Rumsfeld Aides Seek Deep Personnel Cuts In Armed Forces to Pay For New Weaponry
By GREG JAFFE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
WASHINGTON—Aides to Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld are calling for deep personnel cuts to the Army,
Navy, and Air Force in order to pay for new high-tech weaponry
and missile defenses that are cornerstones of President Bush's
plan to "transform the military."
The proposal to reduce manpower—part
of a congressionally mandated defense review due next month—calls
for the Army to trim as many as 2.8 of its 10 divisions, or about
56,000 troops. The Air Force would lose as many as 16 of its
61 fighter squadrons, according to the plan, and the Navy would
drop one or two of its 12 carrier battle groups, defense officials
said. Mr. Rumsfeld and top generals of each military service
were briefed on the recommendations for the first time yesterday.
Any cuts are sure to provoke strong protests
from both the military brass and Congress, which in recent weeks
has insisted it won't allow reductions in force structure or
weapons programs. Earlier this week 80 lawmakers sent a letter
to Mr. Rumsfeld expressing "strong opposition" to possible
cuts in the size of the Army.
It isn't clear exactly which parts of
the world would see the largest reduction in U.S. forces under
the proposal presented to the secretary. "The assumption
is that cuts would primarily come out of Europe," said one
senior military official who was apprised of the review. In recent
months defense officials have focused attention on Asia, which
has fewer U.S. bases and more ground to cover compared with Europe,
and hence greater need for longrange weapons systems called for
by President Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld.
Large cuts of U.S. troops in Europe would
likely raise the anxieties of allies who have expressed concern
that the Bush administration appears to be disengaging from Europe.
Mr. Bush's foreign-policy team has devoted considerable energy
to quelling those fears during his first six months in office.
It also is far from clear that the cuts
will ever even be proposed to Congress in their current state.
Senior defense officials caution that the initial assessment,
part of the defense secretary's congressionally mandated Quadrennial
Defense Review, could change significantly before the report
is submitted Sept. 30. "This is still a fluid situation,"
one defense official said.
A separate review, conducted by Lt. Gen.
Bruce Carlson and the staff of Gen. Hugh Shelton, chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently reached a very different
conclusion about the force structure needed to meet new strategic
guidelines that Mr. Rumsfeld recently negotiated with senior
military brass: It projected the services would need to stay
the same size or even grow. Gen. Carlson's review also was presented
to Mr. Rumsfeld yesterday.
Few expected the Bush administration
would consider such deep force cuts six months ago. But defense
officials say the president's $1.35 trillion tax cut, combined
with a slowing economy, have left little money for the kind of
military transformation the administration hoped for. Senior
defense officials also say they were surprised by the state of
crumbling military infrastructure, which required far greater
infusions of cash than was initially expected.
With money tight, force cuts and infrastructure
reductions through base closings have become critical elements
of the administration's broader strategy to transform the military.
The goal is to create a stealthier, more rapidly deployable force
better suited to fight future battles.
It is unclear exactly which weapons
systems would see more money as a result of potential force-structure
cuts. A defense official said the savings from the troop cuts
could be used to pay for the administration's ambitious national
missile-defense plan, which saw its 2002 budget increased 60%
to about $8 billion. Spending on ground-, sea-, air- and space-based
missile defenses is likely to rise significantly in future years
if those systems prove their mettle.
The force-structure cuts could also be
used to increase the Pentagon's research-and-development spending
on promising new weapons systems, battlefield sensors and unmanned
aircraft. Savings also could be plowed into infrastructure improvements
and salary increases for troops, a defense official said.
If implemented, the reductions also could
mean that more-traditional weapons systems—such as fighter
jets, ships and tanks—could be bought in smaller numbers
as the force shrinks.
Home