While senior Pentagon and Army leaders air concerns about the potential “catastrophic” effect if sequestration kicks in, acquisition and force development officials are closely watching as events unfold.
The Pentagon is already reducing spending by $487 billion over the coming decade, and more than a trillion more in cuts could be coming.
Army Secretary John McHugh last month told Congress the service hasn’t worked out a separate budget to deal with further cuts, though planning for them could commence this summer.
Lt. Gen. William Phillips, military deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics & Technology, said sequestration would “certainly have a hard impact on our programs,” and be “devastating,” as the defense secretary and Army leaders have repeatedly said.
Phillips pointed out that Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno has said a number of times that the Army wants a quality force manned and equipped with the right kind of capabilities so soldiers and commanders can be successful.
“That would be very tough for the Army to balance all that under sequestration,” Phillips said at a March 2 Pentagon roundtable.
Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo, director, Force Development, in Army Headquarters, G-8, tries to match resources to programs so the right number of things get to the priority units.
“We certainly have a model of the amount of money that is spent in all the key areas,” he said. “We know after years of study that if we are spending between 40 and 45 percent of our budget on manpower” then other key areas, such as equipping, base operations, facilities, and sustainment, have a percentage of the budget.
“For example, if I can just lump the equipping into one, if we are spending between 18 and 26 percent of the budget on equipping, we’ve learned after more than 10 years of data, you’re not hollow, you’re in fact, modernizing the force, you’re delivering.”
What the Army would do when the situation becomes clearer, and if they do come…is look at similar analysis, and work from there.
While it’s not in his portfolio, Cucolo said it is likely that the Army secretary and chief of staff would examine the size of the force first, to see what size force is needed to respond to combatant commanders and the missions outlined in the defense strategic guidance.
It’s very complex, he said.
“We’re watching what’s going on right now,” Cucolo said. “I can tell you on the equipping program side, that kind of analysis, that kind of work, will go into our ’14-’18 look, very hard. The ‘what if’ drills will go into that.”