Wow, I can't believe he actually went after the Army's prize program... but he did. In a speech today at a Heritage Foundation conference in Colorado Springs, Co., Defense Secretary Robert Gates questioned the utility of the Army's massive $200 billion Future Combat Systems modernization program. Gates' comments are the strongest words denouncing the problem plagued program I've seen yet from a high ranking defense official. In his speech, Gates again repeated, as he has in almost every public speech he's given since taking over the Pentagon, that the irregular wars we're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are the kinds of wars we'll fight in the future.
[I]t is hard to conceive of any country confronting the United States directly in conventional terms – ship to ship, fighter to fighter, tank to tank – for some time to come. The record of the past quarter century is clear: the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Israelis in Lebanon, the United States in Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Smaller, irregular forces – insurgents, guerrillas, terrorists – will find ways, as they always have, to frustrate and neutralize the advantages of larger, regular militaries. And even nation-states will try to exploit our perceived vulnerabilities in an asymmetric way, rather than play to our inherent strengths.
Gates said irregular wars demand the right people, not costly weapons programs. Then, he talked briefly about the procurement challenges facing DOD. He only mentioned one program.
I believe that any major weapons program, in order to remain viable, will have to show some utility and relevance to the kind of irregular campaigns that, as I mentioned, are most likely to engage America’s military in the coming decades. In Texas, I had an opportunity to see a demonstration of the parts of the Army’s Future Combat Systems that have moved from the drawing board to reality. A program like FCS – whose total cost could exceed $200 billion if completely built out – must continue to demonstrate its value for the types of irregular challenges we will face, as well as for full-spectrum warfare.
In government speak, and particularly in public comments by a defense secretary, that amounts to a HUGE vote of no-confidence in a weapons program that has gotten so out of control the Army can't even explain what it's supposed to do. Right after saying he went to Ft. Bliss, Texas to see the FCS dog and pony show, instead of saying how impressed he was with what he saw, he brings up the program's cost, and then says it has to prove its the right program for irregular wars and then says "if completely built out." Of course he's not buying into the Army/Boeing bullshit, nobody with a brain and not a direct financial connection to the program do. I really wish Gates would stick around into the next administration.
I interviewed Gen' Peter Schoomaker a couple of times back when he was chief and when the subject turned to FCS, the former special operator never talked very enthusastically about the program. He'd spout the usual Army talking points, but not will any real conviction. Schoomaker, for all his failings as a chief, of which they're were a few, realized infantry win irregular wars, not some assesnine belief that technology will provide you with perfect information on the battlefield. I don't think he ever bought the snake oil Boeing was selling.
Comments