The Senate Armed Services Committee members aired a number of acquisition concerns in a confirmation hearing with defense secretary-nominee Ashton Carter, noting that weapons development takes too long and weapons sales to allies and partners is too full of red tape.
During the hearing, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) told Carter that “you were one of the fathers of the MRAP program…It seems to be that could be a model for what we’re talking about” in terms of providing warfighters with needed equipment on an appropriate timeline. “Our asymmetric advantage is technology,” he added, and said the United States risks losing that advantage if the acquisition system isn’t improved.
Carter, who previously served as the Pentagon’s acquisition chief, agreed.
“We need to be able to turn the corner, add new technologies to systems, field new systems more quickly than our opponents,” he said. “I think it’s very important not just for cost-control but in order to remain the best military in the world that we turn the technological corner more quickly. And the MRAP example gave me at least a lot of ideas about how we can do that, even in peacetime.”
The theme of shortening the procurement process was a recurring one–just minutes later, Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) recalled a recent conversation he had with Carter. “One of the items we discussed was the need for the Long-Range Strike Bomber, and in that regard we discussed the fact that it would probably be, what, 10, 10 years from now before, under the best circumstances, it may be operational?”
Carter responded, “yes, although in answering your question I’m mindful of what Sen. King said just a few moments ago–I’d rather say as soon as possible.”
Making clear their frustrations with a lagging acquisition process, several senators also asked about the foreign military sales process, which they said shares the same bureaucratic delays. Having met with King Abdullah of Jordan the day before, SASC members expressed serious concerns about the United States’ inability to get the proper weapons and equipment to Jordan to aid in its fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The committee members submitted a letter to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and Secretary of State John Kerry on Feb. 4 asking for help.
“Jordan is seeking to obtain aircraft parts, additional night vision equipment, and precision munitions that the King feels he needs to secure his border and robustly execute combat air missions into Syria,” according to the letter signed by all committee members. “We understand the need to ensure the integrity of third party transfers, the protection of critical U.S. technologies, and our commitment to the maintenance of a Qualitative Military Edge (QME) for Israel. However, Jordan’s situation and the cohesiveness of the coalition demands we move with speed to ensure they receive the military materiel they require for ongoing operations against [ISIS]. We believe that Jordan’s requests need to be addressed expeditiously, commensurate with their urgent operational needs in the fight against [ISIS].”
Asked about this problem during the hearing, Carter responded that “I have a long experience of frustration with getting equipment to the warfighter–our warfighters, never mind partner warfighters–on time. This is an element that is important when you talk about acquisition reform–the cost control is very important, but also getting things done” in a timely manner.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) asked about the focus of these new technologies–many of which are tailored to operations in the Asia Pacific region rather than Europe or the Middle East, where numerous hotspots have popped up since the Asia-Pacific rebalance was announced.
“Can we afford to devote resources from Europe and the Middle East to the Asia Pacific given the circumstances that we see today?” Wicker questioned for the second time in two days.
Carter said the rebalance “is, in my eyes, a commitment to continue the pivotal American military role in the Asia Pacific theater, which has left peace and stability there for decades.” He said that “American-underwritten peace and stability” has allowed Japan, South Korea, and more recently China and India to prosper despite centuries-old animosities that still threaten to flare up today.
“It is thanks to us that that environment has been created, and in a sentence I think the rebalance is a commitment to keep that going. Now you ask can we do that and keep our commitments to the Middle East and to Europe at the same time, and my view is that we can and must…I think that while [ISIS] and events in Ukraine are terribly important in their own regard and require a lot of attention…we have to remember that half the population of the world and half of its economy is in that region and that our military presence there–the naval presence, the air presence, our allies and partnerships, finding new allies, building new partnerships and conducting exercises–those things can be done at the same time that we’re doing what we need to do in Ukraine and that we do what we need to be doing in Iraq and in Syria.”
Despite the serious topics the senators asked about, it was clear during the hearing that Carter would sail through the confirmation process. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) began to address the witness as “Secretary Carter” before correcting herself–“soon-to-be Sec. Carter”–and she spoke of “when you’re confirmed.” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) expressed his high confidence in the nominee and his ability to run the Pentagon.
SASC chairman Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said at the end of the hearing that he hoped to send Carter a list of additional questions by noon Feb. 5, with Carter being expected to respond as soon as possible. The committee would confirm Carter next week–and so would the full Senate, McCain said, with assurances from Senate leadership that they would put Carter up for a vote before recessing for President’s Day.