The F-35's extra engine got the ax this week, but don't put away your air quotes. The arguments over "security" have just begun. Democrats and freshmen Republicans deserve congratulations for protecting taxpayers, but let's face it, this extra engine could not have been more unwanted if it had been wearing cement boots and dumped off a pier outside Providence. The Pentagon itself raged against it. Eliminating it does nothing to remove our strategic blindfold. And the Senate could yet bring it back. More important: We still can't answer the question about how we're going to get more security for less money. Or how we're going to move past our high tech weapons nostalgia, a fantasy suited to the open terrain of Napoleon, not the crowded streets of Bin Laden.
Security Doesn't Always Come in a Uniform
Exempting defense from the same budget scrutiny as the rest of the U.S. government will not help us achieve a modern presence in the world. What it will do is force the military to take on ever more unsuitable tasks. For the past twenty years, the military has accrued numerous policy assignments simply because it has the money and the personnel (not to mention a can-do attitude). Afghanistan didn't create this problem, it simply revealed it to the American public. Our uniformed personnel are delivering babies, distributing payroll, rebuilding the power grid and fighting a war in Afghanistan. We are learning lessons in reverse i.e. that building social capital is how you win and that this kind of victory is achieved through tools of inclusion: convening, technical assistance, economic support and confidence building. Today, credibility is as important as hardware was a generation ago.
The military knows this. They also know it works best in preventive mode. Take Egypt, for example. Our military education program brings officers from around the world to the United States to study with U.S. and international peers. Testifying this week, Secretary Gates pointed out how U.S. influence minimized violent clashes between Egyptians and their rejected regime. For decades, connections among this professional peer network have been carefully cultivated and prized as security assets. The lesson Congress should learn from this influence bonanza is to replicate defense programs across other areas of the public sector. We should have equally strong peer opportunities for diplomats, educators, economists, city planners, accountants and judges.
Instead, Congress appears ready to cripple or eliminate the nonmilitary side of security. Anything not wearing a uniform is a target. Wild eyed conservatives are even proposing to cut funding to fight the trade in illegal nuclear materials. Gulp.
Tunisia, Egypt and now Bahrain should flip a switch about our security strategy. Egyptians' successful transition to representative government will do more to fight terrorism than, for example, our new $150 million multi-camera Gorgon Stare drone (Medusa the snake haired woman of myth was a Gorgon). Despite the Washington Post's drooling celebration of this weapon, testing found it slow and inaccurate and unable to identify targets. Experts said the same about missile defense long before it hit the 100 billion dollar mark. Constant flogging and fear distortion by industry and politicians made Star Wars an immortal boondoggle. Gorgon Stare might help us understand modern American security challenges if it would fix its gaze on US cities. It would surely see our failing bridges, boarded up homes, potholed roads and long lines at the food bank.
In a world where credibility is a measure of strength, the way we presently care for our own assets makes us unbelievable.
Besides, high tech weapons can't keep up with cheap, simple devices that actually provide the subtle distinctions necessary to have situational awareness "on the ground". This knowledge can be achieved for next to nothing through geo-spatial locating (disaster response groups like Ushahidi lead the way). From Haiti to Cairo, crowd-sourced mobile verification is the future of peaceful transition. Helping individuals everywhere create a positive and interactive alternative to violence is what our elected leaders should be betting on with American taxpayer dollars.
For more on how we can avoid high cost defense failures, check out the new and downloadable Pentagon's Labyrinth.
Our Cammo-Colored Infatuation
Why is Congress unwilling to fundamentally shift our relationship with the rest of the world? Especially when the use of force is becoming less and less productive?
Military professionals normally observe a bright line between expert advice and political advocacy. Yet these boundaries are shifting. Here are some indicators of imbalance:
Lack of interest, oversight and public pressure has created our current over-militarized dilemma: Those in uniform have become a domestic and international 911 service. This is a problem for everyone. We live in a country where popular buy-in to the notion that citizens and their civilian elected leaders are the primary authorities on all policymaking, is vital to sustain the system. Civilian supremacy in setting strategy is the cornerstone of our success and credibility in the world.
Our failure to achieve this balance is manifesting all over the place. We keep telling everybody else to do things that we no longer are able to do ourselves.
A defense budget that has increased 67% in ten years is unreasonable.
A Congress that came in pledging fiscal accountability but refuses to make the Pentagon capable of an audit is not credible.
If we Americans and our civilian elected leaders don't come to terms with our over-dependence on the military, we will cede increasing authority to an institution that doesn't want it and should not have it.
If we don't force this conversation soon, the sad result won't really be an accident. It will be an outcome. And we'll all have a hand in it. Here are a few things you can do:
Follow Lorelei Kelly on Twitter: www.twitter.com/loreleikelly
Importantly, how can the 14 or 15 airbases in Iraq and a multimillion dollar embassy have any real effect on our security...especially if we plan to "get out" of Iraq...or Afghanistan or the Arctic.....?
