Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://snipurl.com/ewja

New York Times
May 11, 2005

Rumsfeld Seeks Leaner Army, and a Full Term
By THOM SHANKER and ERIC SCHMITT

WASHINGTON, May 10 - Ask Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to define
his legacy, and he cuts the question short: "Don't. Hold off on it. There
will be plenty of time."

With a full list of policy initiatives ahead and travel plans penciled in
through the Beijing Olympics of 2008, Mr. Rumsfeld gives every indication
of serving out the rest of the Bush administration, confounding those who
predicted his departure even after President Bush refused, twice, to
accept his resignation over the Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

"I don't think of myself as a short-timer," said Mr. Rumsfeld, who turns
73 in July.

His goal in this pivotal year is to keep Iraq and Afghanistan at bay so he
can turn to closing bases at home and realigning global forces even as
combat continues; overhauling personnel policy while dealing with a crisis
in recruiting; redefining national security strategy while confronting
alarming nuclear developments in North Korea and Iran; and drafting a
disciplined military budget - one that does not rely on emergency spending
to scrape through year after budget-busting year.

But across the Pentagon, officials acknowledge that the twin tasks of
building Iraqi security forces and defeating the insurgency stand in the
way of Mr. Rumsfeld's longstanding ambitions to fundamentally transform
the nation's military into something leaner, more agile and thoroughly
modern. Success in Iraq would allow troop withdrawals to begin, relieving
strains on budgets and personnel.

Opening up a new front of controversy, Mr. Rumsfeld is to unveil his list
of recommended domestic base closings on Friday. It is sure to provoke
opposition from communities that stand to lose the economic benefits of
being host to the military.

By midsummer, the Pentagon's senior policy aides and top officers will
convene a meeting to overhaul military strategy for the next four years. A
final report due early next year, a Quadrennial Defense Review required by
Congress, will try to balance strategy better with budgets, weapons and
troop strength. Everything is on the table, including aircraft carriers,
new fighters and broad strategic goals. Here, too, any change that upsets
the status quo will meet some opposition.

In an interview, Mr. Rumsfeld compared the Pentagon he inherited to a
factory where there were "conveyor belts going by and they were loaded
four, five, six years ago, and they were not connected with each other."
He said budgets did not fit weapons, which did not fit strategy.

Mr. Rumsfeld is opening the Bush administration's second term as if he
were an ambitious novice, not five years into his second tour in a job he
first held 30 years ago, cognizant that this is perhaps his first year not
necessarily dominated by the Sept. 11 attacks and their aftermath.

Even his sharpest critics - generals and admirals who have endured the
wire-brush treatment of his relentless questioning, and senior civilians
across the executive branch who have fought bitter internal battles with
Mr. Rumsfeld and his policy proxies - agree that he got one thing right:
Mr. Rumsfeld is forcing the Department of Defense to think about warfare
differently and, just as important, to think in new ways about its daily
business practices.

Gen. Richard B. Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in
an interview, "There is not a D.O.D. process of any sort that we haven't
turned on its ear in the past four years."

Mr. Rumsfeld produced an eight-page list of initiatives and
accomplishments on his watch, many of them beneath the radar of public
attention but nonetheless substantial changes in how the military prepares
for and wages war, and how the Pentagon gets through the day.

The military's map of the world has been redrawn to divide the globe more
rationally among regional combatant commanders, and new responsibilities,
financing and personnel were given to the specialized commands, in
particular, ones responsible for Special Operations and for strategic
planning and targeting.

The United States' nuclear strategy has been rewritten, as have regional
war-fighting plans, and efforts are under way to restructure and relocate
the forces permanently based overseas. The goal is to reduce the number of
large cold-war-era bases, especially in Germany, in favor of access to
countries closer to future battlefronts across the Middle East, Central
Asia and Africa.

The military is rebalancing the responsibilities of active-duty personnel
and reservists to help ease strains on the Army and Marine Corps, which
are experiencing serious recruiting problems.

One set of overwhelming questions remains: whether the American public and
Congress are exhausted by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and whether
enough money will be available for transformation to a high-tech military
while still supporting a conventional force deployed to combat zones.

"He doesn't have the money to do it," said Representative John P. Murtha
of Pennsylvania, a senior Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee.

Congressional committees are just starting their detailed review of Mr.
Rumsfeld's budget request, work that could take two months or more to
complete.

Mr. Rumsfeld says the Sept. 11 attacks and the wars in Afghanistan and
Iraq have not delayed transformation or even been a distraction, but have
energized the effort.

"It has been the global war on terror and the tasks that we've been
assigned that has provided added impetus to doing the things that
absolutely had to be done in this department," he said.

As Mr. Rumsfeld presses his transformation agenda, he still confronts
bruised relations with lawmakers and even some in the administration over
Iraq policy and the fallout from the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal.

