Dateline: 08/12/02

The war on global terrorism will not override his plans to transform the Department of Defense (DoD) into an organization "adapted to the future, not the past," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told the National Journalists Roundtable last week.

Immediately after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, some defense advisors suggested Rumsfeld shelve his plans for reorganizing and reprioritizing the Defense Department in favor of conducting an all-out war on terrorism.

"It didn't take but a day or two to figure out that you just can't do that," said Rumsfeld, adding that modernizing the DoD remained, "every bit as important to the success of the global war on terrorism as the other things we're doing."

In keeping with the role of the U.S. Military as the world's peacekeepers, Rumsfeld emphasized the DoD's contribution to world peace and stability. 

"The Defense Department does contribute significantly to the peace and stability in the world, and without a stable world the world economy tanks and when that happens, obviously none of the hopes and aspirations of people in our country and in the nations with whom we have such extensive economic interaction can be fulfilled," he said.

The efficient performance of the DoD, said Rumsfeld, "makes an enormous difference not just to our country, but, because of our interdependence with so many other countries, to their countries as well."

The Transformation Two-Step
In order to meet its current and future challenges, Rumsfeld stated that "transformation" of both military personnel and hardware would be required.

Personnel: "We need a work force that is adapted to the future, not the past," he said. "We need people who are capable of operating highly technical activities and providing the kind of leadership that is distinctive in our country and some other democracies."

In order to attract and retain the high-quality personnel necessary for the modern force, Rumsfeld stressed that military pay, housing, health care and quality of family life must keep pace with those found in the public sector. 

Military hardware: Constant modernization and replacement of military hardware must be given top priority, according to Rumsfeld. "Once your airplane fleet, for example, gets old, you can keep it in the air but you have to spend a lot more money on spare parts and there's a lot more down time, so therefore you have to have more airplanes to get the same number of sorties," he said. "You do simply have to keep replenishing -- whether it's ships or planes or tanks or whatever it is."

In order to ensure that America's military services have the hardware capabilities required 20 years from now, Rumsfeld explained that it would be necessary for DoD and Congress to "balance the desire to spend the money on the people side against the desire to modernize and keep what you've got -- to keep your legacy systems going, and then also transform the force in a way that makes sense."

Achieving that balance, said Rumsfeld would require military and government leaders to invest in the design and deployment of new hardware that "will not really benefit this country until after their careers are over."

Offering examples, Rumsfeld recalled the day in 1975, when as Secretary of Defense under President Ford, he attended the first flight of the F-16 fighter jet. "I was at the roll-out for that and we're still flying it," he said.

"The B-1 bomber is still flying," he added. "I was around for that decision. I was the one who approved the M-1 tank, which was so successful in Desert Storm in the 1990s and is the basic piece of equipment for the Army today."

Facing the Changing Threat
The importance of decisions made today about future of military personnel and hardware is critical, said Rumsfeld, because of the changing nature of threats facing the nation. "We do not really face highly competent armies, navies and air forces," he said. "What we do face are a set of capabilities and technologies and weapons of mass destruction that can cause enormous carnage in our country and deployed forces and friends and allies around the world."

"If we lost 3,000 by having people take our aircraft and fly them into buildings," Rumsfeld said, concluding, "If we're looking down the road at chemical or biological or nuclear weapons in the hands of these people where you're talking about losing not 3,000 but 300,000 or a million, then the issue as to what you do about that is certainly something that people have to talk about."