This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/28/us-military-sequester-cuts-congress

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Congress' poor decisions might be the greatest threat to US national security Congress' poor decisions might be the greatest threat to US national security
(about 2 months later)
The greatest challenge for the US military these days isn't a bunch of al-Qaida types hiding in caves along the Af-Pak border or even rogue nerds on computers intent on stealing secrets or turning electricity off in major American cities. It's Congress.The greatest challenge for the US military these days isn't a bunch of al-Qaida types hiding in caves along the Af-Pak border or even rogue nerds on computers intent on stealing secrets or turning electricity off in major American cities. It's Congress.
Much has been written about the nearly $1tn in cuts the US Department of Defense (DoD) has to make in the next decade. There are constant reminders of it. On a recent trip to a US army base, I was met with a yellow and black hazard sign that read: "Expect delays at gate processing due to furlough", and workers on the base were trading stories of how they are personally coping with the lost pay.Much has been written about the nearly $1tn in cuts the US Department of Defense (DoD) has to make in the next decade. There are constant reminders of it. On a recent trip to a US army base, I was met with a yellow and black hazard sign that read: "Expect delays at gate processing due to furlough", and workers on the base were trading stories of how they are personally coping with the lost pay.
The simplistic view of what's going on is that this is a budgetary war between "hawks" who are fighting just about any cuts and the "doves" who believe the military can magically go back to pre-9/11 levels overnight and all will be fine.The simplistic view of what's going on is that this is a budgetary war between "hawks" who are fighting just about any cuts and the "doves" who believe the military can magically go back to pre-9/11 levels overnight and all will be fine.
As always, the reality is a lot more complex. Scaling the military, especially the army, back to pre-9/11 levels is great until you take into account that one soldier costs 57% more today than he or she did in 2001. It's going to take more than just reducing the military back to peace-time levels to solve the fiscal challenges. Furthermore, while the ground wars in the Middle East are nearing an end, the cyber front is growing, and the military is playing catch up.As always, the reality is a lot more complex. Scaling the military, especially the army, back to pre-9/11 levels is great until you take into account that one soldier costs 57% more today than he or she did in 2001. It's going to take more than just reducing the military back to peace-time levels to solve the fiscal challenges. Furthermore, while the ground wars in the Middle East are nearing an end, the cyber front is growing, and the military is playing catch up.
But after spending several days with hundreds of military leaders studying for master's degrees at the US Army War College, I've come to realize that, broadly speaking, they view the cuts much like they do any other mission: a job to get done.But after spending several days with hundreds of military leaders studying for master's degrees at the US Army War College, I've come to realize that, broadly speaking, they view the cuts much like they do any other mission: a job to get done.
As one senior officer noted dryly:As one senior officer noted dryly:
We're not the first, nor the last, to have to sacrifice.We're not the first, nor the last, to have to sacrifice.
Military leaders know what they have to do and frankly, when the media cameras aren't rolling, they are quick to point out the waste they see in their areas of command. Military leaders don't fear cuts, they fear what Congress will do to the cuts they propose. Any budget plan the Department of Defense presents will be critiqued and re-written by Congress.Military leaders know what they have to do and frankly, when the media cameras aren't rolling, they are quick to point out the waste they see in their areas of command. Military leaders don't fear cuts, they fear what Congress will do to the cuts they propose. Any budget plan the Department of Defense presents will be critiqued and re-written by Congress.
As another military leader said:As another military leader said:
We're going to strive for an A, but we'll probably only end up with a C plan.We're going to strive for an A, but we'll probably only end up with a C plan.
While Republicans and Democrats in Washington love to speak generally about budget cuts, when it comes to slashing bases or functions in their own backyard, they suddenly have plenty of objections.While Republicans and Democrats in Washington love to speak generally about budget cuts, when it comes to slashing bases or functions in their own backyard, they suddenly have plenty of objections.
It's how $500 million worth of unneeded tanks still got produced in Ohio. The army didn't want them, but Ohio's federal lawmakers did. The politics won out over any rational debate.It's how $500 million worth of unneeded tanks still got produced in Ohio. The army didn't want them, but Ohio's federal lawmakers did. The politics won out over any rational debate.
The Washington Post recently did an expose on commissaries, the US military's "supermarkets". It's the kind of story of waste that if it were happening at the Internal Revenue Service, there would be outcry. But all this extra spending benefits local workers and companies who live around military bases across the country. Those are jobs that congressmen and women don't want to make the front page (or homepage) of their local papers for cutting.The Washington Post recently did an expose on commissaries, the US military's "supermarkets". It's the kind of story of waste that if it were happening at the Internal Revenue Service, there would be outcry. But all this extra spending benefits local workers and companies who live around military bases across the country. Those are jobs that congressmen and women don't want to make the front page (or homepage) of their local papers for cutting.
The same is true of military benefits. While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan grew more and more unpopular, one thing remained fairly steady: respect and support for the troops. No one in Washington wants to be the Grinch who scaled back the military benefits, even if some adjustments should be made in a post-war era.The same is true of military benefits. While the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan grew more and more unpopular, one thing remained fairly steady: respect and support for the troops. No one in Washington wants to be the Grinch who scaled back the military benefits, even if some adjustments should be made in a post-war era.
The real question isn't whether the military can make the cuts. The question is whether Congress can. One senior army officer likened it to "throwing down the reality card".The real question isn't whether the military can make the cuts. The question is whether Congress can. One senior army officer likened it to "throwing down the reality card".
Congress does not have a great track record for making any decisions, let alone challenging ones in recent years. The ones it does make are too often "for the good of my district", not the good of my country. Consider that the last successful large-scale base closing effort was in 1995. It took an outside commission to make any progress and even then, there was pushback, although the final vote in Congress was an all-or-nothing one.Congress does not have a great track record for making any decisions, let alone challenging ones in recent years. The ones it does make are too often "for the good of my district", not the good of my country. Consider that the last successful large-scale base closing effort was in 1995. It took an outside commission to make any progress and even then, there was pushback, although the final vote in Congress was an all-or-nothing one.
The DoD is being pretty clear about its top priorities to shift its focus to Asia-Pacific and cyber war while still having enough capability to respond to needs in other parts of the world or and defend the US. Unfortunately, the priorities of Congress are too often their own backyards.The DoD is being pretty clear about its top priorities to shift its focus to Asia-Pacific and cyber war while still having enough capability to respond to needs in other parts of the world or and defend the US. Unfortunately, the priorities of Congress are too often their own backyards.
The greatest threat to US national security might be Congress' poor decisions. Making the wrong cuts is as bad as making no cuts at all.The greatest threat to US national security might be Congress' poor decisions. Making the wrong cuts is as bad as making no cuts at all.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.