Critics blame Mr. Rumsfeld for invading Iraq with too few troops and
embracing overly optimistic assumptions about what would happen once
Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

"When it became evident that we were going to face a determined and
prolonged insurgency, he was very resistant to increasing troop levels,
stepping up production of up-armored Humvees, and modifying the game
plan," said Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican on the Armed
Services Committee.

In the interview, Mr. Rumsfeld exhibited a trademark mix, by turns
combative and introspective, as he deflected questions of how history
would weigh the troubled aftermath of invading Iraq - particularly the Abu
Ghraib scandal - against the changes he is still pressing.

"Anybody who knows anything about history knows that history gets written
as a result of a whole series of things being said and aggregated over
time, and people with perspective that don't have their nose pressed up
against a deadline every five minutes," he said.

He said there was progress in the war on terror, but conceded that Al
Qaeda was still able to function, saying, "Goodness knows, it doesn't take
a genius to blow up a building."

Mr. Rumsfeld is banking on operations in Iraq and Afghanistan remaining
stable enough for him to focus his attention elsewhere. Frequent
video-teleconferences with senior commanders in Iraq during the peak of
combat operations have dwindled to a few phone calls a week.

On Capitol Hill, lawmakers say winning support for his proposed changes
has been made more difficult by Mr. Rumsfeld's often rocky relations with
Congress. In public hearings and in news conferences, Mr. Rumsfeld, a
former congressman from Illinois, can often barely disguise his impatience
with lawmakers.

But he has worked hard to cultivate good ties with Congress, setting aside
Tuesday and Thursday mornings for breakfast with House and Senate members
at the Pentagon.

"It's been up and down," said Representative William M. Thornberry of
Texas, a Republican on the House Armed Services Committee. "Some people
think he doesn't kowtow to them enough."

Inside the Pentagon, Mr. Rumsfeld is retooling his senior military and
civilian leadership team from a war cabinet to corporate-style board of
directors.

His new management team is led by Gordon R. England, his new deputy, who
fits the traditional model of a No. 2 who oversees daily operations and
avoids ideological battles. Mr. England, the Navy secretary, was once
executive vice president of General Dynamics.

He will replace Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, a lightning
rod for critics of the Iraq war, who leaves in June to take over as head
of the World Bank. Another senior policy figure criticized during the Iraq
war effort, Douglas J. Feith, is also leaving, to be replaced by Eric
Edelman, a career Foreign Service officer who previously was a senior aide
to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Mr. Rumsfeld is reshuffling his top military advisers, but with familiar
faces. Gen. Peter Pace of the Marines who has worked closely with Mr.
Rumsfeld for four years as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, will succeed
General Myers as chairman this fall. Nominated as the new vice chairman is
Adm. Edmund P. Giambastiani Jr., who was Mr. Rumsfeld's top military aide
until taking over the military's Joint Forces Command in 2002.

Mr. Rumsfeld works hard to leave his imprint on the bureaucracy, spending
up to 10 hours a week on senior officer and civilian appointments. He has
seeded like-minded prot�g�s throughout the military's senior ranks to
ensure that his priorities outlast him. He routinely reaches down to
interview one-star and two-star officers for important jobs, a practice
that some officers deride as a politically motivated "Rumsfeld sniff
test."

In a conference room just a few paces from his office, Mr. Rumsfeld and 15
of his top civilian and military advisers meet at least twice a month to
hammer out the most pressing issues, like budgets or new weapons systems.

"They know each other, they know each other's strengths and weaknesses,
they're comfortable talking in front of each other, which in many cases
they had not been," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "The decisions that flow out of
that room are all of the big things that take place in this building."

Mr. Rumsfeld's admirers and critics alike say it is too soon to gauge his
permanent stamp on the Pentagon or the military operations he set in
motion.

"He hasn't finished the job, either in Iraq or with transformation," said
Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, who has sparred frequently
with the secretary. "So I don't know how you would judge him until the
results are in."

Mr. Rumsfeld believes in measurements, whether electrical output from
Baghdad or how many military jobs civilians could take over or how often a
bespectacled defense secretary appears in editorial cartoons, many of
which hang in his office.

Each day, he tries to walk five miles through the Pentagon's polished
corridors, keeping track with a pace meter on his belt. "He's an
inveterate counter with a purpose," said Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon
spokesman.

Some evenings, he plays squash with Mr. Di Rita or Vice Adm. James G.
Stavridis, Mr. Rumsfeld's senior military assistant. In the fashion of his
hometown, Chicago, Mr. Rumsfeld improves his odds against the younger men
by putting in the fix: He refuses to allow the livelier, softer rubber
ball favored by today's players.

"I play my game," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "I play hardball."

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or you can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will be deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to