Head of Army contracting review seeks to avoid pointing fingers

The leader of a recently announced commission on in-theater Army contracting said Tuesday that the investigation will be forward-looking, not a "witch hunt" for existing problems.

In an interview with Government Executive, Jacques Gansler said his Special Commission on Army Contracting will focus on recommending changes to better prepare the Army to do business during expeditionary engagements. Army Secretary Pete Geren announced last week that Gansler, former undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics and currently the Roger C. Lipitz public policy and private enterprise chair at the University of Maryland's School of Public Affairs, will lead the panel.

Geren said the commission would "take a big-picture look and ensure we are properly organized to support Army and joint force expeditionary operations in an era of persistent conflict."

Gansler said panel nominees are undergoing reviews to avoid possible conflicts of interest. "The people nominated are all people I'm sure will act independently, but there is always the perception of conflict you have to worry about," he said. The commission will be made up of former civilian and military officials, and Gansler is aiming to have the members finalized by the end of this week.

To make recommendations to Geren by Oct. 31, the commission will look at existing contracting procedures, but Gansler said he will not investigate any specific instances of fraud or mismanagement. "You look at the lessons learned from the past, but we're not going to point the finger at anybody or do any attempts at witch hunts," he said.

Despite the forward-looking focus, Gansler acknowledged that the Army's recent contracting controversies played a role in the panel's creation. "There are obviously a number of issues that have come up and that's what has caused these other activities looking at current problems," he said in reference to another task force, also announced Aug. 29, which will investigate transactions made by a contracting office in Kuwait.

Not everyone, however, is convinced that the blue-ribbon commission will make truly influential recommendations to improve Army acquisitions. Winslow Wheeler, director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, a security and defense-focused think tank, is one skeptic.

"I have minimal confidence that this panel will do anything dramatically useful," Wheeler said. "Since the 1950s, we've had blue-ribbon panels, special commissions, all kinds of stuff every few years, and with very few exceptions, they declare there to be big problems but recommend nothing to get serious about doing something about these long-lasting, fundamental problems."

Wheeler said that to get real results, the commission needs different leadership. "You need to find somebody with an established track record of getting to the bottom of these things, naming names and recommending appropriate actions -- like firing officials and sending notifications to the Department of Justice to start proceedings," he said. "These panels appointed by and populated by current and former Pentagon insiders are notorious for finding nothing and, if they stumble across something, doing nothing."

But Gansler said he believes his commission's review is particularly relevant. "I think it's timely . . . . if we hadn't any problems, then we'd be able to say, 'well, the current processes and procedures, laws, everything works,'" Gansler said. "But if we've had a lot of problems, then why not, at this point, pause and say, 'let's see what we can do to fix it and make sure it doesn't happen again.'"