Tuesday, June 08, 2021

Must read article for those that aren't paying attention to the pivot in the Pacific...

 via FP

The battle dates back to the Trump administration, which first called for forward-deployed U.S. troops to sit in the so-called first island chain that rings China in the Western Pacific, including Japan. The fight came to a head this spring as outgoing U.S. Indo-Pacific Command chief Adm. Phil Davidson began privately and publicly urging a buildup of American assets in Guam, including onshore Aegis missile defense batteries, in his final days as commander.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and top officials have indicated to Congress they were interested in moving more U.S. military forces into close quarters with China. But Davidson and parts of the Pentagon supporting the effort have been met with stern opposition from the agency’s budget analysts at the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office, known as CAPE, and the Defense Department’s Office of Net Assessment, an internal think tank that conducts long-term planning. Both offices hold a pessimistic view of the ability of the U.S. military to withstand attacks from China’s new generation of highly capable missile and rocket forces, sources familiar with the debate said. China has tested long-distance missiles that can knock out U.S. carriers and even hit Guam, but its ranged forces are still mostly untested in combat.

Capitol Hill is still struggling to understand the disconnect.

“DoD has produced a lot of products countering the rise of China, we expected this to be more robust than it is,” a senior House Republican aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss ongoing budget talks. “And we’ll be holding DoD to account for all these other briefings and strategy documents and how they’re reflected in this budget request. We’re very concerned that they are not reflected in this budget request.”


The Pentagon's problem?

They've developed talking points that just don't make a bit of fucking sense.

On one hand we're in COMPETITION with China.

On another hand we're deterring China.

Another hand we need to operate within China's threat envelope.

Still another hand we need standoff weapons because IT'S DANGEROUS TO OPERATE within China's threat envelope.

Then we need forces within the envelope to assure allies.

The talking points don't make sense.  The budget doesn't make sense. Congress ain't buying it because Berger can't sell his folly.  The Navy is dazed and confused.  The Air Force just wants budget, budget and more budget.  The Army?  They have a plan but no one wants to let them play!


We're looking at another failed concept.  Can't wait to see what the next big idea is in about another year.

No comments :

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.