My Photo
Dr. Alex Bielakowski
As a former US Army reserve officer and a professional military historian, I am frequently astounded and disturbed the level of ignorance in our society in regards to both history and the military. The purpose of this blog is to distribute important articles on the topics of history and the military. Disclaimer: The opinions on this blog are my own (or whomever they are attributed to) and do not represent the opinions of the US Army Command and General Staff College, US Department of Defense, or the US Government.
View my complete profile

26 April 2009

Gates Defuses The Defense Budget Battle


Secretary Gates has been doing his best to balance the need for a modern force with the need to fight the GWOT. I respect his efforts, but I don't envy his job!

------------------------------------------------------

http://articles.latimes.com/p/2009/04/25/news/na-pentagon-budget25

Thousands of Gurkhas betrayed by ministers after ruling only those awarded for bravery or at death's door can settle in Britain


While this is not an issue of the American military it does still hit at the issue of how Western nations treat their veterans!

25 April 2009

Gates Could Shortchange Army On Cargo Aircraft

If this happens it would be unfortunate, because the Army has never gotten the airlift support it needed from the USAF and the C-27J would have gone a long way to solving that problem.

-------------------------

Roxana Tiron
The Hill


Despite settling a bitter, years-long battle to protect a coveted cargo aircraft program, the Army is now likely to be left empty-handed.

The Army, and in particular the Army National Guard, likely will no longer receive the C-27J Spartan, also known as the Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA), under a new Pentagon plan, according to multiple sources at the Defense Department, in Congress and the defense industry.

Those sources say Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and his inner circle are considering cutting the program in half and leaving the Air Force in charge of the remaining planes.

Instead of purchasing 78 or more C-27Js, the Pentagon could end up buying only 38, the sources told The Hill. Those who spoke asked for anonymity because details about the fate of the program have not been made public. Those details will be revealed when the Pentagon submits its budget request for fiscal 2010 in early May.

Currently, the Army and Air Force jointly oversee the nearly $3 billion program. The planes would be used to ferry cargo deep into battlefields, and also to ship goods to local communities in the U.S. during emergencies such as hurricanes.

A team of L-3 Communications and Alenia North America holds the contract for the C-27J. Alenia North America, part of the Italian conglomerate Finmeccanica, builds the plane.

The company was planning to manufacture the plane in Jacksonville, Fla., but it’s unclear whether the smaller quantity would give the company the incentive to build in the United States instead of Italy. The C-27J already is built with parts and components from 78 U.S. suppliers in 23 states.

When Gates made his announcement about the Pentagon’s budget on April 6, well in advance of its actual submission to Congress, he did not say a word about the program and the changes waiting in the wings. Sources say Gates and his closest advisers made the decision and that themilitary service leaders are just now learning about it. Most of the planes in the program were slated for the Army and Air National Guard.

A request for comment from the Office of the Secretary of Defense was not returned by press time.

However, the plan to take the C-27J away from the Army could create havoc in Congress and among the governors of multiple states that were expecting to house the aircraft on their bases. Without the C-27J, those bases may now be left without a critical mission: Apart from flying in combat, those planes were going to be used for homeland security missions, particularly for helping out during natural and other disasters.

Such a decision is likely to spark an intense debate on Capitol Hill and stir a lobbying campaign from state officials. Governors and their adjutants general in the past have sounded alarm that without these planes, the Guard’s ability to respond to domestic emergencies could be significantly jeopardized.

The Army National Guard was expecting to receive the C-27J in 12 states: California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, Texas, Alaska and Washington state. Each was supposed to receive four airplanes. Alaska was supposed to share its airplanes with Guam.

The secretary’s plan to put the Air Force in charge of the program also comes after the extremely divisive debate over the program’s jurisdiction was believed to have been settled.

The Pentagon in late January submitted a congressionally mandated “roles and missions” report that concluded both the Army and Air Force should be assigned the C-27J. The latest proposal would change that.

Lawmakers have been skeptical about whether the Air Force has a clear need for the aircraft, and defense appropriators in this year’s budget slashed the Air Force’s funding request to procure the aircraft, but left about $16 million to fund the research and development for the Air Force’s portion of the program.

The Air Force was expected to receive the aircraft a couple years after the Army, which has already received two C-27J and has 11 others under contract. It’s unclear what is going to happen to the Army’s aircraft that were delivered and those under contract. They were initially meant to replace 43 of the Army’s beaten-up C-23 Sherpas.

The Army in particular has been adamant about buying a smaller cargo aircraft that can go deep into the battlefield to deliver needed supplies to troops. The Army has been relying heavily on its Chinook helicopters for that purpose. Army officials have argued for months that Afghanistan’s terrain, for example, has put much pressure on these helicopters, which are now filling the void of a cargo aircraft that can fly “the last tactical mile.”

