Military downsizing unlikely

By Robert Burns

Associated Press

WASHINGTON — After months of speculation that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would order the military to get smaller, it now appears he will look elsewhere for savings to pay for missile defense and other investments aimed at remaking the military for the 21st century.

In interviews this week, military leaders and defense analysts said they believe any force cuts that emerge from Rumsfeld’s comprehensive review of the military — due to be finished by late September — will be modest.

"Unless and until you decide you want to completely revamp the military, the current size makes sense," said Daniel Goure, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute, a private think tank. Goure thinks such an overhaul is needed, along with force cuts, but he doubts Rumsfeld will do it.

So much for the talk earlier this summer that Rumsfeld wanted to eliminate two of the Army’s 10 active-duty divisions, one of the Navy’s 12 carrier battle groups and one of the Air Force’s 12 active fighter wings.

When Rumsfeld aides pushed the idea of force cuts earlier this summer, the military brass pushed back.

Army Secretary Thomas White says the Army’s active-duty force of 480,000 is stretched too thin already.

The Navy has made a case to Rumsfeld that it needs all 12 of its carrier battle groups, and senior Navy leaders are known to believe the defense secretary will accept that.

Gen. James Jones, commandant of the Marine Corps, says that while manpower cuts are "always the easiest thing to go after" when the Pentagon is looking to save money, it would be a mistake this time.

"When you lose force structure, you don’t get it back," he said.

Goure, for one, thinks the outcome is pretty clear: Instead of cutting forces, the Pentagon will pay for its priority programs — like missile defense — by doing less to modernize and replace worn out equipment.