GovernmentExecutive.com

The Pentagon on Friday unveiled its highly anticipated Quadrennial Defense Review, a comprehensive document that focuses heavily on realigning the military's forces and technologies to combat a broad range of threats, from traditional state enemies to terrorist groups and other unpredictable adversaries.

The first major defense review since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the 113-page QDR provides a comprehensive look at the Defense Department's plans and strategies for the next two decades. It does not cancel or otherwise alter many pricey conventional weapons systems that have been in the works for several years, indicating that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld intends to continue down the modernization path paved a half-decade ago.

But in a nod to lessons learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, the long document hints at several new programs -- particularly information technologies developed and shared across the military services. "We need to move from a service-centric, systems-focused approach" to one centered around joint programs and operations, Ryan Henry, the Pentagon's chief architect of the QDR, said at a briefing Friday afternoon.

So-called joint programs, which cut across the military services, have had a checkered past, with the Army and Navy only last month opting to cancel their struggling Aerial Common Sensor surveillance program. Undeterred, Pentagon officials address that decision in the QDR, and recommend the military develop a new "tri-service" program that meets "multi-intelligence" requirements.

Pentagon leaders also want to boost investments in network programs that can be accessed and used by all the services. And, beginning in fiscal 2007, the department wants to transform the military's individual operational headquarters into "fully functional" joint command and control centers, continuing a major shift away from the military's traditionally stove-piped operational strategies.

Indeed, the QDR also suggests developing joint training strategies and programs to better prepare troops to work together in the field.

The QDR discusses changing the Pentagon's business and budgeting practices to reflect an increased focus on "joint warfighters," according to the document. Perhaps most notably, the Defense Department plans to break its budget lines into "joint capability areas," moving away somewhat from the historic service-by-service breakdown.

The new approach would help to better manage the budget portfolio and provide a more accurate assessment of military investment in various technology areas, the report states. It also would prevent the services from developing and paying for redundant systems that essentially complete the same task, potentially freeing up money in future budgets for new technologies.

The congressionally mandated QDR has been anticipated in defense circles and on Capitol Hill as a benchmark document that would serve as a guideline for fighting what Pentagon officials are now calling the "long war," which they indicated on Friday could conceivably include future hotspots in the Philippines, Horn of Africa, the former Soviet republic of Georgia, the North African Pan-Sahel region and elsewhere.

The fiscal 2007 defense budget request of $439 billion, already leaked by defense officials, will provide money only for "leading-edge" priorities outlined in the QDR, with Henry noting that the brunt of the recommendations implemented in fiscal 2008 and beyond.

On Capitol Hill, House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said in a statement he welcomed the review's release, but reiterated concerns that it has "become a budget-driven exercise, which limits its utility to Congress."

His committee plans to release its own "threat-based" defense review in coming weeks, he said. A spokesman for Senate Armed Services Chairman John Warner, R-Va., said the panel "intends to examine the QDR closely in an opening hearing in the coming weeks."

COMMENTS

• So long as we have four separate forces as well as a logistical branch that few people outside of the federal government are even aware of, there will massive redundancies and waste. Why have joint service operations which are little more than publicity stunts when, what we really need is just one service that defends our country. Times have changed and we no longer fight world wars. We have smaller battles that we don't even win because there is nothing to win. So, let’s create a defense agency that makes certain that those who challenge our borders lose worse than we do. It will cost less and we could invest the money we save into becoming the world's greatest economic force. Robert M. Posted February 6, 2006 7:24 PM