"U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned on Tuesday that policymakers would face tough choices trimming military budgets, weighing cuts in pay and benefits against delays in updating aging ships and jets." (Reuters, May 24, 2011)[QUOTATION MARKS AND SARCASM ALERT]
The Pentagon has begun a review of priorities and spending to meet the President's budget requirements. And Gates, who retires "in 2011"
Part of this analysis will entail going places that have been avoided by politicians in the past. Taking on some of these issues could entail:As an Air Force wife (ret.) and Navy mother-in-law, I can tell you I don't want our poor pilots left fuel-less over the Atlantic nor our valiant submariners forced to find jobs on land in this economy. Nor do I want our kids in uniform patroling IED'd roads in vehicles that offer them no protection, but that happened even when our military budget was at its highest. And, full disclosure, I sure as hell don't want the kids who have served multiple combat tours to be threatened by cuts in retiree pay, higher Tricare premiums, or reduced veteran's medical benefits just as we're bringing them home from combat zones. Therefore, I can't even write about this subject without all the marks of emphasis available on the Blogger post composition toolbar to express my sarcasm.
- Re-examining military compensation levels in light of the fact that – apart from the U.S. Army during the worst years of Iraq – all the services have consistently exceeded their recruiting and retention goals;
- It could mean taking a look at the rigid, one-size-fits-all approach to retirement, pay and pensions left over from the last century. A more tiered and targeted system – one that weights compensation towards the most high demand and dangerous specialties – could bring down costs while attracting and retaining the high quality personnel we need; and
- It will require doing something about spiraling health care costs – and in particular the health insurance benefit for working age retirees whose fees are one-tenth those of federal civil servants, and have not been raised since 1995. (DOD transcript)
Because it seems to me that Gates is knowingly opening the political argument to sacrifice pay and benefits for both past and future personnel in favor of the continued development of the kinds of weapons that we once used to rattle at Russia. And he's doing it with all the timing and finesse of an Ahmadinejad. He's got his, he's preaching to the well-lobbied choir, and he knows the mood of the country has justifiably, exhaustedly, declared it ain't gonna study war no more. We've been told we won't need so many boots on the ground in wars (we won't even have to fight) in the future, because we'll have all these high-tech robotics that will sniff and snuff troublemakers for us (before they've even decided to think about attacking us) and the rest will be up to an All-Special Ops military. It's another War To End All Wars mindset.
 |
| US Navy Seals Website |
Gates also called for a more flexible retirement system to retain military and civilian personnel with critical skills. The current system provides full retirement benefits to those who have served for 20 years or more, giving them “every incentive to leave,” even if the military needs them.
About 70 percent of the military force doesn’t stay for retirement. 'Somebody who serves for 10 years leaves with nothing,' Gates said. 'That doesn’t make any sense. That’s not fair.'
What does that even mean? That we shouldn't let those poor, exhausted careerists go because they want to leave at the end of twenty years of sheer hell for low pay or that we should start paying benefits to anyone who re-ups past their first commitment? I would assume that, if you've survived the US military for a twenty year career, you're chock full of "critical skills," but that doesn't mean we should ask you to stay for thirty, much less that you'd agree after all the rule changes you've suffered in the first twenty. But, if we don't want to pay full benefits for a twenty year stint due to budget cuts, why discuss benefits for a ten year commitment? Gates is right; it doesn't make sense and it wouldn't be fair.
If we cut pay and benefits and lengthen the career commitment, who's going to volunteer for this All-Volunteer military? We'll be continuing the trend of pulling from those who, by virtue of minority status or sheer bad luck, have no other job options--only we'll be offering them less to work longer and harder. We already pay our military personnel poorly for their services at every level and rank, promising to make it up to them in future benefits and retirement pensions. If we're going to make further cuts both before and after retirement, we might as well turn the DOD over to the private sector and let them outsource this entire national security gig to developing countries.
And make no mistake, it'll be about the pay. The last hooyah generation, the last of the kids who wanted to go out and fight for this grand country because it's just so darned grand, are within a few years of military retirement, themselves. And they've seen how this grand country values their well-being. The long, slow decline of taste for the kind of patriotism that spurs volunteers to fight some politician's wars began in the sixties and has picked up speed ever since. In an election cycle where neither party wants to go on record as being in favor of continued presence in Afghanistan, where will we find the psychological underpinnings of the gee-whizz, gung-ho attitude that helped the services meet their recruitment quotas, the attitude that still existed in some parts of the US in 1965? Which little girl's daddy is going to raise her to believe that fighting for her country is honorable work to be proud of after the exposé on the story of Private Jessica Lynch?
For today's Seal Team Six, it's about pride and country, but dick around with their families' benefits, their buddy's benefits, and pride won't be enough for them to recommend the military to their kids. The last hooyah will belong to Future Seal Team Six and the special ops personnel like them...those highly paid, highly skilled, highly educated, unimaginably well-equipped few who unquestionably have lifetime benefits that put congressional benefits to shame because there is national recognition of the Seal's comparative worth. It'll either be that down the road or the draft.
My dad served in the Marines. He was in Korea at the end of the Korean War. He says that he has never experienced cold like that any place else that he has been. When he came back, he planned to remain a civilian but after a year of a series of low-paying jobs, he decided to rejoin the military. This time he joined the Navy. When he left the navy, the times were changing and he became one of the first four black men hired to integrate the Wilson police force. I need to talk with him about what he thinks about Gates remarks and the possible cuts to the defense budget.
