Military Shock and Awe

10/25/2007

Paul Munnis


There is perhaps no bigger consumer of oil and petroleum than the U.S. military. Aircraft, ships, tanks, armored vehicles all use petroleum at huge rates of consumption. When a modern military exercise is run you can see oil depletion up close and personal. You know our old fuel inefficient military cannot last.

At Stanford University I spoke with a professor who opined that we are at a point in time now where it is not feasible to occupy another nation. The energy costs are simply too high to permit it.

He also opined that the U.S. military, homeland defense, and U.S. foreign policy are all impacted by the new reality of oil depletion. As we redesign our military for the future the emphasis is going to have to be on an energy efficient fighting force.

This has profound impact on the future of our armed services and that impacts you and me.

We can begin with our Navy. They have been working overtime to convert their ships to the use of nuclear power plants. Those that can’t be converted are being run-out and will not be replaced. The Navy has done well with its aircraft carriers. They are all nuclear powered now. The aircraft carrier is a big hanger and fuel storage dump for the aircraft that they haul to a battle zone. Those need a more efficient power plant. Not just one that gets better gas mileage but one that can run on a different kind of fuel. A smaller fuel efficient battleship is not likely to be in the cards for the future. Aircraft can bomb and thus ship-mounted artillery is old fashioned. We have nuclear powered subs and they are fuel efficient by design and necessity. These nuclear subs carry missiles that can be fired from beneath the sea and they replace battleships. A way to defend against nuclear subs is needed and it is not a new generation of surface ship destroyer. Destroyers are being replaced with aircraft that hunt down a submarine at sea and drop munitions to eliminate the sub. Improved sonar and computer based imaging are the keys to submarine defense. Hunter-killer class subs are needed for offense and defense. Interception and interdiction are the strategic keys to naval warfare.

The Air Force faces the same problem of fuel efficiency. Strategic bombers allow America to intimidate other nations with an ability to bomb them from aloft. But our B52’s are getting old and the Stealth Bombers, while sexy in their silent threat, are in fact fuel hogs and another generation of them to replace the B52 is just not likely. A new and far more efficient aircraft power plant is needed. Note that missiles have a new future in strategic bombing and that necessitates interceptor missiles. Much has been publicized of hyper-powered engines to move an aircraft across country faster but little has been done to move a huge cargo craft cross country in a fuel efficient manner. Note that the American transportation system and our airlines in particular, are in desperate need of the same fuel efficient solution. Our ability to move people and goods from point (a) to point (b) is dependent upon a fuel efficient cargo capability. An army cannot man a battlefield without cargo support and a ride to the remote destination. Fighter aircraft are obsolete for the Air Force. The days of the silk scarf and goggled super pilot are gone and are replaced with pilot-less drones. These are smaller and more fuel efficient aircraft. They are used for observation tasks and for weapons delivery. Satellites have replaced spy planes.

It is the Army and the Marines that are the most challenged by fuel shortage. We can start with the obvious. They will be merged. The Navy will lose the Marines. The tank, the heavy artillery, and the armored fighting vehicles are obsolete and these will be phased out. Paratroopers and Gliders are obsolete too. Once occupation duty is eliminated then much of the needs for ground transportation vehicles like fuel trucks and all-terrain supply trucks also are eliminated or at least vastly reduced. It comes down to mission definition for ground forces in a world of guerrilla warfare. The classic WWII style Army is eliminated when occupation is no longer the goal. It is replaced by a new kind of super warrior built around the cult of the independent, self-sufficient soldier that we see in the form of modern Special Forces units and being tested in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The Special Forces mission is to disrupt the capabilities of guerrilla units. It is small and flexible guerrilla forces vs small and efficient anti-guerrilla forces that form the future of the Army and its ground combat capability. The first requirement of such a unit is to not depend upon a contractor force supplying them with hot meals and clean uniforms. These troops have to be able to live off the land, to scrounge in order to eat, and to carry their own ammo or to use the enemy munitions whenever they can seize them. Often these soldiers will have to fabricate their own munitions in the field. An offensive Army must be a guerrilla Army and a defensive Army must be an anti-guerrilla force. Thus the future of the Army is one of forming a much different ground force than we have today.

