More

Obama Administration Considers Altering U.S. Military's Global Role

Obama Military

First Posted: 04/14/11 03:49 PM ET Updated: 06/14/11 06:12 AM ET

By Colin Clark
Editor, AOL Defense

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration, with very little fanfare, has launched what national security experts say is the most significant reconsideration of the United States' military role in the world since at least the end of the Cold War.

The announcement was made yesterday in President Obama's deficit speech, in which he appeared to call for cutting as much as another $400 billion in spending from the Department of Defense.

"Over the last two years, [Defense] Secretary [Robert] Gates has courageously taken on wasteful spending, saving $400 billion in current and future spending. I believe we can do that again. We need to not only eliminate waste and improve efficiency and effectiveness, but conduct a fundamental review of America's missions, capabilities, and our role in a changing world," Obama said.

The Pentagon "will identify alternatives for the president's consideration," Gates' press secretary Geoff Morrell said late yesterday afternoon. The “roles and missions analysis†-- military shorthand for the review -- should be finished by the beginning of Fiscal Year 2013, about 10 months from now.

One of Gates' closest advisers, Andrew Krepinevich, called the president's remarks "an almost earth-shattering speech" during an address at a conference sponsored by the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis on the future of the Marine Corps. Krepinevich, who is head of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment and also serves on the Defense Policy Board, told AOL Defense he believes this is the most significant strategic period since the turbulent period after World War II.

Krepinevich said the cuts come at a very difficult time. The threat level the U.S. faces is likely to increase for the next decade and, more ominously, the threats are shifting in form. If the U.S. is forced to cut defense spending in this environment, it may well be left with the wrong mix of weapons, strategy and personnel to handle the changing world, Krepinevich said.

But he was cautious in his analysis of the Gates' announcement of a roles and missions study, which traditionally focuses on smaller changes. The White House has not, as far as he knows, decided to launch a strategic review. But Krepinevich said he thinks the White House and Pentagon must first focus on strategy because the stakes are so high and there are so many fundamental military and social changes underway across the globe.

Jacquelyn Davis, a defense expert at the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis (IFPA), told AOL Defense that she believes Libya may spell the "death" of the NATO alliance -- a statement that shows just how fundamental the stakes are.

Another speaker at the IFPA conference, national security author Bob Kaplan, called the current period the "most unstable era in a long time."

But it looks as though the president isn't really asking for an additional $400 billion in defense cuts.

A White House fact sheet issued after the Wednesday speech says the cuts will come from "security spending," which defense budget expert Todd Harrison, who works with Krepinevich at CSBA, noted would include the departments governing veterans, energy, homeland security and defense.

"It looks like we won't know every much until the [roles and missions] review is done,†how much might be cut from the Pentagon budget, Harrison said.

Any savings would be spread over 12 years, out to 2023. Harrison said the pledge of cuts is "kind of vague, but the takeaway is that it's a larger cut than we expected."

Launching in Spring 2011, AOL Defense will provide news, insight and tools about the defense sector. Follow Colin on Twitter at @colinclarkaol. Follow defense news on Twitter at @aoldefense.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
By Colin Clark Editor, AOL Defense WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration, with very little fanfare, has launched what national security experts say is the most significant reconsideration of the ...
By Colin Clark Editor, AOL Defense WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration, with very little fanfare, has launched what national security experts say is the most significant reconsideration of the ...
Filed by Maxwell Strachan  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 85
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
Give peace a chance
07:53 AM on 04/17/2011
Shutdown all the bases we have in Europe for starters. That alone would save trillions. End the wars. We'd be flush in no time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eljefefx
03:12 PM on 04/17/2011
Are you aware that many of those bases are there as a result of treaties?
11:37 PM on 04/16/2011
Any real effort to wrestle $$ away from the Pentagon will be met with fierce opposition from the MIC, which is firmly entrenched in all levels of the US government. It can be heard echoing in Krepinevich's statement that "the threats are shifting in form."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gregory57
Micro-bio, was one of my favorite classes.
08:06 PM on 04/16/2011
It's a pretty simple choice. Keep increasing funding to the Pentagon until we become a paranoid fortress state on the order of North Korea, with two classes of citizens, The soldiers and the starving, and make ourselves available as an international mercenary police force to the highest bidders, or stand down.

No-Brainer, right? Why do the Republicans keep pushing us in the wrong direction?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arts4u
It's better than a reality show.
07:51 PM on 04/16/2011
Cu the military 35% minimum. Do it now.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eljefefx
03:13 PM on 04/17/2011
Can't do it. Now, if you were to elaborate on what areas to cut of the military budget that would be a better comment to make.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Skeetshooter
Artist, writer, provocateur
02:31 PM on 04/16/2011
Best Obama should alter our military role around the world before bankruptcy does it for him.
photo
phread
antiFA and proud of it
01:15 PM on 04/16/2011
Fascism was “an authoritarian response to the contradictions of capitalism, when democratic institutions are no longer capable of patching up the "broken barrel" that is the free market.
The suppression of a competitive price structure was achieved by the Nazis through laws that blocked market entry, setting up cartel arrangements based on compulsory prices that thwarted deflationary tendencies and froze the status quo of the corporate elite.
Economic control became a technique of mass domination as a quasi-dictatorship of industrialists laid bare the class bias of fascist "corporatism." This "compulsory order" guaranteed profits, socialized losses and enriched capital-intensive industry.
Such production controls veil and dissemble economic facts, and the capital structure is mangled in the process. Moreover, state control over banks enabled the Nazis to embark on a huge military build-up, which funneled monetary expansion into a growing military-industrial complex. An autarkic philosophy of economics, as Franz Neumann called it, led to the collapse of German purchasing power, the crowding out of capital investment for consumer goods production and a dwindling domestic market for the very bourgeoisie that gave Hitler his mass support. Workers' wages plummeted, labor unions were crushed, and German business became a parasitic class. A similar process ensued in Mussolini's Italy.â€

A distinctive fascist political economy, which can best be summarized as the creation of a wartime economy in peacetime.