ReplyDeleteI'm all for cutting defense spending. My dad thinks that I'm naive. I don't believe that it's necessary for us to be primed and ready for war at all times. I think that we need to focus on changing our mindset. I'm tired of the oft repeated, "War is a necessary evil." Why? Who makes war a necessity? Somehow I think that we do and that if we really wanted to we could change to a better vision where war is an unacceptable choice.
It would certainly save a lot of money that we could use for other purposes like eradicating poverty, cleaning up the environment, providing medical care to everyone...Maybe my dad is right; I am naive.
My mom married two marines (one for 20+ years, one for 40+ years), my aunt was a WASP in WWII) and I grew up with a reverence for those called to serve their country. I have a silly amount of romantic patriotism for military service, and I despair of what it's become and what it could end up being if things go the way of the worst-case scenario.
ReplyDeleteI don't like to be doomy and gloomy. But looking at the GOP platform, if they were to gather enough of a majority to run things, what I see happening is a continued erosion of enlisted pay and benefits, and an eventual re-institution of the draft. It goes along with the feudal mentality and will of course exclude the "fortunate sons" who will be able to afford college deferments. There will be fewer and fewer of those as college tuition rates continue to escalate at a ridiculous pace, of course.
My hope is that we can stop the current pointless wars as soon as possible, thin the ranks through attrition, and increase funding for things like long-term care for those who survived horrible wounds that would have been fatal in the past. Make enlisting once again a combination of patriotic duty and a way to achieve the American Dream, with all the benefits this used to convey. And fire the defense contractors. Defense, like law enforcement and safety, corrections, and infrastructure maintenance, are things that should be "socialized."
Just my $0.02.
My oldest daughter brought the same conservation to my door during a weekend visit. She is a career officer currently working in Washington, 5 years away from early retirement, and too exhausted to reenlist. After 4 wartime deployments, stints in South Korea and Kuwait, she wants out.
ReplyDeleteWhat she shared with me this weekend: It takes 10 years to develop a field radio when rugged off-the-shelf versions are available commercially at 100th the cost (most likely from Asian suppliers because too few electronics products are made in the USA these days). Military procurement methods are cumbersome, costly and off the Richter scale, she says.
There are politicians in Congress, she mentions, pushing pet projects that the Pentagon does not want and cannot use, a pure case of political pork taking precedence over military priorities. When the cutbacks begin, she says, personnel will be forced to make sacrifices in order to save mission-critical capabilities.
Same old story: A cumbersome bureaucracy plus chicanery and corruption in every sector of the economy.
Finally, I am thinking of one more mindset dragging us further down the road to ruin: American Exceptionalism from decades of Cold War thinking. Our country seems to equate freedom with abundance and consumption in a never-ending cycle, and uses military force to secure materials to maintain an overarching sense of entitlement. In one decade alone: A botched war (unfunded), an illegal war (unfunded), an over extended Post WWII military footprint (unfunded) … all driving us to bankruptcy.
you asked: "... who's going to volunteer for this All-Volunteer military?"
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you brought up the example of Private Jessica Lynch who joined the military after having her employment application to Wal-Mart had been rejected - several times. With kids coming out of college with huge debt and few job prospects, the concept of "retirement" will seem a lifetime away and a military career will still look pretty good. Even the military is a "market" now, and the market is on the side of the employers. They will cut benefits because they can, simple as that.
America's war machine is all it has left to protect its commercial empire. Which means that as resources become evermore scarce, military means to secure these resources will have to escalate. It's a vicious spiral. The symptoms are painful (as Nance clearly points out), and it will be the poorer half of the population that will continue to make the greatest sacrifices.
ReplyDeleteThe alternatives are unlikely: dismantling the war economy or re-energizing American industry for a post-fossil fuel world. The ruling classes, whether by design or myopia will continue to build up the walls on their gated lifestyles while Rome burns.
The question becomes, can ordinary Americans rise up? And/or can some real leadership break through the corporate vice-grip on the US political system?
Edge: "can ordinary Americans rise up?"
ReplyDeleteCthulhu knows I've tried, but I am a very short octopus, and no one seems to notice.
"can ordinary Americans rise up?"
ReplyDeleteAd Caelum per Cialis?
Not sure about the Latin grammar here, but all kidding aside, Americans don't do anything from some conviction arising from a rational appraisal of reality, while a sufficient number are led around by the 'ruling classes' who have a power to manipulate opinion unknown in the ancient world - or even in recent history. I think it's hopeless. I think we've been bred and trained to hate our own best interests.
The Second Coming has been worn down to the bare cords, and I hates to keep quoting Yeats, but "The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity" seems to describe things awfully well.
Been thinking about your comment, Capt.
ReplyDeleteI think some of the problem with Americans rising up is cultural mythology. The military, as Nance alludes, is an important part of the American self-image, and the military itself holds both the State and the Revolution in one thought, which is paradoxical and makes it difficult for the individual to challenge the military foundation of the nation without compromising his/her own identity/self-image.
None of this, mind you, is consciously considered, at least by the 'ordinary American'...
Yes, I agree. I do live in an area where stories about veterans and "da troops" pervade the local papers so I'm inclined to be uncomfortable -- not that I have the slightest dislike of veterans or deny the need for a strong military. I just prefer to diminish the hyperbole and glory seeking and maximize things like medical care, pay and benefits.
ReplyDeleteI think we got into the habit of self hatred back in the 60's and we don't have much else we feel comfortable being proud about, despite the "we're the greatest country that ever was or will be" claptrap. Do we have anything left but jingoism?
Yeah, I think there's something left other than jingoism. But it would take a some kind of shifting of the ground toward a reflective approach rather than the current combative one.
ReplyDelete