Is all of this reconstruction of military forces something that is way off in the future? Not at all! It is upon us right now. Bush has worn out the old obsolete force in Iraq and it needs to be rebuilt. Rebuilding our military in the old fuel inefficient and mission obsolete manner is financially unacceptable. Iraq is the last military occupation that the U.S. will ever be able to participate in and one we should have not taken on in the first place. We are at the end of the old military era and at the start of the new era right now. In a real sense we are scrapping the old and Iraq is the place we are dumping our old stuff in.

The impact on our National Guard is to phase them out. As Guard units return, they will be retained for awhile longer, they will get the old junk equipment, and they will be militarily useless. They will have to be streamlined in the context of a homeland defense guerrilla army. That is a total change from todays National Guard. The role of the National Guard in terms of providing homeland security will also change and with it comes the elimination of tasks like flood assistance and border patrol, and emergency policing and rescue duties will also change.

Thus when Bush pushes for billions to build new heavy duty armored personnel carrier he is wasting his time. The new armed forces simply do not have a need for them beyond the immediate use in Iraq and frankly we are about to leave Iraq no later than 2010 as nearly every serious candidate for President has declared. This puts Congress in the position of having to say “No,” to the Bush supplement military spending bill until it is revised and made compatible with the military future of America. That too is a “Now,” call by Congress and the challenge is how to tell America that a change is happening and that Bush is pushing for bad investment. It has to start by having enough guts to say "No," to Bush and making America like it. Congress needs a good PR firm.


Note too that when the troops come home from Iraq and Afghanistan a large stand-down of soldiers is needed. They will in effect be laid-off. We just don’t need the type of soldier that we have now -- we need a very different breed and recruiting and training them will be based upon the concepts developed by the Special Ops type of soldier. Thus a wholesale housecleaning of troops lies ahead. Those with low IQ’s are not useful. Those not capable of adapting to stress and change are to be eliminated and those dependent on comfort and supply are also to be eliminated. The new soldier is flexible, minimal in terms of support needs, and self-sufficient. He is indeed an “Army of One.”

Blackwater, and other civilian contractors will be phased out the moment our troops come back to America. They are support troops and they are history. The State Department is being told "No," to continued use of Blackwater and it signals a new shift in diplomacy that was coming anyhow. The investment in a big fancy new embassy in Baghdad was a waste of money.

The military will have to provide security forces for awhile that can protect America assets in our embassies and these will have to be redesigned and perhaps eliminated as we now know them. Such facilities may be replaced by Internet meeting capabilities with the heads of State of each nation. A complete redesign of our State Department now lies ahead. Diplomacy needs a complete overhaul. Condoleeza Rice has so far exhibited little understanding of the needs for our diplomatic future. She has offered no vision for redesign of our foreign diplomatic service. This will fall to a new generation of government employee, one more capable of working from a distance and without all of the shuttle style of diplomacy that has marked past State Department methods. Even the notion of a unified meeting place for the UN may be replaced with a distributed notion using modern communications equipment to replace the UN chambers in NYC.

As the military changes its mission and its armament then so too will the needs for command and control, cryptography, and communications change right along with it. As these change they will descend into industry for their application. Companies will also incorporate much of this technology thus eliminating business travel and dropping the airline demand. With business travel reduced the needs for Air Traffic control will also change. The future of the multinational corporation and its command and control systems parallels that of our military.

I repeat these are not far distant scenarios. Already investors need to be thinking in terms of dropping their old approach to industrial investment and to be thinking in new strategic terms. Congress must soon publicize a new vision of our military and fund it accordingly -- beginning now.

We hasten to add that the military itself has performed the redesign on paper and has been prototyping much of what is needed. They are not ignorant of the changes coming – indeed they have crafted the changes that are coming. They are prepared for it and a lot of brass is about to get retired. They have a vested interest in the Iraq War. It’s the only war that they have. Once it's gone – so are they.

The time for change has arrived. The time to bring home our troops is now. Let the rebuilding of America’s military begin.