Financial Times Editorial - The half-revolution

The half-revolution
Published: February 7 2006 02:00 | Last updated: February 7 2006 02:00. Copyright by the Financial Times

Even before the attacks of 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld had the foresight to realise that the US military had to change from the lumbering behemoth it became during the cold war to a nimbler machine capable of using stealth, skill and technology to fight terrorist groups. But he has failed to carry this revolution much further in his latest Quadrennial Defence Review, released late last week.

Indeed it proposes maintaining virtually all the sort of weapons systems such as destroyers, submarines and fighter-bombers that were thought essential during the cold war, while remedying none of the troop shortages the US has since experienced in trying to pacify Iraq and Afghanistan.

Part of Mr Rumsfeld's problem is that this review, conducted during the current US "war on terror", is also designed to outline strategy to deal with anticipated security threatsover the next 20 years. And over that period China looms very large inthe Pentagon's mind. Not only does China have "the greatest potential to compete militarily" with the US, but its present build-up has "already put regional military balances at risk", the review claims.

So the Pentagon appears unwilling to sacrifice any big conventional weapons programmes, but at the same time proposes to reduce overall army strength by 30,000 men over the next five years. This is the wrong order of immediate priorities, given how overstretched US forces currently are. Nor is there any let-up in the ever-rising cost ofUS defence. The administration yesterday asked for a 7 per cent increasein its 2006-2007 defence budget requestof $439.3bn (£251.7bn), in addition to the $120bn "supplemental" it is about to send Capitol Hill for current war expenditure.

Some lessons have been learnt from Iraq and Afghanistan, at least in the type of forces needed there. In its new budget, the administration wants a 15 per cent increase in special operations forces. The review rightly calls for "a level of understanding and cultural intelligence about the Middle East and Asia compared to that developed about the Soviet Union during the cold war".

There is also emphasis on smart weapons - unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for the air force, and smaller "littoral" ships to operate in the "brown and green waters" along coasts. But continuation of submarine and destroyer programmes in the new budget shows the navy's " blue ocean" obsession still lives.

The review also professes that recent operations have highlighted the need for the US to "work with and through others". But this lesson appears more theoretical than practical. For there is little mention of allies, in Nato and beyond, in the 92-page review, apart from a passing compliment to Britain and Australia. Washington will require the help of more than this pair to meet its security challenges.