Change is upon us, and it's unavoidable. For the U.S. armed forces this means having to do more with less in a period of dwindling resources and ever-escalating threats.
Cooperation, collaboration, and streamlining were hot topics during the recent West 2009 conference in San Diego. The theme of this year's conference, cosponsored by the U.S. Naval Institute and the Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association (AFCEA), was "Defense: Reset—Redesign—or Reinvent?"
Also discussed were the need for better technology, the increasing importance of cyber-warfare, and the need to maintain traditional military strengths.
Collaboration, Cooperation, and Team-Building
Navy Admiral Jonathan W. Greenert, Commander of the U.S. Fleet Forces Command, kicked off the conference with an address in which he stressed the importance of collaboration among the branches of the military, between government and industry, and also among other countries and their nongovernmental organizations.
Relationship-building will be the key to maritime security in the future, he said. "Forces can surge, but trust and cooperation cannot be surged. You've got to earn it." Greenert cited Operation Continuing Promise, which brings humanitarian aid to South America, as an example. "Building partnerships, developing mutually beneficial skills, and fostering goodwill. This is how we will prevent a war in the future."
Maintain Traditional Strengths
At the same time, the United States should not shrink from its key strengths, several speakers said. The United States needs to retain its advantage in space, as well as its nuclear capability, said retired Air Force Lieutenant General Daniel "Fig" Leaf, "That is an area where we overmatch the rest of the world right now, and I think we need to keep that," said Leaf, the former Deputy Commander of the U.S. Pacific Command. Retired Army General Barry R. McCaffrey agreed. "I think we walk away from that nuclear deterrent at our peril," he said.
The need to maintain a military edge over China was discussed by retired Navy Rear Admiral Michael McDevitt, Director of the Center for Naval Analyses Strategic Studies, and Dr. Jacqueline Newmyer, President and CEO of the Long-Term Strategy Group. They agreed that while China is not technically our foe, caution is warranted.
McDevitt said the Chinese army is eyeing a takeover of Taiwan. "There's a possibility the U.S. would ride to the rescue of Taiwan," he said. "They're worried about us intervening in a way that would not allow them to achieve their military objective."
Newmyer noted that China has been quick to resort to military aggression even in peacetime and warned that the United States might manage to get on China's bad side unintentionally. "There are things that we do that might strike them as quite offensive or provocative, and we might not even appreciate it," she said.
IEDs and Cyber-Terrorists
Irregular warfare was also a big topic at the conference. As combat shifts from traditional warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. forces must adjust to the new reality, even if it means battling an unseen enemy.
Army Lieutenant General Thomas F. Metz, Director of the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, said IEDs persist as a daily threat. The bombs remain effective not only because they are deadly, but also because their use instills fear and uncertainty. "The IED is used by the enemy as a tactical weapon for strategic purposes," Metz said, "because it appears to be the best way to erode our national will."
There isn't a weapon yet that can effectively locate and disarm IEDs, Metz explained, so instead he's fighting them with computers: collecting data and overlaying them with maps, trying to narrow down how, when and where the bombers may strike.
The need to improve the military's computer technology and its ability to protect against infiltration was another topic of much discussion. Navy Vice Admiral H. Denby Starling II, Commander of the Naval Network Warfare Command, called for a culture change to bring about an understanding that focusing resources on computer networks is as important as traditional weapons.
Attention must be paid to the new breed of high-tech terrorists, said Navy Vice Admiral Harry B. Harris Jr., Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Communications Networks. "They have built a deadly new model of insurgent at a fraction of the cost of building and maintaining a traditional military force," Harris said.
Shipbuilding Challenges
Improving the shipbuilding process, while reducing the delays and cost overruns that plague the system, was the chief topic of the conference's final day.
Fred J. Harris, President of General Dynamics NASSCO, made his case for the need to eliminate costly and time-consuming changes once production has begun.
As an example, Harris cited the USS Seawolf (SSN-22): her design was only six percent complete when construction began, and the ship ran $250 million over budget. The PC-1 showed how it can be done, Harris said, using a design procured from the Koreans that was 100 percent complete before building started. "We delivered the ship six months early and under contract value by about 24 percent," Harris said. "If you really get the design and planning done before you build the ship, you'll be saving at least four million man-hours."
Retired Navy Vice Admiral Kevin J. Cosgriff agreed in part, saying that the absence of disciplined planning "is emblematic of what's wrong with the system as it is today." The U.S. Navy still has the best and most capable warships and supply ships in the world, said Cosgriff, "but the process is not good enough, and frankly, I think we're better than this."
Sometimes changes are needed, he said. "Earnest, hard-working people build it, and equally earnest, hard-working people change it," Cosgriff said. "Technical and acquisition standards exist for good reason."
The bottom line, he said, is that "shipbuilders need to build what's authorized, on time and within the allocation. No less and no more."
Ronald O'Rourke, a specialist in national defense for the Congressional Research Service, said the perception of overall unaffordability and insufficient accountability in shipbuilding has led to the Navy taking "a terrible hit in its credibility" on Capitol Hill.
Even though a low price can help shipbuilders win a bid, cost estimates need to be more realistic, O'Rourke said. "The game of defense acquisition has turned into a game of liar's poker," he said.
The Navy should track shipbuilding lessons learned so mistakes aren't repeated, O'Rourke said. He also suggested establishing a long-term director of shipbuilding. "It would at least provide a chance to hold somebody, in the end, accountable for something that was promised years earlier."
Joining the Armed Forces, Staying In, and Developing Leaders
Two panels departed from the topics of warfare and strategy, focusing instead on the people in uniform.
While panelists from the Coast Guard, Marine Corps, and Navy had a variety of reasons for joining, their reasons for staying in were similar: it's like a family. They said they valued the teamwork, the mentorship they received, and they way everyone looks out for each other.
A good leader who continually points you in the right direction is another asset, they said. In a separate talk about developing leadership, panelists noted that the best leaders have courage and loyalty and have learned to reward rather than punish those who take risks and succeed.
One panelist, Marine Corps Captain Scott A. Cuomo, said that in the end, his reason for staying in is simple: to win the war. "There's thousands of the enemy out there who wish to take our freedom, who don't like our way of life," he said. "To the average Marine, this is unacceptable."
"Ultimately, what Marines want is to go fight," Cuomo said. "Keep sending us to the fight, keep challenging us, keep telling us it's impossible, and we'll go there."