Keeping a Low Political Profile at the Pentagon
Surge or not, $50 billion infusion or not, all-important September progress report or not, the Pentagon is already looking beyond the 2008 election. And though Iraq certainly figures into its plans, the military has decided to keep a low profile until the end of the Bush presidency.
In a memorandum to Defense Department managers -- first reported by Reuters and the trade newsletter Inside the Pentagon -- Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England has laid out 25 goals for the military to meet by December 2008. The memo divides the initiatives into four categories: "prevailing" in the global war on terrorism; improving cooperation among the four services; focusing more on people; and transforming "enterprise management."
The latter is the bread and butter of bureaucracy and includes a number of internal management changes to tame the massive Pentagon establishment, including establishing a "new strategic planning process" and implementing reforms to better align demands from the field with orders from the procurement office. Buried in the bureaucratese is a new initiative to stack up one service's weapon or system against another's, with the goal of actually moving resources between service budgets if necessary -- for some, a fate worse than peace.
The memo, dated Aug. 9, asks the military to assess progress in the Iraq war once the September report is issued and to revise its strategy as needed. But there is no goal that imposes either winning or withdrawing. Clearly, by December 2008, the Pentagon foresees that the status quo will continue. Oh, there may be fewer boots on the ground, but the Defense Department leadership clearly believes that the Iraq war will have to be resolved by the next president.
Specific Iraq-related goals in the 25 are actions needed to address weaknesses uncovered in six years of combat since 9/11:
• rapidly fielding a new fleet of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles;
• "aggressively" pursuing the work of the Joint Improvise Explosive Device Defeat Organization (IED's continue to be a major killer and have not yet been countered by the multibillion dollar Pentagon technology effort);
• developing a Near East-South Asia security cooperation strategy and plan (that is, foreign military and police training and arms assistance and sales to friendly government); and
• implementing a long-term strategy for detainees.
In the field of counterterrorism, the military is ordered to continue to expand its special operations forces and to "swiftly improve high-value target tracking and locating capabilities" -- that is, the overall ability to go after al-Qaeda and other terrorist leaders. Two elements of pursuing the "global war" into new areas include standing up the new U.S. Africa Command and transforming the U.S. Southern Command (covering Latin America) into a more "interagency" operation, code for increased integration of military and CIA counterterrorism operations.
On homeland security, the Pentagon is also directed to reassess its ability to execute homeland defense and civil support missions and "revise and execute plans and resources accordingly."
Eight of the 25 goals relate to the war on terror (which, according to the Pentagon, includes Iraq). The remaining 17 are mostly management-related. There is talk of implementing a new "cyberspace strategy," but there's no talk of Russia or China or Iran or missile defense or nuclear weapons or any of the other monster-in-the-closet programs that would indicate that the Bush team has a clandestine agenda to start more wars before leaving office. England says the idea is to provide the next president -- the next "management team," as he calls it -- a firm footing for the future.
There's two pieces of good new here: One, the Pentagon is getting out of the way, trying to support the war effort but not declaring some goal or direction that would just serve to make the military or political situation worse. The Defense Department leadership has concluded that the decisions are being made elsewhere.
Two, the Gates-England team is ratcheting down the heat. Maybe it is their manner, and in that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, whose 14-month tenure at the CIA was frankly unremarkable, may indeed be the perfect man for the job after the fire-breathing Rumsfeld. But maybe Gates and England are also truly respectful of a larger reality: Iraq is insolvable, but a wide-open presidential campaign is not the time for new military adventures or geopolitical initiatives. Bravo then, gentlemen.
By William M. Arkin |
August 29, 2007; 8:23 AM ET
Previous: They're Marching, But for What? |
Next: Sustainable Military Development
Posted by: piuj eknaw | September 20, 2007 3:05 AM
phtbmji kwmol qopuba ulikbzym wkzmqn tfqm nulvsj
Posted by: iowjgsbc mbatdv | September 20, 2007 3:04 AM
Good, no more foreign funny business. Do you think for a minute that we are over our head in quagmires? Our country has many recources to deal with anything. Terror needs to be replaced in the five sided building with policy initiatives. The fear factor will not sway us Americans.We are always ready for a fight, just direct it positively,not with talking points and bluster. Our military is smart,and no one can match it.
Posted by: dennis igou | September 4, 2007 2:54 PM
lmao
The Rev noted that you did not include your post among those, in this blog, that make sense. And thank God for that!
