The dangers of deep defense cuts

The dangers of deep defense cuts

The new defense secretary has an enormous task. To fulfill his primary responsibility of fielding a military capable of keeping the United States safe, he must convince his boss – and Congress – to reverse six consecutive years of defense cuts and reject sequestration.

If we consider our nation’s avowed enemies and potential adversaries, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has an easy case to make. On Jan. 23, China test-fired a new submarine-launched ballistic missile capable of nuclear strikes against all 50 states. Lest you think China is simply an economic threat, take into account that in 2013 its state-run newspaper reported that a nuclear JL-2 missile strike on the western United States would kill 5 million to 12 million people.

In addition to the threat of radical Islam, the world faces increased aggression from Russia, regimes in Iran and North Korea that are developing nuclear weapons, and a revival of anti-Semitism in Europe.

A strong national defense is one of The American Legion’s pillars. Thus, we’re alarmed that the 2016 defense budget is projected to be 31 percent less than it was in 2010. This is irresponsible and dangerous.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has announced that unless Congress spares the military from another round of sequestration cuts, annual training will again be slashed. While we cannot definitively blame sequestration for servicemembers’ deaths, I recall an accident at a Nevada mortar range in 2013 caused by human error and inadequate training. Thirteen Marines died, and eight were wounded.

And don’t forget the personnel costs associated with these budget cuts. While a strong argument can be made that a draft would lighten the burden of the small percentage of brave Americans who are defending our freedoms, a strong all-volunteer force is more cost effective. Yet these troops are seeing their pay and benefits chipped away at an alarming rate. In 2009, a Military Times survey indicated that 91 percent of military members rated their quality of life as “good” or “excellent.” In 2014, only 56 percent felt that way. Moreover, 70 percent now predict that the quality of life for servicemembers will decline.

Carter says that military service needs to be an attractive and viable option for this tech-savvy generation. He can help by shelving one of the major recommendations of the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission. While it’s fashionable to compare private-sector 401(k) plans to what our military retirees receive, let’s dispel the myth that the pension system is somehow overly generous. Unlike private-sector careerists, those who spend 20 years or more in the military have been required to change duty stations every few years, be separated from their families, risk life and limb in combat zones, uproot their children from schools and friends, and be subject to a military justice system that can imprison them for disrespecting their boss.

 

Just as important, we should not allow our elected leaders to pit personnel costs and benefits against weapons modernization and training. We can and must do both. We owe it to every man and woman in uniform that we will never send them in harm’s way without the resources necessary to win.