Former Chief of Staff Warns Army’s Future is a ‘Perilous Death Spiral’;’Doing More with Less’ Won’t Allow Real ‘Transformation’

(Washington, D.C.): In a sharply worded warning to Secretary of Defense Cohen,
former Army
Chief of Staff General Gordon Sullivan wrote last week that the lack of
funding being provided
to effect his service’s projected “Transformation” to a lighter, more mobile force is deepening
his fears that “a perilous death spiral controls the future.” This timely alarm should have a
similar effect to that issued by one of Gen. Sullivan’s predecessors, General Edward
“Shy”
Meyer, who, in the late 1970s, warned of a “hollow Army” produced by the last era in
which the
U.S. military suffered from the sort of years of neglect, overuse and underfunding that has
characterized the Clinton years.

Gen. Sullivan today heads the 100,000-member Association of the U.S. Army and
serves on the
Center for Security Policy’s distinguished Military Committee. He is to be strongly commended
for serving notice on the outgoing Clinton-Gore Administration, its would-be successors and the
Congress that the present failure to provide the resources necessary to modernize the military
will have potentially terrible future costs. Under the President’s budget, Gen. Sullivan’s bottom
line could actually be applied to each of the armed services — and should feature prominently in
the national debate leading up to this fall’s elections: “The Army of the United States of
America should not be shortchanged and made to forage internally for money to fulfill its role as
directed by the Administration that then refuses to fund it adequately.”

8 March 2000

Honorable William S. Cohen
Secretary of Defense
Washington, D.C. 20301-1000

Dear Secretary Cohen:

I write to express my concern with the fiscal year 2001 budget, recently submitted to the
Congress. I write as the president of the Association of the United States Army and with the
unique perspective of a former Chief of Staff of the Army. I am compelled to speak out for the
100,000 members of the AUSA — members of the Army (active, Guard, and Reserve), retirees,
Army civilians, friends of the Army, and family members.

As budget details emerge from public documents, my concerns grow and fears deepen that a
perilous death spiral controls the future. Our review causes me to conclude that Army funding
levels are dangerously low and place the Army in a precarious position. At the exact time when
the Army is taking a bold step known as Transformation, encouraged by senior Administration
officials, it faces the reality of a 1.7 percent decline in buying power. This fact recently caused
the Army Chief of Staff to admit to Congress that, once again, Army leaders struggle to balance
near-term readiness and modernization. Since fiscal year 1989, Army modernization funding has
decreased over 40 percent. Simultaneously, chronic underfunding continues to plague the full
time manning programs in the Guard and Reserve. Ominous reports indicate that the Army may
radically slash procurement of its centerpiece program — the Comanche helicopter — to bankroll
Transformation. These facts make it evident that the Army cannot transform itself. Moreover, it
cannot accomplish the Transformation on the backs of its soldiers — by cutting readiness and
quality of life programs — at a time when the nation continuously calls on them to do more with
less.

The Army is being told to make a profound change but to do so within current resources.
The
Army has aggressively begun it transformation and I think the Army has, in spite of a remarkable
lack of support, made profound change a reality. Inexplicably, the budget does not support the
recently directed action. What’s the solution? The Army’s share of the defense budget,
historically below 25%, must increase, and increase into the outyears. As Secretary of the Army
Caldera recently stated, “No company would say I am going to operate next year based solely on
the funding formulas in past years.” We at AUSA will work tirelessly to increase the nation’s
commitment to defense and the Army’s share of the Defense budget.

Soldiers of the Army have the privilege of serving this great nation. The American people
have a
right to expect its Army to succeed. The Administration has the obligation to submit a budget
that enables the Army to meet that expectation. Mr. Secretary, the Army of the United States of
America should not be shortchanged and made to forage internally for money to fulfill its roles
as directed by an Administration that then refuses to fund it adequately.

Sincerely,

Gordon R. Sullivan
General, USA Retired