And with regard to your questions? To all of your questions, the answer is a resounding yes.
Now what other bit of insanity do you have to offer to us today? The rest of us have offered solutions for just over a year or so now, where has your head been during that time? I would hate to imagine where it has been!
Grow up!
Posted by: The Rev | August 30, 2007 11:30 AM
so much stupdity in one place...thanks WP for the Service.
- OBL wants peace! bahahahahahaha
- the Rev (aka the bigot) sees bogeymen everywhere. btw, Rev...you ever been part of the bureaucracy at the P-Gon? You actually have experience in how it works? understand how the budget process works, how the defense planing process works, the interrelationships among vendors, civil servants, the Administration and Congress? in short...the strengths and weaknesses. or do you remain earlobe deep in cliches?
- the "global criminals at the P-Gon"? There's an analytically insightful thought. whatever it means. "alleged enemies"? come join the fight coward and learn what "alleged" really means. or are you just anoter heckler on the curb with nothing to contribute? and please...spare me all the rhetoric....it's become predictable and boring.
There's one post on this blog thuis far with an actual idea....kudos to you Nick. the rest is garbage.
What are you doing?
Posted by: lmao | August 30, 2007 8:57 AM
There are a lot of people on this blog posting criticisms and attacks on U.S. policies, whether in Iraq or elsewhere. You have a right to speak your mind. Now, do you have a better plan? A more constructive, more realistic, more considerate of the long-term welfare of the Iraqi and U.S. and world community, plan?
Withdrawing now from Iraq would be an unmitigated disaster-- the entire Middle East could conceivably descend into chaos. Would you have us leave the Sunni insurgents to try and murder their way back to power? Or let the Shiite militias hand their country over to the Iranian mullahs? Either way, it would not be likely that ordinary Iraqis would have any hope of freedom, democracy, or getting a piece of the oil wealth of their country.
Do you have a better, more workable plan? Or are you just spewing anti-American bile and venom?
Posted by: Vladimir Maranov | August 30, 2007 1:52 AM
Forget about Ron Paul, vote for SEAN PAUL! Just give me the vote an' we be clubbin', y'all!
Posted by: Sean Paul for 2008 | August 30, 2007 1:34 AM
So, does this mean that the long-rumoured air assault against Iranian nuclear processing facilities (or perhaps even more ambitious "targeting") is a dead letter? Creating a three-front war now is "off the table"? Hmm, I wonder, given the continual ratcheting-up of tensions, which are more and more requiring the Iranian government to simply capitulate on all issues across the board - even those that reasonable people would consider legitimate Iranian interests - in order to forestall US military adventurism.
Posted by: barrisj | August 29, 2007 8:38 PM
The Pentagon could make some progress
against IEDs if they would consider the
use of minesweeping with electric and
magnetic fields. In this invention
a large military truck is equipped with a long boom extending out in front of the truck. A coil is mounted on this boom. The coil is energized by a strong alternating current at several KHz provided by a motor and generator on the truck. The intense magnetic field from the coil induces currents in the detonator of the IED causing it to explode.
Posted by: Nick | August 29, 2007 5:58 PM
The Pentagon could make some progress
against IEDs if they would consider the
use of minesweeping with electric and
magnetic fields. In this invention
a large military truck is equipped with a long boom extending out in front of the truck. A coil is mounted on this boom. The coil is energized by a strong alternating current at several KHz provided by a motor and generator on the truck. The intense magnetic field from the coil induces currents in the detonator of the IED causing it to explode.
Posted by: Nick | August 29, 2007 5:57 PM
"...actually moving resources between service budgets if necessary -- for some, a fate worse than peace."
Good one!
Posted by: OD | August 29, 2007 3:24 PM
P.J. Casey: "While we should get out of Iraq, Afghanistan is still on the front burner. This will be a long term operation because..."
Because they'll kill one or two (potentially more, as witnessed in Iraq, with it's historically similar anti-invasion tactics) INVADERS (there IS no other description that adequately fits western involvement in the region) a day for HUNDREDS OF YEARS!
If you want an American police state, keep INVADING the region, and they WILL FOLLOW YOU HOME to give you a reason to have one.
Osama bin-Laden essentially waved an olive branch at the west in his "election speech" before the 'Moron-in-Chief' was re-'elected'.
I suggest the west accept that gracefully, and as he stated (paraphrased): "Your governments won't help you with that... you must do it yourselves."
