Small Wars Journal

Mackenzie Eaglen previews the latest Pentagon strategy rewrite

Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:47am

Writing for AOL Defense, Mackenzie Eaglen, defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation, previews the Pentagon’s latest attempt at strategy, which Secretary Panetta is to roll out in January. By Eaglen’s account, there seem to be few surprises, at least for those who have been expecting a large cut to the Army and Marine Corps and a boost in funding for high-end capabilities, especially for the Pacific theater. This latest strategy/budget drill has occurred in response to the looming crash in projected defense spending. In an era of real constraints, many analysts thought it a good idea to return to first principles regarding ends, ways, and means. According to Eaglen, this strategy effort will fall short of that mark. But don’t despair – there is sure to be yet another stem-to-stern strategy review next year.

Eaglen reports that Pentagon planners will harvest savings by cutting overseas bases, reducing ground force headcounts below pre-9/11 levels, and by pushing more capability into reserve forces. Nuclear forces will suffer from benign neglect. Meanwhile, the administration’s “Pacific Pivot” has revealed the Pentagon to be unprepared for that theater’s vast spaces and growing missile threats. Thus the boost in funding for long-range strike, in an attempt to make up for delays to these programs previously imposed by Robert Gates and Gen. James Cartwright. Another new funding winner is cyber-defense, even if much of the most serious strategic vulnerability lies in the private sector outside the Pentagon’s control.

Eaglen closes her essay with some smart advice that this year’s strategy writers probably lacked the time or authority to include:

Unfortunately, the way DoD is preparing for this shift seems to be driven more by budgets than by strategy. Defense officials should not shoulder all the blame. A truly comprehensive review would boil down America's key activities into a concrete list of five or six enduring advantages and then think about how the U.S. can maintain these core competencies into the future.

Not to worry though; there will always be next year’s “once in a generation” strategy review to finally get things right.