The Insider

Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. James Winnefeld, the service secretaries and Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos will today provide closed, classified briefings on budget issues to both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee, said Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby. The same top-level group of defense officials will brief House committees tomorrow under the same circumstances, he added.

Another closed Defense Department briefing on Capitol Hill is also scheduled for today, which is not budget related but involves other Pentagon and military officials, Kirby said, declining to comment further on that session.

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos released a statement early this morning on the Pentagon's fiscal year 2013 budget request. Amos' statement defends the plan to shrink the Marine Corps to 182,100, noting the service will be able to accomplish the missions of the new Defense Strategic Guidance. "I am confident that we will be able to maintain our legendary high standards of training, education, leadership and discipline while supporting joint force capabilities across the full spectrum of operations," Amos states:

Our nation is in the midst of a challenging economic environment that has forced the Marine Corps to make tough fiscal choices with respect to manpower, procurement, operations and maintenance. Though the fiscal choices made over the past year were difficult, we are confident that we managed risk by shifting capacity in a post-Afghanistan environment towards balanced capabilities across our Corps, while maintaining the high levels of readiness the nation has come to expect of its Marines.

In the fall of 2010, the Marine Corps initiated a force structure review whose mission was to re-shape the Marine Corps while responsibly meeting our national security challenges. Our goal in this effort was to provide the American people with the most ready, capable, and cost-effective crisis response force our nation can afford. For 8.2 percent of the Department of Defense's budget, the Marine Corps provides our nation 31 percent of its ground forces, 12 percent of its fighter attack aircraft, 19 percent of its attack helicopters and the ability to respond to unexpected crises, from humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts, to full scale combat.

Our force structure review resulted in a "purpose-built" Marine Corps that is smaller, but in many ways more capable than the force we had at the onset of the last decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We have acknowledged the changing nature of the battlefield by increasing our contribution to special operations and cyber warfare, and have lightened the Marine air-ground-logistics task forces by reducing the number of heavy armor and artillery units, and through streamlining our organizational hierarchy.

With a force structure of 182,100, our re-shaped Marine Corps is able to accomplish the missions of the new Defense Strategic Guidance while keeping faith with our Marines, sailors and their families. I am confident that we will be able to maintain our legendary high standards of training, education, leadership and discipline while supporting joint force capabilities across the full spectrum of operations.

As our nation turns its attention to the Pacific, the Marine Corps looks forward to reorienting our focus west to this historic area of operations; in doing so, we will continue to respond to crises and contingencies throughout the world as the President may direct. In line with the strategic guidance, we will recommit ourselves to our long-standing forward-deployed and forward-engaged partnership with the Navy, while returning to our fundamental role as America's expeditionary force in readiness.

In a briefing with reporters today, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz said that unlike the last time around, the service likely will have to close bases if Congress goes ahead with a new base realignment and closure round, as requested by the Obama administration. The last BRAC round, in 2005, resulted in “a multitude of realignments” but no base closures, Schwartz said, and the service's excess infrastructure has only grown since then.

“There are estimates in that era that our infrastructure, we had excess infrastructure in the neighborhood of 20 percent,” he said. “Since 2005, our inventory of aircraft, for example, has declined in the neighborhood of 500 aircraft, and so the presumption is -- and I think it's a fair presumption -- is that there is yet more excess infrastructure. So indeed, we certainly support the proposal to go through another round of base closure analysis and execution.”

Budget documents released by the Pentagon yesterday indicate that the Defense Department intends to ask lawmakers for back-to-back BRAC rounds this decade, with the first in 2013 and the next in 2015. Many members of Congress immediately released statements detailing their opposition to base closures, which would negatively affect some congressional districts.

Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno said he signed a memorandum of understanding this morning setting up an arrangement for the Air Force to provide ground support to the Army using C-130s rather than C -27Js, which the Army hoped would replace its retiring C-23 Sherpas.

Prior to his announcement this morning at the Pentagon during a budget briefing, Odierno previewed this arrangement at a Jan. 25 Association of the United States Army breakfast in Arlington, VA. He said then that the Air Force's C-27J cargo aircraft program was likely to be canceled and that the services were working together on an agreement to require the Air Force to provide support using C-130s.

A Pentagon white paper released Jan. 26 reveals C-130 aircraft would provide direct air support for the Army's ground forces after the Defense Department weighed all options. “The C-27J was developed and procured to provide a niche capability to directly support Army urgent needs in difficult environments such as Afghanistan where we thought the C-130 might not be able top operate effectively,” the white paper reads.

