Over the course of his tenure, but most impressively since agreeing to stay at the DoD helm
late last year, Secretary Gates
has shown a keen understanding
of both the National and Washington political environment as well as an ability to build a feasible,
sufficient and acceptable plans for implementing a new national security vision. With his
unassuming, serious, and focused manner
he is the anti-Rumsfeld and that
virtue alone has won him a vast amount of support in both houses in Congress.
Moreover, Gates' thorough
preparation, reasoned presentations, and calls for unified actions in the crafting of future defense budgets has raised
the level of discourse in the halls of Congress and begun to fracture, in a beneficial
way, the bedrock principle of defense funding, most
prominently
enshrined in the practices of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee - District First. Contractors Always.
Because he has shown the ability to run DOD as a well-managed, large
business, at a time when many large commercial businesses
run by high-flying CEOs cratered
and now litter the economic landscape, Gates daily gains credibility on the Hill.
There his past performance engenders confidence in lawmakers, particularly among those in the Senate,
of the SECDEF's view of the
future global security environment.
Nonetheless, as the summer fades
and fall arrives, Gates and the Congress will continue their debate on national security threats,
capabilities, requirements, and risk. Yet, the state of the global economy, the rising
tide of violence in Afghanistan, the fragility
of Pakistan, and the decision
to add more soldiers and Marines to the ranks of the Nation's ground forces all combine to
limit available funding and continually narrow the Administration's range of choices for allocating
spending.
Thus, as September 30th approaches
and DOD continues to show a disciplined approach to aligning its defense spending
plans to its national security strategy, the rancor of the discussions over potential program
cancellations or proposed
programmatic adaptations (e.g.: the
Marines' EFV, or the Navy's Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft, the proposed USAF
dual-tanker buy, or the post-FCS plan for Army ground vehicles) will undoubtedly rise significantly.
Therefore, in a manner similar to today's Congressional action, one
can only hope that SECDEF's commonsense and
serious-minded approach
to prioritizing DOD's efforts, manpower and money to address the Nation's current adversaries
and the most-likely near term threats will be equaled by a Congress that, in the end, will match
virtue to necessity and
separate its constituents' appetites
for pork from the opportunity to accomplish real reform of defense spending.
