London (AFP) May 10, 2012
Panetta warns Congress against extra Pentagon funds
Washington (AFP) May 10, 2012 - US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta scolded Republican lawmakers Thursday for adding what he deemed to be unnecessary expenses to the Pentagon's budget, warning it could lead to "gridlock."
The Pentagon chief spoke after the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee approved a defense budget that added funds for a study on a possible East Coast missile defense site and for modernizing US Navy cruisers that were due to be retired.
The panel approved a bill for a base defense budget of $554 billion, which committee Chairman Buck McKeon says is about $4 billion more than what President Barack Obama's administration wants to be spent for fiscal 2013 in order to meet cost-cutting targets.
The lawmakers also authorized $88.5 billion for the war in Afghanistan and other counterterrorism efforts, in line with the Pentagon's request.
"My concern is that if Congress now tries to reverse many of the tough decisions that we reached by adding several billion dollars to the president's budget request, then they risk... potential gridlock, because it's not likely that the Senate will go along with what the House did," Panetta told reporters.
He warned that the bill, which must be voted by the entire House before heading to the Democrat-led Senate, "could force the kind of trade-offs that could jeopardize our national defense."
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, said the committee's extra funding for a study on a possible new missile defense site on the US East Coast was not necessary.
"In my military judgment, the program of record for ballistic missile defense for the homeland, as we've submitted it, is adequate and sufficient to the task," he said.
"I don't see a need beyond what we've submitted in the last budget."
Fiscal pressure has forced military chiefs to scale back projected spending by $487 billion over the next decade, a task they have described as tough but manageable.
But a threat of dramatic defense cuts also looms on the political horizon.
If Congress fails to agree by January 2013 on how to slash the deficit, dramatic defense reductions of about $500 billion would be automatically triggered under a law adopted last year.
"The Department of Defense and I believe the administration are not going to support additional funds that come at the expense of other critical national security priorities," Panetta said, warning that "there is no free lunch here."
"And if members try to restore their favorite programs without regard to an overall strategy the cuts will have to come from areas that could impact overall readiness."
The panel's bill also cancels an increase in military health care benefits.
Britain confirmed Thursday it has reversed its choice of fighter jets for future aircraft carriers, ditching the preferred conventional take-off version of the US-built F-35 for a jump-jet model.
The latest turnaround by the coalition government deals a blow to a defence deal between Britain and France as it means that planned Royal Navy aircraft carriers will no longer be equipped to handle French aircraft.
Defence minister Philip Hammond told parliament that delays and spiralling costs caused by the need to fit carriers with catapults to launch the planes and special arrester gear to trap them when they land were unacceptable.
The government was therefore ditching the conventional take-off and landing F-35C joint strike fighter (JSF), reportedly preferred by Prime Minister David Cameron, in favour of the shorter-range jump-jet F-35B model.
"I can announce to the House today that the National Security Council has decided not to proceed with the cats (catapults) and traps conversion but to complete both carriers in the STOVL (short take-off vertical landing) configuration," Hammond said.
"When the facts change, the responsible thing to do is to examine the decisions you have made and to be willing to change your mind, however inconvenient that may be," Hammond said.
Britain is currently without any aircraft carriers following a strategic review unveiled by the coalition government in 2010 as part of wide-ranging austerity measures aimed at cutting a record deficit.
Hammond said the decision on the F-35s meant that Britain would now have its two new planned carriers in service sooner and that it would be able to keep both in operation, instead of mothballing one as had been anticipated.
He said the cost of fitting catapults and arrester wires to the carriers had doubled in the last 17 months from initial estimates of £950 million ($1.53 billion, 1.18 billion euros) to around £2 billion.
But it risks being seen as yet another gaffe for the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, which has made a series of recent policy U-turns and faces growing pressure over its dogged adherence to austerity over growth.
The change is also an awkward start to Britain's relationship with French president-elect Francois Hollande, as it goes back on an Anglo-French pact signed in 2010 that involved sharing aircraft carriers.
Without catapults and arrester wires, French naval Rafale jets will not be able to operate from the new British carriers.
Hammond said however that after work with "allies" the government had decided that "emphasis on carrier availability, rather than cross-deck operations, is the more appropriate route to optimising alliance capabilities."
The F-35 Lightning II, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, is touted as the backbone of America's future air fleet and and 11 other allied countries, but has been dogged by technical problems.
At an estimated $385 billion, the F-35 is the Pentagon's most expensive weapons programme.
