Philip A. Odeen
Chairman, National Defense
Panel
16 April 1997
Introduction
Thank you
for the opportunity to come before your committee
today. I know
that I speak for the entire panel when I say we are
honored to have been chosen to take on this challenge --
the opportunity
to influence the future directions for our nation's
military forces and the institutions underpinning
their success.
While the national security establishment has made
great progress in understanding and reacting to the
fundamental
world changes since the end of the Cold War, we are
well aware that we still have a long way to go. Moreover,
now is the time
to consider how we will meet the needs of the nation
in the 21st century -- an era that will be quite different
from the past as well as the world today. Extending
our nation's
military strength and world leadership into the
next century
will require a combination of the knowledge gained
in the past and a vision of where we must be headed in
the future. Importantly,
it also will require the ability to create
new and innovative approaches and determine if these
concepts will
work in the future. I am convinced our team, panel
members and staff, is ready to meet this challenge.
Philosophy
The "Military Force Structure Act
of 1996" calls for a comprehensive examination of efense strategy, the
force structure, modernization,
infrastructure, and other elements of the defense program and policies.
Its objective is to develop alternative defense
strategies and force structures that will meet U.S. security challenges
of the 21st century. Specifically, the legislation assigns
to the National Defense Panel two tasks: to review and comment on the 2005
focused Quadrennial Defense Reviewing conducted
by the epartment of Defense, and to conduct an independent assessment of
alternative force structures through the year 2010 and beyond. We also
remain cognizant or our inherent visionary role and the impact our recommendations
might have as this committee
deliberates during the next several years. We hope our objective assessment
will be helpful to you, as we
take our responsibility quite seriously. To meet the challenges before
us, the Panel believes that its greatest contribution lies in setting directions
for the future and in identifying paths to meet them. We do not intend
to propose specific numbers of systems or organizations that should make
up future forces. We cannot analyze in depth all the issues that must be
addressed by the Department. In short, we are not going to try to duplicate
the range of activities carried out by the Department. Instead, we believe
that our real contribution is to look beyond what we _are_ doing today,
and towards what we _should be_doing tomorrow. To do this we must fully
explore the future and its potential implications for our military forces.
Additionally, we must consider how the forces of tomorrow should be supported
by the infrastructure, management processes and organizations that make
their operations effective. Tomorrow is not far away -- the soldiers, sailors,
marines and airmen that will command our forces in the future and are already
in the force today, as are many of the systems and platforms they will
operate. Our approach,
therefore, will be to look back from the future -- that is, to identify
where we will need to be and the determine how
to get there. For example, to know where we should be in 2010 and beyond,
we need to carefully consider:
the dramatic
and continuing changes in the world,
the emerging
technological directions and opportunities they represent,
the changing
nature of warfare,
the role
of the military and its relationship to other instruments of power,
the relationships
we have around the globe, and
the needs
of the nation in the 21st century.
With this understanding, we will
develop strategies that have the potential to succeed in the world of the
future, We can then examine
the capabilities and force structure alternatives that might meet them.
We know, however, that the future cannot be predicted and that enormous
uncertainty will remain. Therefore, we must consciously pursue approaches
which are capability based and yet able to adapt to emerging threats to
our national interest. That is, as new challenges to our national security
mature, we must ensure our capabilities continue to evolve in a manner
that will be successful against them. Let me also make it clear that we
do not see our mission as one to either balance the federal budget, nor
one which is automatically budget driven. Instead, our analysis must be
guided by the needs of the future and the strategies that best get us there.
I am confident our work will result in decision making that both identifies
savings opportunities _and_ identifies innovative opportunities to strengthen
or augment current approaches. We look forward to making both the easy
recommendations, as well as the ones that some may find less appealing,
yet are critical, for our future. We also realize that we cannot be all
things to all people, and stand prepared to recommend what we feel are
the best alternatives and approaches. Finally, the review we now begin
is not geared to specific programs organizations or management procedures.
Instead it is about a plan for the future we hope to realize, and the consistency
of current and future capabilities, organizations and management processes
to get us there. Allow me to summarize how we view the key aspects of our
job. We will strive to:
develop strategies that address the
future, not the past,
offer a vision of what future forces
and supporting structures should look like,
identify innovative opportunities
to augment or replace current approaches,
describe a realistic plan to implement
these future directions, and
deliver a well thought out framework
against which the Department,
and ultimately Congress, can make
future decisions.
We seek to achieve these goals by reaching
out to those within the Department, and throughout government, industry,
academia and research institutions
who are willing to offer their ideas and expertise -- we know we cannot
do this alone. Moreover,
the creative and innovative thinking that will support meeting the challenges
of tomorrow is not the sole domain of those of us currently in the defense
arena, but will result from the cooperation and collaboration of those
who share a desire to meet
the national security needs of America in the next century.
Current Status and Future Plans
You are already will aware of the expertise
and talent base represented by our panel members. They include strategists
and specialists with
extensive experience in defense issues, global business and technology
development. I am fortunate to chair a panel
that is enthusiastic and extremely committed. We also plan to engage a
variety of others with varied backgrounds to infuse
their thoughts into the Panel's deliberations. We have also assembled a
small group of broad strategic thinkers to support the panel. This group
can best be described as people with creative minds, who challenge the
status quo. They will be augmented by experts to ensure our overarching
strategies are supported by the appropriate knowledge base and analysis.
In addition to those already mentioned,
we are inviting the defense community at large to offer their thoughts
on both specific topics
and general directions for the future. This morning in a meeting open to
the public, the Panel heard from experts from three
respected research organizations on a variety of topics. In two weeks we
will have a similar session. It is my intent to ensure
the Panel's deliberations are enriched by the considered thinking available
throughout both the defense community and other
arenas. The Panel and the staff have concentrated our efforts to date on
meeting your objective of providing the Secretary with our views of the
direction and emerging results of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review.
To this end, we have met with the Secretary and Deputy Secretary, the Chairman,
the Service Chiefs, and the JROC as well as a number of other senior DoD
staff. In addition to delivering an interim report and drafting a final
set of comments on the QDR in mid-May, we have committed
to continuing to provide advice and constructive suggestions to the Secretary.
Importantly, we believe, as does the Secretary,
that our insights can be of great value both during the Department's review
as well as after it is completed. More importantly, we concur that the
QDR should be seen as an important milestone in a longer journey to define
our security needs for
the 21st century. We have also been developing the analysis plan and tools
that will support our longer term objective and the delivery next December
of alternative force structures. I have already mentioned our outreach
program that is directly contributing to this challenge. Additionally,
we understand the importance of gaining the perspective of the Services,
our Allies and the regional and functional CINCs before a true understanding
of the future, a strategy to meet it, and a set of capabilities for 2010
and beyond can be crafted. This June we will visit many of those locations
to hear their thoughts first hand.
Concluding Thoughts
Our goal is to give you the very best
thinking available. How do we do this? We consider future challenges and
the needs of the nation. We make sure we have a sound vision and strategy
for our country's national defense. We consider all opportunities for
new thinking and innovation. Finally,
we offer real and implementable ideas that will support future success
of both our forces and
the institutions that support them. As I said earlier, we welcome your
thoughts and ideas. I am determined that our final report and the process
we go through to develop it will be rigorous, enlightened, and progressive.
Thank you again for this opportunity to support our nation's defense and
to come before your Committee. I look forward to your questions.