Silly! Expecting Americans et al to take responsiblitiy for ANYTHING!
Must outsource that item...
Posted by: The voice of doom & gloom | August 29, 2007 2:45 PM
The instructions are vague, which I think reflect a period in limbo, with a lame duck President, and some uncertainty about the direction of Foreign and Defense policy after the election.
Realistic contingency planning would involve a large standing army supported by the draft, and or limited increases in the volunteer army to fight the "War on Terror".
I believe a combination of these plans is the safest way to go. While we should get out of Iraq, Afghanistan is still on the front burner. This will be a long term operation because it involves a counter-insurgency operation and Shinseki's recommendations for several hundred thousand troops for the Iraq war apply also to Afghanistan. We need proper troop rotations for a long term operations. I would not like to see other long term voluntary operations like Iraq. War is always a last resort.
Posted by: P. J. Casey | August 29, 2007 1:43 PM
The global criminals of the Pentagon NEED to keep a low profile to avoid lynching by the American public for treason such as this: "More Missing Weapons & A Mysterious U.S. Military Officer's Suicide: American Weapons Recovered In Turkey Were Originally Destined For The Iraqi Government"
A senior Turkish security official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities, said his government estimates some 20,000 U.S.-bought Glock 9mm pistols have been brought from Iraq into his country over the last three years.
[...]
What puzzled Turkish police was the weapons' origin. Glocks are high-quality sidearms, but by last year they had practically become common street weapons in Turkey. More than 1,000 had been taken from criminals, guerrillas, terrorists and assassins all over the country, and authorities believed tens of thousands more had found their way onto the black market - but from where?
The Austrian government repeatedly checked the serial numbers of the murder weapons. The manufacturer informed Ankara that the pistols were consigned originally to " 'US Mission Iraq' [formerly the Coalition Provisional Authority], address: Republican Presidential Compound, Ministry of the Interior, Baghdad, Iraq."
[...]
In full: http://leighm.net/wp/2007/08/28/missing_glocks/ with links to probable Pentagon, Russian (and Italian) Mafia gun-running connections by parties that have also worked for our alleged enemies, the taliban, and our one-time allies, The Kosovo Liberation Army (AKA al qaeda).
These people are in soooo deep that they can no longer even see the light at the end of their own a-holes.
Posted by: The Buffalo In Da' Midst | August 29, 2007 1:03 PM
The military industrial complex...
of the 20th century, has morphed into the religious-political-military complex of the 21st century.
Its focus, is to preserve America at all costs and by any means neccessary, including the Americanization of the remaining nations of planet earth.
And, America will do so either by regime change, constraint, force, economic strangulation or under the guise of spreading Christianity.
It will be interesting to see what happens if another political party takes over and proceeds to dismantle what has been put in place by the current incumbent party and administration.
Otherwise, $50, is a drop in the bottom in comparison to what our military government will require over the next couple of decades (trillions and trillions more than today).
Posted by: The Rev | August 29, 2007 12:29 PM
Forget the HBIEDs, we have a bigger mess on our hands (and face) -- The BAP - The Born Again Penetrator:
While the Singing Senators were playing with children, the Bushes protected Senator Mark Foley (Republican, Florida) and enjoyed a sausage tasting with Bush White House spiritual leader Pastor Ted Haggard at prayer breakfast. These Bush Family values are spread in a wide stance by the Blackwater Missionaries in their covert rape rooms. Even Senator Vitter (Republican - The State Formerly Containing New Orleans) followed Neil Bush's example of Bush Family values. Republican Bob Allen is not only another RPOF backroom insider, he is also another Florida Republican who did it like they do on the Discovery Channel Blackwater special and Republican Senator Larry E. Craig certainly fits tightly in Bush's loyal family. So now we know what made the Singing Senators sing!
"Let the eagle soar...
Posted by: Singing Senator | August 29, 2007 11:22 AM
I support Ron Paul. Why are we intervening and invading other countries?
It will only cause more push back against the USA.
When the USSR used to do this didnt we see that as evil?
Join the Ron Paul Revolution.
www.ronpaul2008.com
Posted by: Paul Schlimme | August 29, 2007 9:48 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.

mdktv ivhjbknq ljqepfdn epanlqsri kjpbic ykdbufo tdbwkvyrl [URL=http://www.tkfildz.pejuxqfls.com]mkcrydw cako[/URL]