Under the initial plan, the Air Force was expected to receive 24 C-27Js — four planes in six states across the country: Connecticut, Michigan, Maryland, North Dakota, Ohio and Mississippi. Now, under the proposed plan, the remainder of the 38 aircraft will likely go into the active Air Force.

China's First Aircraft Carrier On Horizon

I don't think it's an accident that so many similar articles have been appearing in the last free weeks.  The PRC is engaged in a PR campaign ahead of some sort of action they are about to undertake!

--------------------------------

Christopher Bodeen
Associated Press


BEIJING — China's navy has added sophisticated nuclear submarines, destroyers and missile systems, but the holy grail of surface ships — an aircraft carrier — has stayed out on the horizon. That may be about to change.

The navy will have one "very soon," says the commander of the East China Fleet, Adm. Xu Hongmeng. The navy's commander, Adm. Wu Shengli, spoke last week of plans for "large combat warships," an apparent reference to carriers.

The comments come ahead of an unprecedented international fleet review on Thursday marking the 60th anniversary of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy and spotlighting its recent rapid development.

"As China's navy takes on missions that go beyond simple coastal defense, an aircraft carrier becomes an obvious addition to maritime power-projection platforms," said John Pike, a defense analyst and director of GlobalSecurity.org.

In his remarks to the official Xinhua news agency, Wu said the navy would speed up development of a technologically advanced, oceangoing fleet, stepping away from its traditional missions of coastal protection and blocking permanent independence for Taiwan.

Operating a carrier would be a step toward a "sea-control capability" in Northeast Asia and the Indian Ocean, a strategy that could bringBeijing into conflict with the U.S., Japan, South Korea and India and raise doubts about Beijing's self-declared defensive military posture, Pike said.

Having a carrier allows a navy to operate fixed-wing aircraft beyond the range of aircraft based on land. That would be key on missions to defend China's territorial aspirations, especially in the South China Sea, where a half-dozen countries have overlapping claims for areas rich in fish and oil.

In China to attend this week's festivities, Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of U.S. naval operations, said Sunday there is "no doubt in my mind" that China wants a carrier, but he said American forces would take such a development in stride.

"The advent of an aircraft carrier on the part of the PLA Navy, to me, really doesn't change the nature of our operations at all," he said.

Such expansion has been made possible by two decades of near-annual double-digit increases in military spending. China has announced a 14.9 percent rise in military spending in its 2009 budget, to 480.6 billion yuan ($70.3 billion).

The 225,000-sailor People's Liberation Army Navy already operates more submarines than any other Asian nation, with up to 10 nuclear-powered vessels and as many as 60 diesel-electric subs. It boasts almost 80 destroyers and frigates — more than a dozen have entered service since the 1990s — and hundreds of smaller craft and support ships.

China's second-generation, nuclear-powered Jin and Shang class submarines are considered just a notch below cutting-edge U.S. and Russian craft. The diesel-electric Yuan class boasts a Chinese-developed air-independent propulsion system that allows it to remain submerged for weeks, while Chinese Luyang destroyers and Jiangkai missile frigates incorporate stealth features and a mix of latest-generation Chinese and Russian weapon systems.

Still, operating an aircraft carrier requires orchestrating a highly complex matrix of sailors, aircraft, missile defensespower plants, support ships, fuel and weather. In that, the Chinese navy has little experience.

"Carrier operations are very complex, difficult and dangerous," said retired Rear Adm. Eric McVadon, a former U.S. Navy pilot who is now director of Asia-Pacific Studies at the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. "China's current navy is not designed for carrier warfare."

McVadon speculated China would build up to three modest carriers considerably smaller than the U.S. Navy's 100,000-ton displacement Nimitz-class carriers.

Unconfirmed reports have emerged on the Internet pointing to the construction of a dedicated carrier-building dock outside Shanghai, although Pike said China has been building large ships for many years and that shipyard capacity should prove no obstacle.

"It's easy to imagine that China would have at least one aircraft carrier by the year 2020, but such vessels take a long time to build and outfit, so I imagine the world will have about five years' advance notice of such a ship," Pike said.

20 April 2009

Human Element: When Gadgetry Becomes Strategy











The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the political debates concerning the nature and scope of U.S. involvement in those countries, have resurrected the “lessons” of Vietnam once again. Far from having kicked the “Vietnam syndrome,” as President George H. W. Bush put it in the exuberant aftermath of Operation Desert Storm, it now seems possible that the memory of the Vietnam War will be forever conflated in the public imagination with the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, producing something like a Vietnam syndrome on steroids.

To see the rest of the article, follow this link: http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/2009%20-%20Winter/full-McMaster.html