. He was stymied by Congress and then (after he left office) his own President not only didn’t cut such staffs, but added one (Africa Command).
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Casey, I'd love to chat with you about this at some point to get more in-the-system perspective. Thank you for sharing.
May '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Your analysis of the "cutbacks" is more detailed than the general statement I just posted on the Member Feed. I'm glad you agree that in general we need to "cut" spending (reduce the rate of growth) even in the defense sector. Of course, the devil is in the details as you point out.
Sep '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
I would think the first thing to be decided should be what the mission of the military should be. If it is to continue to help fund the European welfare sate by providing free protection to them then let us be honest about it. During the cold war there was a rationale for such a posture, but in my view there has not been one for at least 2 decades. There are several other areas that are equally suspect. Both parties have used the Defense Department as a cookie jar to dispense political favors. This says a lot about the level of corruption in DC. Some of Paul's ideas go too far, but he should be given credit for being the most honest person in the GOP when it comes to discussing these issues.
Jan '11
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
I agree that the first step is to define the missions we want the military to be prepared to perform and to design a force structure to successfully accomplish those missions.
I am not sure that removing forces from Europe is quite the money saving move some suggest it is. Is the plan to remove the forces in Europe from the force structure entirely or simply relocate them to CONUS? If the former, what effect would the smaller force structure have on our ability to accomplish desired missions? If the latter, how much money is actually saved and what capability (political as well as military) is lost by no longer having forces forward deployed on the Eurasian landmass?
Apr '11
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Casey Taylor
Tricare and the money siphoned off for the Post-9/11 GI Bill are killing us.
I would add retirement to this list as well. The new GI Bill is too generous and in most cases only benefits the military by increasing retention. I know so many airmen that are constantly taking classes but none of these classes have anything to do with their job. They take them for careers once they get out. They use Tuition Assistance which is different from the GI Bill. As for retirement, I joined the Air Force when I was 24 and will be eligible for retirement at 44. This means I will get half my base pay for the rest of my life. I could go work as a civilian contractor and with the skills the Air Force has given me make a ton of money doing it. I'd still get that pension. Something has to be done with retirement. I understand these things are for retention, but they aren't sustainable. Give me a good airplane to fly on with the best technology and you can keep all this other stuff.
Jun '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
DocJay: Casey, front page drudge report has certain specialties going broke. It's nice to see loyalty though. This all seems like obama's middle finger to the summer budget fiasco. Somewhere he's smirking right now. Obama knows the military just hates him and he's done his best to hate them back. He is a petty, spiteful man. · Jan 5 at 9:54pm
Edited on Jan 05 at 10:44 pm
My optometrist, one of the most successful in the area, had to close one of his offices or stop seeing Medicare patients, and my DO is probably less than a year away from either retiring or closing her practice to work for a hospital. These are good people, excellent doctors who care for a lot of patients, and they and their patients are both being slowly smothered by the proverbial boot in the neck. It's infuriating.
Then there's the military... it's a good thing the president is intent on cutting troop strength, because if he wins the next election we're going to have a very hard time retaining personnel.
Jun '10
Re: Defense Cutbacks and the Death of COIN
Ben Domenech
Casey, I'd love to chat with you about this at some point to get more in-the-system perspective. Thank you for sharing. · Jan 6 at 4:21am
Any time, brother!