Landing Zone, 3.15.17
By Alan W. Dowd
The U.S. military’s once-unrivaled technology edge is disappearing. The warning signs are everywhere.
From
the military: Before leaving his post as Air Force chief of staff last
year, Gen. Mark Welsh reported that China will soon field an air force
“at least as big – if not bigger – than our air force” and that China is
matching quantity with next-generation quality. China is developing and
deploying “a number of new aircraft ... completely new variants,” Welsh
noted. “We are not keeping up with that kind of technology
development.”
From
policymakers: “Our technological superiority is slipping,” warns Deputy
Secretary of Defense Robert Work, who has served under both President
Barack Obama and President Donald Trump. “We see it every day.”
From our adversaries: Russia’s new electronic warfare capabilities can jam, scramble and blind U.S. assets. China’s cyber-siege of the
United States is decimating industry, holding hostage the U.S.
government and weakening U.S. defenses. Both Russia and China are
catching up with the United States in stealth capabilities, networked
warfare, power projection and precision missilery.
And
from the frontlines, where U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines
are being forced to make the most of aging equipment: The Navy has been
ordered to stretch the build time of new aircraft carriers from five to
seven years. Short on ships, Marines are hitching a ride on allied vessels.
The Lexington Institute’s Loren Thompson warns,
“To say the Army isn’t ready for what lies ahead is an understatement:
if it got in a fight with Russian troops in Ukraine, Poland or the
Baltic states, the Army could quickly see all of its key targeting and
communications systems shut down by enemy jammers.”
The
Lexington Institute adds, “When the Cold War ended, the Defense
Department terminated production of the B-2 and ceased development of
new bombers for the first time since the 1920s.” Thanks to this
bomber-building holiday, America’s bomber force comprises just 76 B-52s
(the “newest” of which was built in 1961), 63 B-1s (brought into service
in 1986) and 20 B-2s (the first rolled off assembly lines in 1988).
Initial operational capability of the yet-to-be-built B-21 Long Range
Strike Bomber will not come until 2025.
Winning or losing
Why
is this happening? It’s not because the United States suddenly became
less technologically capable than China and Russia. The reason the
military-technology gap is closing is threefold.
First,
since Sept. 11, 2001, the U.S. military has been focused on dismantling
terrorist networks and clearing the spawning grounds of terrorism – and
understandably so. But this has expended resources that otherwise would
have been allocated toward new technologies and new weapons systems.
China
and Russia have not been standing still. Instead, they “have gone to
school on us,” in Work’s words, and invested their resources into
fielding 21st-century militaries.
Second, while Washington has been cutting defense spending, China and Russia have been increasing defense spending.
Between
2011 and 2015, Beijing increased military spending 55.7 percent. Last
year, Beijing increased military spending another 7 percent. Between
2010 and 2020, it’s expected that Beijing will double its military outlays.
Moscow increased military spending 108 percent between 2004 and 2013;
Moscow’s 2015 military outlays were 26 percent larger than in 2014.
All
the while, U.S. defense spending has been falling. The U.S defense
budget – in a time of war and growing international instability – has
fallen 15 percent since 2010. The U.S. defense budget has shrunk from
4.6 percent of GDP in 2009, to around 3 percent of GDP today. Looked at
another way, national security spending made up 20.1 percent of the
federal budget in 2010, but in 2015 it was 15.9 percent, as Politifact details.
Not surprisingly, defense R&D spending has plummeted accordingly – down 22.6 percent since 2009. Defense R&D spending has fallen from nearly 0.9 percent of GDP in 1988 to barely 0.4 percent of GDP today.
There
would be nothing wrong or worrisome about these numbers if peace were
breaking out around the world. But with ISIS and al-Qaida waging war and
sowing terror, with China building up its arsenal and claiming the
territories of its neighbors, with Russia annexing Crimea and projecting
military power into the Middle East, with Iran testing missiles and
North Korea detonating nukes, we know the very opposite is true.
Diminished
defense spending has led to a third factor that’s blunting America’s
military-technology edge: America’s defense industrial base is draining
away.
Even
before the bipartisan gamble known as sequestration began to take its
toll, then-Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen warned in 2011, “I
think the likelihood that if you make a decision which ends a certain
part of our industrial base, it doesn’t come back ... People go away,
skills go away.”
Take,
as an example, the plight of the F-22 Raptor, the most sophisticated
warplane in America’s arsenal. The F-22 is so advanced that Air Force
planners say it takes eight of the newer F-35s to do what two F-22s can do. The Pentagon’s original goal was 749 Raptors, but scaled that
back to 381 aircraft, before shutting down the F-22 program at just 187
aircraft in 2009.
