Collateral damage, DoD budget style

An unintended consequence of the U.S. Defense Department’s decision to kill the Army’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) vehicles was the disruption of a number of its other vehicle upgrade plans. Chief among these was the replacement of obsolete armored medical evacuation vehicles (MEVs) with variants of the eight-wheeled Stryker personnel carrier.

MEVs are armored ambulances that carry the Army’s medics into combat and its wounded soldiers out of harm’s way. These vehicles can make the difference between life and death for wounded soldiers by enabling their treatment and transport during the "golden hour," when such care can improve the chances of survival.

The current MEV in the Army’s heavy brigades is based on the venerable Vietnam-era M113, a tracked armored vehicle that is decades past its intended service life. A number of studies and reports over the past five years have determined that the M113 MEVs need to be replaced. The Army’s most recent Combat Tactical Vehicle Study, issued in June 2008, recommended that the M113 ambulances be replaced by the Stryker-based MEVs.

Lessons Learned?

This finding has also been validated by numerous field observations, lessons-learned exercises and combat after-action reports dating back to 2003.

For example, a 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment Iraq lesson-learned submission concluded: "M113s were cited as substantially slower … as well as not having adequate space to care for multiple casualties … During operations in Iraq, the M113 was rarely used … Recommendation: Replace M113s with Stryker ambulance vehicles."

The Army’s leaders are also painfully aware of the problems associated with continued reliance on the M113 ambulances. The deputy chief of staff for programs, Lt. Gen. Stephen Speakes, has likened riding in one to being inside an aluminum trash can being beaten by a hammer. While the care and comfort of combat casualties are understandably a top Army priority, there is another compelling reason for replacing the M113: The Combat Tactical Vehicle Study noted that the obsolete tracked ambulance can no longer be operated economically. The study estimates the M113 costs $38 a mile to operate compared with the Stryker cost of roughly $14 per mile.

For these reasons, the Army had developed an aggressive M113 ambulance replacement plan. Thirty Stryker MEVs have recently been fielded to the 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry Division in preparation for their upcoming deployment to Iraq, and the Army also funded the acquisition of another 306 Stryker MEVs in the 2008 supplemental budget bill.

All future purchases have now been put on hold, though – including an originally planned funding for 308 Stryker MEVs in the 2009 supplemental budget.

Promises, Promises

When the Pentagon unveiled its proposed budget cuts, it emphasized that presidential guidance was not received on individual program decisions. In the case of the armored vehicle cuts, not only was guidance not received, but it seems as though previous guidance was ignored.

The National Guard, which owns the oldest M113 ambulances and those most in need of replacement, had been promised special attention by the Obama administration.

"Barack Obama and Joe Biden will provide the National Guard with the equipment it needs for foreign and domestic emergencies," it continues to pledge at the official Team Obama Web site, Change.gov.

As a practical matter, unfunding the future purchase of Stryker MEVs means not only will front-line troops wounded in combat be at greater risk, but the states where these vehicles would have been based will be deprived of the use of these vehicles when dealing with disasters of either the natural kind or "man-made" (aka terrorist) ones.

The dual-use nature of these vehicles has not been lost on state adjutant generals, 11 of whom have already written their congressional delegations urging support for the Stryker MEV, and highlighting its obvious benefits to the Guard’s domestic support mission.

Congress to the Rescue?

Fortunately, Congress has shown willingness in the past to act in instances like this – where everyone at the Pentagon seemed to recognize a problem but the Department inexplicably would not act to fund the solution. Fiascos such as the Army’s initial lack of body armor for Iraq and the procurement of mine-resistant armored personnel vehicles are but two recent episodes in which congressional intervention resulted in corrective action.

As the imminent action on the defense supplemental legislation offers little time, it is fortunate that lawmakers are already intimately familiar with the Army’s acute shortfalls with respect to medical evacuation vehicles. As early as 2002, the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee noted that the M113 ambulances should be replaced: "The current ground evacuation platform appears incapable of keeping up with this modernized force and lacks the protection necessary to evacuate casualties from the close combat fight. The current platform also lacks the capability of providing essential en route medical treatment."

The Bottom Line

Delaying or canceling the procurement of the Stryker medical evacuation vehicle because of confusion surrounding the recent DoD budget announcement will not impart "new discipline and focus to military spending," as The New York Times fatuously said of the defense cuts. Neither is it an accurate internalization of the lessons of counterinsurgency warfare, a justification the Pentagon has used for a number of its recent budget decisions.

Rather, the disruption of the MEV program is the byproduct of changes made to the Army armored vehicle budget without full involvement of the service’s leaders or planners. If the Stryker MEV – and its life-saving capability – are to be kept alive, now is the "golden hour" for Congress to act.

A shorter version of this article appeared in Defense News.