Chris Matthew Sciabarra
History News Network
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Skeetshooter
Artist, writer, provocateur
02:30 PM on 04/16/2011
AKA corporate socialism/public feudalism. When Eisenhower warned about the growth of the military industrial complex, this is what he was talking about; the tendency for fascism to creep in stealthily through corruption of the political process by the ultra rich, and in our case, recently enabled by the Roberts court through their Citizens United over reach.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
11:38 AM on 04/16/2011
"The threat level the U.S. faces is likely to increase for the next decade"

How so?

The only threats we face are the ones in which we've got troops in someone else's country. Nobody is actually attacking us. The last nationality to attack us was Saudis but look where that went.

Of course when you let generals dictate our war and foreign policy, in their self-interest they will make sure there are "enemies", hypothetical as it may be.

The Cold War is over. We have no business with and can't afford 1000 bases all over the world and multiple war fronts going on.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
AZreb
equal-opportunity Independent heathen
10:35 AM on 04/16/2011
So how much of those $400 billion will our government pay to mercenaries? Take away with one hand and give with the other. I am all for cutting our global military presence, but you know darned well that there will be a catch to it. We already have thousands of mercenaries on the payroll of the U.S. government - will they just add more?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
muck-raker
give me liberty or give me death
12:01 PM on 04/16/2011
exactly, here are 3000 of them stirring up trouble in Pakistan..I guess THEY ARE NEXT

http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/27/isi-seeks-data-about-cia-operatives.html
07:31 AM on 04/16/2011
Typo on previous post - ominous
07:30 AM on 04/16/2011
According to the military and many "foreign affair experts," no time is a good time to cut military spending. They see an ominious threat behind every bush, all in an effort to justify incredibly wasteful military spending. The American people and rank and file American military personnel aren't the beneficiaries of all that spending - military contractors and the higher ranks of the military are.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Danek Greori
01:34 PM on 04/15/2011
This is something that has been a long time coming. The other nations of the world see fit to use us and our military as their enforcers, mediators, and when the situation suits them: saviors. It's high time that the US stop playing big brother to the rest of the world, and focus on our interests here at home, and get to work repairing the damage done to America over the last 20-something years. We have cities falling part, we have people struggling to live, and we have masses who have lost faith and trust in their government. We've spent so much time policing the world for our allies, and being paranoid about external threats, that we've completely overlooked, either by design or by circumstance, that increasingly more dire situation here in our own country.

I really hope these cuts to the defense budget happen, and I hope it's just the beginning of a new fix.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
muck-raker
give me liberty or give me death
12:09 PM on 04/16/2011
Danek you said "playing big brother to rest of world"....here is just a quick tabulation
2 million dead Viet Nam civilians, 1 million Cambodians, 1 million Iraq civilians, and so far 1250 Afgans AND COUNTING
and here are some interesting figure 9 million lost in the shuffle on the way to Bremer, 13 million lost on the way to KARzai. Today Iraqis have only several hours of electricity (on day 1 we blew up their instillation,) sewage never repaired, even today waste can be see running down the streets. Their drinking water not potable and is making many sick...Americanization? mmmm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Danek Greori
08:52 PM on 04/16/2011
I'm not sure what you're trying to say, or how that has anything to do with my reply? O.o
photo
Thumbody
just for the halibut!
12:34 PM on 04/15/2011
Won't be holding my breath on this one!
12:26 PM on 04/15/2011
One can only hope this is the case. We need to stop being an empire and return to being a Republic, because empires and republics don't mix well. This is our opportunity to pull back and stop projecting U.S. power abroad. We need to continue to do R&D on weapons (after all, we all like cool toys), but rework the strategy to fight small, easily hidden, low tech threats. After all, its hard to kill an ant with a sledge hammer.
photo
Pandoras Folly
This Micro-bio is of legendary quality
08:35 AM on 04/15/2011
A= massive unrest in the middle east
B= israeli iron dome makes the last major weapons that Hamas has ususable or at least ineffective, ie rocket and morter strikes
C= growing unrest broken along the Sunni and Shiite divide, focused in Baharain. The rulers backed by Saudi against the majority of the population religiously related to Iran.
D= still fractured Iraq: Sunnis and Shiites don't like each other and neither like the Kurds who are basically running their own country in the north and preparing for the entire kibosh to fall apart

E=Hamas is now using sophisticated anti-tank weapons they obviously smuggled from Syria and Iran. When Israel gets confirmation of which people are going to die

F= Rising oil prices, falling suppplies more money for the middle east

add it all up and I think we may be headed for a show down the next couple of years between the Shiite and Sunni nations kicked off by a tragedy in Baharain and a Major military action by Israel