DIVEST NOW

As simple as it sounds, cleaning out our garage is a hard task for most of us. We become attached to all manner of things and get used to having them around. We also think of how expensive it is to replace this “perfectly good stuff” and put the task off until tomorrow. The same is true for some parts of the Air Force, and especially the communities in which they live. The “my garage” tendency takes over as these very patriotic and well-meaning interest groups fight to preserve systems, missions, jobs, and bases that have long outlived their usefulness. When our Air Force leadership tries to do a “spring cleaning” to pay for the modern tools of its trade, these interest groups close ranks and thwart the professionals—time and again. These are hard words to write and reflect on—I’ve been there. As a vocal community advocate for Utah throughout both the 1995 and 2005 Base Realignment and Closure deliberations, I often asked myself whether the National and our local interests were in harmony. Difficult as it was, there were times when those interests didn’t align and our community suffered through the closure and realignment of defense functions that were unnecessary (Fort Douglas, Defense Depot Ogden, and the Tooele Army Depot are examples). People lost jobs and the local economy suffered. Yet, the Armed Forces were stronger and more affordable for having endured that trial.

Today, as the Air Force voluntarily cuts over 40,000 military and civilian personnel in order to revitalize and modernize its fleet, hundreds of jobs were lost at Hill Air Force Base near my home. Undaunted, the men and women at Hill are leaning out and transforming to preserve as much capability as possible, despite the shrinking ranks. In exchange, Hill will see the fruits of its labor when F-22 Raptors arrive to be modified and overhauled, and F-35 Lightning IIs come to replace the aging F-16 fleet that’s lived here since the late 1970s. My first challenge to interest groups and communities across the Nation is to educate themselves and understand what our sons & daughters need to meet the enemy and survive, check their local interests at the door, and do the right thing when it becomes personal. If this means accepting a change to missions or closing a local base, so be it.

INVEST IN THE BEST CAPABILITY POSSIBLE

Unfortunately, eliminating aged systems is but a small component of financing the major overhaul needed. Even if all the Air Force’s proposed divestitures were embraced by DoD and the Congress, a huge bill remains. For this reason, the Air Force has proposed cutting its force by 40,000 people (from over 340,000 to just over 300,000) almost immediately—and plowing the pay and entitlements those people would otherwise receive back into new systems. To minimize losing real airpower, Air Force leadership adopted the lean-based, transformational Air Force Smart Operations 21st Century (AFSO21) program across every unit at every level. Applying lean principles perfected in private industry to all manner of military functions, substantial efficiencies have been achieved. In some cases, capabilities are actually improved in real terms, even when the required manpower is a fraction of its former self. In other cases, real programs are lost—but Air Force leadership has determined that it’s worth the trade off.

Money gleaned from these reforms is now reflected in the budget lines for new systems: finishing the F-22 buy; developing and buying a new tanker to replace those old KC-135s; developing and buying an advanced bomber to replace the B-52s and B-1s; developing and buying unmanned surveillance and combat systems; updating the intercontinental ballistic missile fleet, deploying the next generation of space assets, and expanding & modernizing the special operations forces and their related systems.

Drawing from the Quadrennial Defense Review and other Air Force doctrine and strategy assessments, Air Force and many defense leaders and experts (in and out of government) have concluded these changes are far overdue. As such, popular support for the Air Force strategy is crucial—without it, the resources that were cut from the Air Force’s very skeleton might be diverted to use by others. In the end, our sons & daughters would lose manpower AND the new, essential tools they so desperately need. My second challenge is a call to those same interests and communities to engage the political infrastructure of this Nation and demand nothing less than the total modernization of US airpower. We must accept the wisdom of Air Force leaders in defining what they need, then back them at every level as they seek to keep the benefits of their sacrifice to effect this capability transformation.

STAY THE COURSE

Finally, it should go without saying that, having embarked on the modernization path, we ought to see it through. From the time we were young our parents counseled us to finish things we start. Unfortunately, in the business of defending our Nation there are frequent examples of fickle behavior—within and across the services, within DOD, with changing administrations (and sometimes within the same Administration), and up and down the halls of Congress. Every time we change, things slow down and the price goes up—delaying critical capability and increasing its cost. The end result: our sons & daughters in uniform lose……and might die from that loss.

This last challenge to the interest groups, communities, and our elected representatives is simple—stay the course. Plan the buy, and then buy the plan—on time, on cost, on target. The result will be swift, affordable modernization of our Air Force—and the best, most capable systems we can afford in the hands of our defenders. Obviously the rapid pace of technological change will dictate open acquisition structures to take full advantage of advances in science and engineering—but endless study and reassessment will paralyze the effort and subvert its effectiveness better than Al Qaeda or the Taliban ever could.

THE NEAR FUTURE

Even recent history is replete with examples of whimsical reform and modernization. Every conflict from the waning days of the Vietnam War to the occupation of Baghdad in 2003 has evidenced two common threads—US air dominance and airborne devastation of the enemy’s will to press the fight. Air Force, Navy, Marine, and Army air power (and increasingly space power) has fought and won every conflict—with very little loss of American lives. Only when US policy dictated an enduring occupation of Iraq has the emphasis shifted to large ground forces. Erosion of Army capabilities over the years and its inappropriate focus and organization for the current task were quickly highlighted. Now $30 billion dollars in the red for 2008, the Army seeks special treatment and investment within the DOD. It’s just my opinion, but by the time those funds are applied to their intended purpose we will have substantially withdrawn from Iraq and, just like in Vietnam, promised to never get mired in a largely internal conflict ever again (sound familiar?). The Army will be bigger and more modern—and the next conflicts will focus on airpower and its inherently “cleaner” form of US engagement.

As a Nation we must preserve a balanced armed force, suitable for its intended purpose and agile enough to move with the changing world. Some investment in large ground forces and Army agility is necessary for the short term. Recent modern history and any reasonable reading of the tea leaves, however, tell us that air and space power will remain the dominant National security instrument. Sacrificing and endangering its modernization threatens the Nation—and the lives of our sons & daughters.