“However, in practice, we did not experience the anticipated airfield constraints for C-130 operations in Afghanistan and expect these constraints to be marginal in future scenarios,” the document states.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) isn't too optimistic about the Pentagon's fiscal year 2013 budget request. In a just-released statement, he says:

Today Secretary Panetta announced how he will execute the President’s direction to cut $47 billion from his original request for FY13 military spending.  Contrary to those who would assert that this budget still represents an increase in defense spending, clearly this budget is a real cut in military spending.

To achieve these reductions, the President has abandoned the defense structure that has protected America for two generations; turning 100,000 Soldiers and Marines out of the force.  To compensate for this loss, he will build on unmanned assets and Special Forces.  To be clear, these asymmetric assets are a vital component in defending America; but they are insufficient to meet the manifold security challenges America faces.

This move ignores a critical lesson in recent history: that while high technology and elite forces give America an edge, they cannot substitute for overwhelming ground forces when we are faced with unforeseen battlefields.

These cuts reflect President Obama’s vision of an America that is weakened, not strengthened, by our men and women in uniform.  This is a vision at odds with the President’s empty praise on Tuesday evening, and one I fundamentally disagree with.  To be clear, the impacts of these cuts are far deeper than Congress envisioned in the Budget Control Act because of strategic choices the President has made.

Last year, when the Super Committee failed, I pledged that I would not be the Chairman who would preside over the hollowing out of our military.  I renew that commitment today.  This month the House Armed Services Committee will continue and intensify our rigorous oversight, keeping in mind that while the President proposes, Congress disposes.

UPDATE 3:45 p.m.:

House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee Chairman Todd Akin (R-MO) doesn't much like the proposed budget, either. In a statement of his own, he says:

I am deeply concerned by the cuts announced by the Secretary of Defense this afternoon.  Only a few weeks ago, the President announced a “pivot” to Asia, with a focus on Navy and Air Force power. However, today the Secretary announced that he is cutting at least 12 new Navy ships over the next five years and retiring at least 9 ships earlier than planned. It is stunning that the President would announce a strategy and then cut the Navy who will be called on to execute this strategy.

I am also concerned by the announced delays to the Ohio-class replacement program. Our nuclear missile submarines are a vital piece of our nuclear deterrence, and I am concerned that this delay will put our ability to deter at risk.

Lastly, I am deeply concerned about the 100,000 soldiers and Marines who will be losing their jobs. With a tough economy, many of these brave men and women will end up on the unemployment line. For every soldier or Marine getting fired, there had better be a government bureaucrat getting fired. The President made a special trip to the Pentagon recently to announce cuts to the Defense Department. When will the President make a special trip to announce cuts to any other federal bureaucracy? When will the President get serious about reforming mandatory spending programs, which are the real problems facing our national budget? Taken in whole, these cuts will create a more dangerous world for America and her allies.

UPDATE 4:45 p.m.:

California Democrat Loretta Sanchez (CA-47) had this to say:

I commend Secretary Panetta for the Department's review and for their considerable efforts to comply with significant cuts mandated by the Budget Control Act.  Recently, the Department of Defense issued a new strategy for the United States military.  It was appropriate, considering the budget cuts, for the Department to re-evaluate what resources need to be sustained while prioritizing regions our forces would need to maintain presence.  Simultaneously, the strategy stressed the importance of strengthening our alliances in order to maintain a global presence.  Despite the significant cuts I was happy to see the strategy addressed the importance of mobilizing a healthy industrial base in order to maintain efficiency and readiness.

The Secretary will request $525 billion for the Department's FY13 base budget along with $88.4 billion for overseas contingency operations.  I believe the most significant costs to the Departments are big systems such as our ships, air carriers and weapons systems and of course the labor and cost of benefits.  We are no longer fighting a conventional war, which means the skills, resources and technology we buy must also change.  And this is why I agree with Secretary Panetta that we must increase our Special Operations Forces capacity and focus on unconventional threats like cyber-attacks.  We will also be reducing our force size but this only reflects the current situation as we drawdown from two major wars.

We live in an unpredictable world, where threats can develop anywhere and at any time.  It is absolutely necessary for our Armed Forces to be trained, equipped, and ready to address these threats -- and yes this requires affluent resources and funding.  However, the instability of our current economy has rendered many Americans unable to receive adequate education and health care. The Department must be flexible and as Secretary Panetta has demonstrated, willing to develop new and cost-efficient ways to secure the safety of this nation.

