Defense watchers will seek insight during Leon Panetta’s confirmation hearing today into how he would treat weapon systems and industry as defense secretary, though the Washington insider offers few details beyond pledging to continue current budget-cutting exercises in writing.
Panetta, in advance-policy questions from the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), wrote he would continue outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ “strategy-driven approach” to a comprehensive review of the Department of Defense (DoD), which is intended to help identify $400 billion in security savings President Barack Obama wants by 2023.
Panetta, the current Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director, cautioned “it must be understood that a smaller budget means difficult choices will have to be made,” in his 79-page response to questions from the SASC in advance of today’s hearing. Obama nominated Panetta to replace Gates, who is retiring at the end of the month. The SASC and Senate must confirm the nomination.
Panetta said he “will not hesitate to provide my views on the potential consequences of proposed future changes in the DoD’s budget.” Yet he did not elaborate much beyond current policy on hot weapon-system issues analysts want his views on, including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, F-22 Raptor, and size and make of the Navy’s fleet.
Varied constituencies have called for such elaboration.
A group of conservative think tanks–the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, and Foreign Policy Initiative–calling themselves the Defending Defense project issued on Tuesday 10 questions about Panetta’s defense-spending priorities. They include if he would consider buying more F-22s, how he would boost the size of the Navy’s fleet of ships, and whether the service should have fewer than 12 aircraft carriers. The group also wants to know if Panetta agrees there is an “urgent” need for equipment recapitalization
Analyst Byron Callan, director of Capital Alpha Partners LLC in Washington, issued his own list of questions for Panetta yesterday, including where the nominee believes the United States can take risks with its defense-industrial base. Callan also questioned how Panetta would decide which of the different military services’ F-35 variants have become unaffordable, and how he would assess the aircraft’s return on investment compared to competing programs including a new strike bomber.
Of course, observers know an incoming defense secretary would not offer detailed positions on controversial weapon systems before assuming office.
“I just think as a practical matter it’s going to be a long time before Leon Panetta is going to be confident on his positions” on weapon systems, defense consultant Loren Thompson told Defense Daily. “In fact, it is possible that Mr. Panetta will not be office long enough to form convictions” on programs such as the F-35. That’s because Thompson, chief operating officer at the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., believes Panetta has been tapped to get Obama through his reelection campaign and would depart soon afterward.
Mackenzie Eaglen, a research fellow for national security at the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington, said she expects SASC members will “go relatively easy” on Panetta. That’s because he has gone through the Senate confirmation process previously, is a former member of Congress, and “most politicians’ concerns in national security lately center around foreign policy as opposed to defense policy or budgets,” she said.
Still, Eaglen told Defense Daily that as the Pentagon’s comprehensive review wraps up this fall, “members will surely be concerned about shipbuilding–aircraft carriers in particular–becoming a budget casualty.”
“Many are also worried that Panetta will continue to focus budget cuts on the procurement account as opposed to defense overhead and services contracts,” she said.
Eaglen has concerns about Panetta’s views on weapon systems. She pointed to how, as a congressman from 1977 to 1993, he voted to cut funding for strategic-delivery systems including the M-X intercontinental ballistic missile, Trident submarine, Pershing II medium-range ballistic missile, and B-1 and B-2 bombers. He also voted cut funding for President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, opposed Operation Desert Storm in 1991 and, once out of Congress, criticized the more-recent surge of troops in Iraq.
Thompson said some of the most important questions Panetta could answer from the SASC would be about qualities he wants in a deputy defense secretary. Some observers believe Panetta would not keep the current deputy, William Lynn.
In response to the advance-policy questions from the SASC, when questioned about the developmental F-35, Panetta said he believes “it is important that we transition to a fifth generation tactical aviation capability across the U.S military services as soon as practical.” He acknowledged the two-year “probation” the Marine Corps’ technically challenged F-35 variant is on, saying: “I believe we should maintain sufficient legacy inventory to support the force structure needed to prevail in the wars we are currently engaged in, as well as in possible future conflicts, while we field the F-35.”
Regarding naval shipbuilding, Panetta wrote he is “not familiar with all of the analysis performed in the Chief of Naval Operations’ assessment” that the fleet needs to grow from 285 to 313 ships. He said he would work with naval leaders to find the “appropriate force structure requirements.”
In response to SASC questioning, Panetta acknowledged troubled Army development and procurement programs that “ultimately did not match the needs of DoD, were cost prohibitive or were technologically infeasible.” He said he would “closely monitor and oversee the Army modernization efforts.” He called for lessons learned from any changes to its acquisition system, spurred by an Army-wide capability-portfolio review, to be applied through the Pentagon.
Panetta also pledged to continue improving the Pentagon’s much-reviled acquisition system.
“I believe that the acquisition process must be closely coordinated with the requirements and budget processes,” he said. He added that while progress has been made with such coordination thanks to the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, “there remains room for improvement” and “DoD can reduce costs to get better value for its defense dollar.”
Panetta said he supports creating a “fast lance” for buying and fielding equipment in response to urgent requests from warfighters.
The nominee further said “a strong, technologically vibrant, and financially successful defense industrial base is in the national interest.”
“If confirmed, I will ensure DoD uses a sector-by-sector approach to the defense industrial base, with productivity growth and long-term health as its goals,” he wrote.