Alternate Translation: There’ll Always Be An England

Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England unveils the F-35 fighter in 2006 -- in the Fort Worth factory he ran for both General Dynamics and Lockheed / Lockheed photo

Gordon England is highly regarded in defense circles, which is why he got space in Friday’s New York Times to detail how he thinks Defense Secretary Leon Panetta should trim Pentagon spending. Yet the op-ed page only said he “served during the administration of George W. Bush as secretary of the Navy and deputy secretary of defense.”

But those jobs were rewards for a career spent in the defense industry. Once you realize where England spent his formative years (Honeywell, Litton, General Dynamics, Lockheed), the column makes a lot more sense. That’s why Battleland, as a public service, is providing this annotated version of England’s recommendations:

Mr. Panetta should first cut the department’s civilian workforce before reducing the size of the military force…And there should be no additional outsourcing, thereby forcing the Pentagon to operate more efficiently.

The Pentagon has out-sourced so many engineers and accountants that the Pentagon inspector general earlier this week complained that in one case contractors were giving orders to government civilians and colluding on contracting specs to ensure they won additional contracts.

Second, Washington must do more to encourage the sale of defense equipment to our friends and allies abroad, like the littoral combat ship, the mine-resistant ambush-protected armored vehicle and a host of other combat and combat-support equipment.

As head of General Dynamics’ — later Lockheed’s — Fort Worth division, England oversaw the sale of F-16 jets around the world. In addition to the U.S. Air Force, nations flying the F-16 include Bahrain, Belgium, Chile, Denmark, Egypt, Greece, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Morocco, the Netherlands, Norway Oman, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.

Third, the Pentagon should put a moratorium on starting any new procurement programs. Instead, it should use the money to increase the rate of production on existing ones and complete them faster and for less.

Such a strategy would help preserve the troubled F-35 program, much of which is being built in…Fort Worth…by Lockheed, England’s former employer. (England’s column is datelined Fort Worth.) Nations expected to buy the F-35, in addition to the U.S., include Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Singapore.

Fourth, the new secretary of defense should adjust the military’s “tooth-to-tail ratio” — the ratio of fighters to support personnel — which is increasingly out of balance…Mr. Panetta should concentrate on cutting administrative workers — not the fighting force, intelligence personnel and front-line maintenance troops. Such cuts would greatly increase efficiency.

Many such “administrative workers” — in uniform and out — are charged with ensuring that the taxpayers get their money’s worth.

Finally, the Pentagon should give the heads of the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force and combatant commanders more say in decisions over buying equipment, including weapons.

Are you noticing a pattern yet?

Related Topics: Air Force, Arms sales, Leon Panetta, Marines, Military, National Security, Navy, Pentagon, Weapons
  • Latest on Battleland

    MANDEL NGAN/AFP/GettyImages

    Only One Year of U.S.-Led Fighting Left

    President Obama’s goal at the NATO summit this week is looking increasingly clear: wrap up U.S. troops’ combat role over the coming year, and get the allies to pay more money to enable the Afghan military to fill the gap.

    Getty Images

    House Pushes for East Coast Missile Shield

    The House has approved a $643 billion defense-spending bill for 2013 that’s $3.7 billion more than the Obama Administration, and its Pentagon, is seeking. That’s just about the same amount the Congressional Budget Office estimates the House bill’s push for an East Coast missile shield will cost over the next five years.

    Photo by Ron Sachs-Pool/Getty Images

    The Pentagon’s “Washington Monument Strategy”

    Whenever federal bureaucrats running the nation’s parks get antsy that their purse is likely to shrink, they roll out something long known as the “Washington Monument strategy.” That’s the tried-and-true technique of warning the public that if money isn’t forthcoming, one of the first budget cuts will force the shutting down of the popular obelisk to Washington, D.C., tourists.

blog comments powered by Disqus