House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee Chairman Mike Turner (R-OH), on the other hand, was most concerned about the administration's proposed nonproliferation funding. In a statement of his own, Turner says:

When the New START treaty was ratified, it was part of a very clear bargain. The Administration promised that a specific and detailed nuclear weapons modernization plan would be implemented, and Senators consented to a unilateral reduction in U.S. nuclear forces because the remaining U.S. nuclear forces upon treaty implementation would be modernized.

The Secretary's announcement today is yet another indication that the President is backing off his part of the deal. Ultimately, this changes the circumstances for U.S. participation in the treaty under both Condition Nine of the New START Treaty Resolution of Ratification and language I offered in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY12.  Following this announcement, I will look carefully at the President’s budget request for NNSA Weapons Activities, specifically the CMRR and UPF projects which the President pledged to accelerate.  These two facilities are absolutely critical to the ability of the U.S. to maintain a credible and reliable deterrent, and they were an essential piece of the New START treaty bargain.

I am also concerned about the Administration's missile defense plans.  For three years, the Administration has underfunded and diverted funding from national missile defense.  With rising threats from Iran, North Korea, China and others, we cannot afford the risk created by the Administration’s irrational opposition to the missile defense of the United States.  I hope the FY12 budget undoes more than three years of neglect of national missile defense.

UPDATE 6:15 p.m.:

House Armed Services readiness subcommittee Chairman Randy Forbes (R-VA) added his two cents:

The President's defense strategy embraces weakness by a thousand cuts. PLA Admirals will welcome the news that the President has no plans to catch up to China's sixty attack submarines nor to invest in a missile defense system that can rival China's mounting arsenal of missiles. North Koreans will feel more secure as America prepares to dismiss almost 1 in 6 soldiers.  Tehran will be pleased that one-third less American cruisers are slated to patrol the world's sea lanes.  Foreign shipyards will embrace a shift toward outsourcing defense manufacturing jobs.

This Administration is not building a military that is lean, agile, and flexible.  It is dismantling our nation's greatest strategic asset and accepting grave risk in the process.  Virginians will undoubtedly suffer as a result of this Administration's budget proposal -- so too will our allies -- but it is our men and women in uniform who will suffer the most.  They are the ones who will face America's unforeseen enemies under-prepared, under-resourced, overworked and late to the battle.  America is a superpower on a dangerous and rapid course towards mediocrity.

The president has nominated Lt. Gen. Dennis Via for a fourth star and the position of commander, U.S. Army Materiel Command, according to a service announcement.

Via is the deputy commanding general and chief of staff at AMC.

From his Army bio:

A native of Martinsville, Virginia, Lieutenant General Via was commissioned on 18 May 1980 in the Signal Corps after graduating as a Distinguished Military Graduate from Virginia State University. He later earned a Master’s Degree from Boston University, and is a graduate of the United States Army Command and General Staff College (class of 1991) and the U.S. Army War College (class of 1999).

The General’s command assignments include the 82nd Signal Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division, Fort Bragg, NC; 3rd Signal Brigade, III Armored Corps, Fort Hood, TX; 5th Signal Command; United States Army Europe and 7th Army, Mannheim, Germany; and the United States Army Communications-Electronics Life Cycle Management Command and Fort Monmouth, Fort Monmouth, NJ.

His key staff assignments include Aide-de-Camp to the Chief of Staff, Allied Forces Southern Europe, Naples, Italy; Operations Officer, J-6, Armed Forces Inaugural Committee, Washington, DC; Chief Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) Division, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-8, United States Army, Washington, DC; and Principal Director, Global Information Grid Operations/Commander, Defense Information Systems Agency Global Operations/Deputy Commander, Joint Task Force-Global Network Operations, Defense Information Systems Agency, Arlington, VA.

According to the Army announcement, the president has nominated a successor to Via as deputy commander: Maj. Gen. Patricia McQuistion, the commander of U.S. Army Sustaintment Command, Rock Island, IL.

President Obama has signed a National Strategy for Global Supply Chain Security that sets U.S. policy to strengthen the global supply chain.

"The first goal is to promote the timely and efficient flow of legitimate commerce while protecting and securing the supply chain from exploitation, and reducing its vulnerability to disruption," the White House states in a fact sheet. "To this end we will enhance the integrity of goods as they move through the global supply chain. We will also understand and resolve threats early in the process, and strengthen the security of physical infrastructure, conveyances, and information assets while seeking to maximize trade through modernizing supply chain infrastructure and processes."

The second goal, the statement adds, is to "foster a global supply chain system that is prepared for and can withstand evolving threats and hazards and that can recover rapidly from disruptions. To achieve this we will prioritize efforts to mitigate systemic vulnerabilities and refine plans to reconstitute the flow of commerce after disruptions."