Congress
now wants the Air Force to explore restarting the F-22 assembly line
and building 194 more Raptors. As Defense News reports, congressional
officials cite “growing threats to U.S. air superiority as a result of
adversaries closing the technology gap.” However, building just 75 more
Raptors would cost $17 billion, owing largely to the fact that the
personnel, tooling and facilities needed to resurrect the Raptor are
gone.
For
numerous reasons – cost, efficiency, the trend toward outsourcing –
today’s defense industrial base “relies on supply chains that are
increasingly complex and globalized,” retired Army Gen. John Adams
explains. “Too often, these supply chains create vulnerabilities and are
subject to manipulation by strategic competitors.” As an example, he
notes that the United States relies on a Chinese company to manufacture a
key chemical used in the propellant for Hellfire missiles.
In
fact, Reuters reports that the Pentagon “repeatedly waived laws banning
Chinese-built components on U.S. weapons in order to keep the
$392-billion Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter program on track in 2012
and 2013.”
With
sequestration hacking away at the amount the nation is investing in
defense, the five largest U.S. defense firms have cut 14 percent of
their workforce since 2008, according to a Politico analysis. However,
the U.S. defense industrial base was disappearing long before
sequestration. “From 1990 to 2000, both the number of major surface
combatant shipbuilders and the number of fixed-wing aircraft developers
fell from eight to three; the number of tactical missile producers fell
from 13 to three; and the number of tracked-combat vehicle developers
fell from three to two,” a Heritage Foundation report explains.
Reviving
the defense industrial base isn’t primarily about saving U.S. jobs or
even protecting U.S. military assets from foreign mischief – important
as those priorities are. Ultimately, it’s about winning or losing wars.
The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments concludes, “The
United States’ ability to mobilize key parts of its own defense
industrial base, particularly those concerned with volume production of
long-range precision-guided munitions, will likely be a critical factor
in its success or failure in the conflict.”
Changing the game
Even so, all the news on the military-technology front is not bad.
America’s
unmanned systems, missile defenses and cyberwar capabilities are on the
cutting edge. For instance, Ralph Langner, an expert in industrial
computer systems, has likened the Stuxnet computer worm, which the
United States deployed to target Iran’s nuclear program, to “the arrival
of an F-35 into a World War I battlefield.”
The
Navy is fine-tuning an otherworldly electromagnetic rail gun that can
hit targets 100 miles downrange at speeds exceeding 5,000 mph.
Air
Force leaders predict laser weapons will be grafted onto AC-130s, MQ-1
drones, F-22s and F-35s by 2020, Military Times reports. “This is a
reality,” Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, commander of Air Combat Command,
says. The technology is coming “very soon,” according to Carlisle, who
predicts the addition of laser weapons will “change the game.”
The
Air Force plans to turn old B-52s into unmanned “arsenal planes” that,
when networked with new F-22s, F-35s and B-21s, will serve as “airborne
magazines,” thus greatly expanding the striking power of smaller
airframes.
The
Pentagon is testing “micro-drones that can be launched from the flare
dispensers of moving F-16s and F/A-18 fighter jets,” The Washington Post
reports. Once dispersed, the micro-drones can attack independent targets, swarm a target or even lie in wait for a target.
U.S.
industry is developing the Prompt Global Strike missile system capable
of delivering a hypersonic kill vehicle “anywhere on Earth in as little
as an hour,” the Congressional Research Service reports.
Perhaps
Washington is ready to make the investments necessary to develop and
deploy these and other next-generation military technologies, in order
to defend America deep into the 21st century.
For example, there is bipartisan support in Congress to end sequestration. Noting that “it takes 22 years on average to field a major new weapons system,” the president pledges to build a military that can “deter, avoid and prevent conflict through
our unquestioned military strength” and wants to make the United States
“the world’s dominant technological powerhouse of the 21st century.”
Toward that end, Trump issued an executive order directing the Pentagon “to rebuild the U.S. Armed Forces,” determine
funding levels “necessary to improve readiness conditions and address
risks to national security,” and identify any issues with “insufficient
maintenance, delays in acquiring parts, access to training ranges,
combatant command operational demands, funding needed for consumables
... manpower shortfalls, depot maintenance capacity, and time needed to
plan, coordinate, and execute readiness and training activities.”
Timeless
It’s
well known that President George Washington advocated military
preparedness to deter America’s enemies and preserve America’s
independence. “There is nothing so likely to produce peace,” he
counseled, “as to be well prepared to meet an enemy.”
Less
well known is something Washington said about maintaining a strong
defense industry: “A free people ought not only to be armed, but
disciplined,” he declared. “Their safety and interest require that they
should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent on
others for essential, particularly for military, supplies.”
It’s time, again, to heed Washington’s timeless counsel.