Article: Counterterrorism to Displace NMD

Summary

The terrorist attacks this week on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon will have many impacts on U.S. budget priorities, especially defense. Washington must now refocus its efforts to counter a new kind of enemy. This will deal a major blow to the Bush administration's defense strategy.

Analysis

The U.S. Congress and Bush administration have agreed to allocate $20 billion in emergency funding for security and aid in the aftermath of terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C, this week. This emergency allocation is only the first of many impacts the Sept. 11 attacks will have on U.S. budget priorities, particularly in the area of defense, forcing a complete revision of the White House's defense strategy.

On Capitol Hill only days before the attacks, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Henry Shelton, outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stumped for the Defense Department's $328.9 billion budget request for fiscal 2002, the largest increase in defense spending since the mid-1980s.

When the Bush administration took office, it launched a comprehensive review of U.S. defense strategy and structure. Among the top priorities were the development of a national missile defense system and a reduction in U.S. military commitments abroad.

Rumsfeld advocated a major restructuring of the military to address the 21st Century battlefield. Counterterrorism and asymmetric warfare were included in this vision, but cyber war, space-based weapons platforms and defense against weapons of mass destruction featured prominently as well. Rumsfeld went so far as to suggest skipping a generation of weapons in arming the military for the future.

That vision changed this week. Defense strategy, structure and funding will now focus on facing a new enemy, and the ramifications will be long lasting.

The United States generally focuses on one big enemy at a time. Until Sept. 11, the top current candidate for that spot appeared to be China, with Colombian guerrillas running a distant second. The so-called rogue states -- Iraq, Iran, North Korea and others -- caught Washington's attention, but rarely held it long. Now the government is focused on a new nemesis, militant Islamic fundamentalism.

This is a substantial foe, and the battle will not be quick. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and Secretary of State Colin Powell both said Sept. 13 that the United States will respond to the attacks with a protracted military campaign.

The potential battlefield stretches from Mindanao to Morocco, from Tanzania to Kazakhstan. The new enemy is not a state, though states are involved. Rather, the opposing army and its allies are deployed internationally, even within the United States. For instance, evidence suggests some of the suspected terrorists received flight training in Florida before the hijackings and suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

The new foe is low-tech, amorphous and transnational. It does not fight conventionally, it does not mass tanks or deploy satellites. The weapons, doctrines and force structures needed for combating major Eurasian powers are inappropriate for fighting this new war.

This was demonstrated clearly this week, as satellite intelligence and computer network monitoring were ineffective in thwarting the attacks. Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, a prime suspect in the attacks, learned quickly to pay with cash and ditch the satellite phone. U.S. missile defense plans have also yet to incorporate anti-aircraft components.

Washington's ability to counter this new threat mandates more intelligence spending, particularly in human intelligence. It will require additional funding of domestic security, investigation, special forces, weapons systems and force structures appropriate to combating multiple, isolated and militant cells. Certainly signals intelligence, satellites and cruise missiles will remain on the budget, but they will not have top priority.

The United States will also need to rely on a new set of allies for intelligence, basing and political support although this will be costly. Washington has stepped on a lot of toes in the areas within which it must now operate. Controversial programs like national missile defense may have to be delayed to appease new allies.

Defense needs will have to compete with other priorities as well, possibly for smaller overall government revenues. The attacks generated immediate funding priorities for cleanup, investigation and retaliation. The recent $20 billion allocation will only begin to address these demands.

The cost of rebuilding cannot yet even be estimated, and the federal government will have to shoulder some of that financial burden. When the U.S. stock exchanges open Sept. 16, they will reveal the first hints of the damage the attacks may have done to the U.S. and global economy.

In the end, the Bush administration's entire defense strategy has just been upended. The United States will not be reducing its overseas commitments. It will not be skipping generations of weapons. And space-based lasers will just have to wait a few years.

Thanks to:

(c) Strategic Forecasting L.L.C. All rights reserved.