WASHINGTON, Jan. 13 (UPI) -- Columnist Mark Steyn raised a typically biting point about the escalating "beauty contest where we are competing to give higher (tsunami aid) figures," as Europe's development commissioner characterized the apparent bidding war. In a world where seemingly unrelated issues prove increasingly connected, however, the Canadian humorist also unwittingly broached the world of Pentagon politics.
Steyn dismissed criticism, largely European, of the relative size of the United States' financial assistance. "If America were to emulate Ireland and Norway, there'd be a lot more dead Indonesians and Sri Lankans. (Euro-critics) may not have noticed, but the actual relief effort going on right now is being done by the Yanks: it's the USAF and a couple of diverted naval groups shuttling in food and medicine ... The Irish can't fly in relief supplies, because they don't have any C-130s. All they can do is wait for the U.N. to swing by and pick up their cheque."
If you're a homeless Sri Lankan, Steyn continued, what matters not is the relative "moral authority" of the United Nations and United States, but who has the equipment. For now, at least, that remains us.
In the middle of this carrier-and-transport driven effort, the Pentagon surprisingly proposed decommissioning the very hardware proving indispensable to -- in the words of certain commentators -- showing our humanity to the Muslim world.
Among the targets proposed for scrapping are the aircraft carrier U.S.S. John F. Kennedy -- a choice certain to push political hot buttons -- and the F-22 stealth fighter. Also tagged was that workhorse for all cargo and relief functions the C-130 transport, currently carrying the load in the Indian Ocean and two combat zones.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is sticking around in President Bush's second term, to execute their joint vision for a new U.S. military to confront changing threats. He also has been charged with finding spending cuts, while pouring $4 billion and $1 billion per month into Iraq and Afghanistan, respectively.
Rumsfeld has no hope of finding savings in the personnel budget, given the need to increase troop strength. As such, in the closing days of last year the Pentagon announced cuts so seemingly rich in substantively objectionable targets that he has some observers wondering whether the old bureaucrat has struck his wiliest move yet.
Amid preparation of its 2006 budget the Pentagon's spokesmen, without providing numbers, state an expectation of a 2006 defense budget higher than 2005's $420 billion. Yet, in addition to the obvious politics attaching to retiring the Kennedy, consider the stealth fighter, into which the Air Force has invested about $40 billion in research, development and early production.
More remarkable is announcing termination of the C-130. Just two years ago the Pentagon signed the deal to replace and upgrade 60 of these planes built during the Vietnam era, now ferrying troops in hot zones. Since its introduction to service the C-130 has performed tactical and strategic airlift, airdrops, search and rescue missions, conversion to a gunship, weather reconnaissance, and special operations like helping to battle forest fires within the United States.
Now, the evolving next generation plane is serving as an airborne "mini-M*A*S*H" unit with a pod that may be left as a transportable hospital, as well as its infamous pre-invasion electronic combat (jamming, e.g., Al Jazeera or mobilization instructions).
To cancel this beast the Pentagon would spend an extra $100 million per plane delivered. Terminating the C-130 will cost taxpayers $2.2 billion, to complete 12 aircraft. That's a cost of more than $183 million per plane that still leaves the Marine Corps short 18 of what it requires. Continuing the program costs $3.2 billion, for 39 aircraft, or $82 million per plane.
Viewed otherwise, by obtaining its required planes for merely 50 percent more than the cost of termination, the Pentagon obtains 300 percent more airships.
It seems clear that cost considerations did not dictate here. It seems equally unthinkable that tactical considerations are at work, given how recently the Pentagon requested these 60 next-generation, replacement C-130s and the plane's myriad and indispensable roles.
Also contributing to suspicions that Rumsfeld is floating military cuts certain to be rejected is that under the recommended budget the United States will find itself with one single production line for fixed-wing aircraft by 2010 (there are currently six). Industry sources actually hypothesize that future lines could thus be outsourced to our European allies, presumably in line behind China's orders which look likely to resume soon.
There is no apparent pressure from the White House for these particular decisions, and the cagey Rumsfeld has put the administration in a nearly irresistible position to refuse tactically risky and politically dreadful recommendations. Watch for the White House, and Congress, to intervene in the Pentagon's effort to find military cuts at this remarkable time in history.
--
(Christopher C. Horner is a Washington-based attorney working on environmental and competitiveness issues.)
--
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
