Army seeks to balance near-term, future needs

Senior Army officials remain firmly committed to pursuing long-term modernization efforts, especially the ambitious $160 billion Future Combat Systems, despite pressures to shift more resources to meet the expensive manpower and equipment demands of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Army Chief of Staff George Casey and other senior officers acknowledged at the Association of the United States Army's annual conference this week that the service needs billions of dollars to repair and replace equipment lost or damaged in the war zones. But they are telling audiences that the service cannot focus its efforts and budgets solely on current operations.

"We believe we must continually modernize our equipment to put our Cold War systems behind us and provide our soldiers with a decisive advantage over any enemy they face in the future," Casey said during an appearance Tuesday.

Lawmakers, particularly in the House, have long been skeptical of the FCS program, questioning whether the high-tech system is too expensive given the Army's more immediate budgetary needs.

The House-passed version of the fiscal 2008 Defense appropriations bill slices $406 million from the program. But the Senate, typically a more reliable supporter of FCS, fully funded the Bush administration's $3.7 billion request, setting up the Army program as a major funding issue for conference negotiations on a final bill.

So-called equipment reset accounts will likely total $13 billion this year, with the bills for repairing and replacing vehicles and other battlefield hardware expected to continue piling up for several years after operations in Iraq end.

Meanwhile, the service needs billions of dollars to pay for new battlefield equipment, including the Mine Resistant Ambush-Protected Vehicle, which provides better shielding against roadside bombs.

But senior Army officials emphasized that those programs, though urgently needed, do not negate the need to upgrade, overhaul and replace the Army's fleet of vehicles. They argued there is a pressing need to come up with adequate resources for both the near-term and future equipment needs of the ground force.

"We're completely committed to the FCS program," said Lt. Gen. Michael Vane, director of the Army Capabilities Integration Center and the so-called "architect" of the Army's transformation efforts. The program, he added, is the "DNA of the future force."

The Army, for instance, does not see the MRAP, a vehicle that has become so crucial to current operations in Iraq, as an "enduring program," said Lt. Gen. Stephen Speakes, the Army's deputy chief of staff for programs.

There is a "broad recognition that this is a need of war," he said.

Speakes added that he believes "people are sophisticated enough" to view the MRAP and other wartime requirements as separate from the Army's long-term transformation efforts, such as FCS. Support for both efforts is "much appreciated and much needed," he said.

During a speech Wednesday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates did not mention the FCS program specifically, but hinted at the need for a delicate balance in spending for both current needs and long-term investment in the force.

"Resources are needed not only to recoup from the losses of war but to make up for the shortfalls of the past and to invest in the capabilities of the future," Gates said. "How those resources are used and where those investments are made today will shape the Army for decades to come."