thedrifter
12-06-03, 07:46 AM
12-04-2003
From the Editor:
The Military World Turned Upside Down
By Ed Offley
Goodbye “Little America,” hello, Sao Tome
Obscured by news coverage of the guerilla war in Iraq and the early fulminations of the 2004 presidential election campaign, the Bush administration over the past week has formally begun a yearlong process to review the “footprint” of overseas U.S. military bases.
Two days before he visited with U.S. troops in Iraq, President Bush on Nov. 25 released a one-page statement announcing, in the dry language of government, an “ongoing review of our overseas [military] force posture.” The statement noted:
“Since the end of the Cold War, the once-familiar threats facing our nation, our friends, and our allies have given way to the less predictable dangers associated with rogue nations, global terrorism, and weapons of mass destruction. We have been actively transforming our defenses to address these changes. While we continue to make progress in the transformation of our uniformed military, it remains for us to realign the global posture of our forces to better address these new challenges.”
Pentagon officials note that in the two years since 9/11, operations in the war against terrorism have taken U.S. military units to a growing list of new locations ranging from the Horn of Africa to Central Asia. The European Command has significantly expanded its presence missions in Africa and experts point to obscure nations such as Sao Tome off the coast of Nigeria as potential new alliances.
The men and women serving in the U.S. armed services and their families know exactly what this portends: The world in which they serve and fight is about to be upended in a scale that no one serving today can imagine. Within the next year, we can expect announcements of major overseas base closings, unit transfers and the shift of military bases from “little America” enclaves to sparse remote facilities such as Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo or Entebbe Airport in Uganda.
That such a review is vastly overdue is beyond debate. It has been more than a decade since the collapse of the Soviet Union, yet a majority of U.S. forces in Europe still occupy the bases and kasernes that they seized during the conquest of Germany in 1945. The same applies to South Korea and Japan.
Speaking to a conference in Washington, D.C., earlier this week, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith said, “We are aiming to achieve the most basic and comprehensive review of the nation’s global defense posture since the United States became a world power.”
Driving what appears to be a genuine sense of urgency among the top military leadership is recognition that the Cold War-era military infrastructure and organization is too static and rigid – and in many cases, in the wrong location – to meet the new threat from transnational terrorist groups such as al Qaeda.
In a speech to a different Washington conference this week, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Richard Myers said the war on terrorism is unlike any war the United States has fought before, and this demands new thinking, tactics and capabilities. “I would say transforming our armed forces is not optional. We have to focus on the near-, the mid- and the long-term capabilities all at the same time. That task is every bit as difficult as it sounds.”
Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld were scheduled to confer with our NATO allies on the plan this week. Feith said on Wednesday that he and Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman will visit 13 other countries next week to brief their governments on U.S. ideas for repositioning military forces to better respond to future threats. This includes addressing long-term security implications from the anticipated increase in military power by China, India and other nations.
While administration officials say no decisions have yet been made, the outlines of a new overseas military “footprint” are beginning to emerge:
* The Pentagon will substantially reduce the number of major fixed bases in Europe and Northeast Asia, while leaving a number of major hubs such as Ramstein Airbase in Germany and Rota Naval Station in Spain as they are.
* A sizable but indeterminate number of U.S. military units now based overseas will be relocated to the continental United States for future rotational deployments abroad.
* The Pentagon will rely more on two other types of bases: Spartan but semi-permanent “forward operating bases” with some permanent structures such as Kosovo’s Camp Bondsteel; and even more austere “forward operating locations” such as Cairo West airfield in Egypt or Entabbe Airport, Uganda, which have scant infrastructure but a usable airstrip.
* New forward operating bases will be constructed along major global transportation routes to position U.S. military forces for rapid response to crises. These facilities will possibly include pre-positioned military equipment such as the brigade sets the Pentagon stored in Southwest Asia prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
* The Navy and Marine Corps will accelerate research into developing a permanent mobile force capability using redesigned or new designs of cargo and combat ships that will enable them to launch combat operations directly from the sea.
* The reshaped overseas base “footprint” will be selected in time to dovetail with the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure hearings mandated to identify excess military infrastructure here at home.
Still absent from the briefings and interview transcripts are any signs of recognition by Pentagon leaders that the changes will add major new stresses and strains to military people and their families. One hopes this omission is unintentional.
Throughout this controversial but necessary process, it will be the responsibility of the DoD leadership to ensure that the unavoidable disruption to the lives of our military people and their families is kept to a minimum.
Ed Offley is Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at dweditor@yahoo.com.
