House Armed Services to launch own Defense review

The House Armed Services Committee will move ahead with plans to conduct an in-depth analysis of defense capabilities, military force structure needs and potential threats that will run parallel to the Pentagon's sweeping Quadrennial Defense Review.

The committee's goal is not to second-guess the Pentagon's work but rather to "make sure the department strikes the right balance" in its report, due to Congress in February, House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said at a hearing Wednesday.

Unlike the Pentagon's QDR, which is under way, the panel does not intend to base its conclusions on budget constraints and fiscal realities. The review should "reflect what it takes to defend America," Hunter said.

During past Pentagon reviews, Congress has received only a part of the Defense Department's analysis -- largely what defense officials think they can afford, the chairman added. But Armed Services ranking member Ike Skelton, D-Mo., cautioned that the committee cannot simply ignore the budget.

"Anything that passes out of the realm of reality is ... wishful thinking," he said.

Former Pentagon Comptroller Dov Zakheim likewise warned that the committee should be "very careful to avoid being dismissed because you're entirely blue sky." But Zakheim said it is important for Congress to recognize all threats and other issues considered in the Pentagon's long review and not just those that make the final report.

Meanwhile, Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee ranking member Vic Snyder, D-Ark., expressed some doubt that the committee's review could be bipartisan despite assurances from Hunter. "I'm not sure either this committee or this institution ... has that in them right now," he said.

Rep. Susan Davis, D-Calif., said she was initially concerned that the committee review would simply be a "make-work exercise" but now views the review as potentially "instructive."

After this morning's public hearing to discuss the Pentagon's QDR with several defense analysts, the committee planned a closed-door session to develop the scope of its review. The goal is to "keep the focus narrow enough to be useful," Hunter said. Zakheim and a panel of other defense analysts agreed the review could be valuable in highlighting any gaps in the Pentagon's forthcoming report, particularly in regard to interagency cooperation. Conducting its own review also will give the committee insight when it analyzes the Pentagon's conclusions.

"You're going into training so you're well prepared when [the Pentagon] crosses the river in January or February," Andrew Krepinevich, executive director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, told the committee.