["If we Americans and our civilian-elected leaders don't come to terms with our over-dependence on the military, we will cede increasing authority to an institution that doesn't want it and should not have it."]
America could end up governed by a military junta instead of a Wall Street junta.
.
The Watson on Jeopardy thing was a roll-out!
HuffPo: Now cyber-moderated by IBM's Watson.....
Thanks, IBM!
You're not an outsourced moderator in India, are you?
When cutting military budgets in the past the wrong things like training and readiness get cut along with overpriced weapon systems. The bases in Europe never get looked at because the Germans do not want our forces to leave and outdated ideas on what is needed for world security.
If we pulled our forces back to the US we might see that the military is not the only answer to problems around the world. This would also reassure counties like Russia that we truly are not still in an a aggressive posture in regards to them.
One of the reasons we spend more money on the military than the rest of the world combined is we let ourselves become the guarantor of everyone's security. It is well passed time for a rethink of defense policy the Cold War is over and a large land war is not really in the foreseeable future.
Much of our heavy forces should be converted to National Guard and reserve units the Navy should be re targeted to patrolling sea areas that are vital to the US not all our allies.
That is so true.
It is surprising that the Republicans and megacorporations in America haven't figured out that if we remove all of our military bases from allied countries that they will be forced to spend oodles of money building their militaries and thus will need more war-making materials, purchased from us. Seems like a tremendous business opportunity that they could not pass on. I think, inevitably, this is what will happen.
Personally, I am hoping for more peaceful times. Not this ever increasing darkness that is descending on all of us, thanks to world right-wing philosophy.
[""One of the reasons we spend more money on the military than the rest of the world combined is we let ourselves become the guarantor of everyone's security.""]
"The reason we spend more money on the military
than the rest of the world combined is that
we let ourselves become the guarantor of
Halliburton's, Lockheed's,Northrup's, Bechtel's, Xe's, etc. security."
.
http://powertoxins.blogspot.com/2009/11/greatest-source-of-power-toxins.html
The author of this post points out: "A defense budget that has increased 67% in ten years is unreasonable".
We are no longer listening to the wisdom of our founding principles.
The Founders were resistant to a standing army, and for good reason. Once you've got one they are damn hard to get rid of.
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_12s10.html
Perfect example -- I have been issued no fewer than 6 pairs of new boots in the last 5 years, each at an MSRP of $125-!80 each pair and yet to wear through one. That is minor in comparison to a jet engine but represents the same thought process that gets new aircraft every few years just because the manufacturer 'influences' his congressman.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mn-1LuLhrw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mDEh_lxlRQ
Apart from wasting vast amounts of money the excessively macho attitude a militaristic nation breeds harms relations with other countries.
The combination of excessive military and out of control Wall Street blood suckers making big bucks on military expenditures able to buy lobbyists to perpetuate the mess has created a fascist oligarchy.
You bought it and your grand kids will still be paying for it.
http://wwwÂ.youtube.cÂom/watch?vÂ=3mn-1LuLhÂrw
http://wwwÂ.youtube.cÂom/watch?vÂ=9mDEh_lxlÂRQ
The military needs to have an effective civilian oversight. History tells us that when this is done we have less waste. Harry Truman in WWII did a stellar job looking at waste at a time when we were literally fighting for our lives. If we had our bloated military infrastructure in place instead of what we had, we might have been speaking in German or Japanese right now.
Civilians and the military have to stand for best practices and best process. Creeping militarism and the status of a vet for a sense of gravatas is the wrong way to go particularly if the cost is a unwarranted distrust of government.
I knew the military was bloated and needed some pruning (with extreme prejudice), but I wasn't under the impression it was that bad. See if you can't sic the tea party on cutting THAT budget!
Excellent article. Examined things like the unwilling expansion of military roles that aren't often considered. Thanks.
That's not to say we can't trim some fat though, there's a lot of weapons systems that aren't exactly necessary. The F-22's role is probably better served by the F-35. It's not like other countries can challenge our F-16s these days, even though the F-15s are designed to be better in an anti-air role. The strength of our military isn't so much the technological advantages of each individual fighter as the cumulative force multipliers of training, organization, doctrine, communications, and logistics.
Iraq War will total out at around $3 Trillion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302200.html
This is the most egregious nonsense, spewed at us from all sides, day and night, as a justification for...... almost anything, but especially for insane military spending.
To be clear: the United States is not "at war", "in a war", "in a state of war", or any other scaremongering phrase used to describe what is essentially a permanent military occupation of multiple locations throughout the world. Just because we're killing people, doesn't make it a war. Just because people are shooting at us, doesn't make it a war.
Finally, just because we're the United States, doesn't mean we're right, or just, or on the side of God.