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=FTE.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=15&rnd=512.5123395443036
Sempers,
Roger
:marine:
From the Editor:
The Military World Turned Upside Down
By Ed Offley
Goodbye “Little America,” hello, Sao Tome
Obscured by news coverage of the guerilla war in Iraq and the early fulminations of the 2004 presidential election campaign, the Bush administration over the past week has formally begun a yearlong process to review the “footprint” of overseas U.S. military bases.
Two days before he visited with U.S. troops in Iraq, President Bush on Nov. 25 released a one-page statement announcing, in the dry language of government, an “ongoing review of our overseas [military] force posture.” The statement noted:
“Since the end of the Cold War, the once-familiar threats facing our nation, our friends, and our allies have given way to the less predictable dangers associated with rogue nations, global terrorism, and weapons of mass destruction. We have been actively transforming our defenses to address these changes. While we continue to make progress in the transformation of our uniformed military, it remains for us to realign the global posture of our forces to better address these new challenges.”
Pentagon officials note that in the two years since 9/11, operations in the war against terrorism have taken U.S. military units to a growing list of new locations ranging from the Horn of Africa to Central Asia. The European Command has significantly expanded its presence missions in Africa and experts point to obscure nations such as Sao Tome off the coast of Nigeria as potential new alliances.
The men and women serving in the U.S. armed services and their families know exactly what this portends: The world in which they serve and fight is about to be upended in a scale that no one serving today can imagine. Within the next year, we can expect announcements of major overseas base closings, unit transfers and the shift of military bases from “little America” enclaves to sparse remote facilities such as Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo or Entebbe Airport in Uganda.
That such a review is vastly overdue is beyond debate. It has been more than a decade since the collapse of the Soviet Union, yet a majority of U.S. forces in Europe still occupy the bases and kasernes that they seized during the conquest of Germany in 1945. The same applies to South Korea and Japan.
Speaking to a conference in Washington, D.C., earlier this week, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith said, “We are aiming to achieve the most basic and comprehensive review of the nation’s global defense posture since the United States became a world power.”
Driving what appears to be a genuine sense of urgency among the top military leadership is recognition that the Cold War-era military infrastructure and organization is too static and rigid – and in many cases, in the wrong location – to meet the new threat from transnational terrorist groups such as al Qaeda.
In a speech to a different Washington conference this week, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Richard Myers said the war on terrorism is unlike any war the United States has fought before, and this demands new thinking, tactics and capabilities. “I would say transforming our armed forces is not optional. We have to focus on the near-, the mid- and the long-term capabilities all at the same time. That task is every bit as difficult as it sounds.”
Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld were scheduled to confer with our NATO allies on the plan this week. Feith said on Wednesday that he and Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman will visit 13 other countries next week to brief their governments on U.S. ideas for repositioning military forces to better respond to future threats. This includes addressing long-term security implications from the anticipated increase in military power by China, India and other nations.
While administration officials say no decisions have yet been made, the outlines of a new overseas military “footprint” are beginning to emerge:
* The Pentagon will substantially reduce the number of major fixed bases in Europe and Northeast Asia, while leaving a number of major hubs such as Ramstein Airbase in Germany and Rota Naval Station in Spain as they are.
* A sizable but indeterminate number of U.S. military units now based overseas will be relocated to the continental United States for future rotational deployments abroad.
* The Pentagon will rely more on two other types of bases: Spartan but semi-permanent “forward operating bases” with some permanent structures such as Kosovo’s Camp Bondsteel; and even more austere “forward operating locations” such as Cairo West airfield in Egypt or Entabbe Airport, Uganda, which have scant infrastructure but a usable airstrip.
* New forward operating bases will be constructed along major global transportation routes to position U.S. military forces for rapid response to crises. These facilities will possibly include pre-positioned military equipment such as the brigade sets the Pentagon stored in Southwest Asia prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
* The Navy and Marine Corps will accelerate research into developing a permanent mobile force capability using redesigned or new designs of cargo and combat ships that will enable them to launch combat operations directly from the sea.
* The reshaped overseas base “footprint” will be selected in time to dovetail with the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure hearings mandated to identify excess military infrastructure here at home.
Still absent from the briefings and interview transcripts are any signs of recognition by Pentagon leaders that the changes will add major new stresses and strains to military people and their families. One hopes this omission is unintentional.
Throughout this controversial but necessary process, it will be the responsibility of the DoD leadership to ensure that the unavoidable disruption to the lives of our military people and their families is kept to a minimum.
Ed Offley is Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at dweditor@yahoo.com.
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=FTE.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=15&rnd=512.5123395443036
Sempers,
Roger
:marine: