|
STATEMENT
OF
GORDON R. ENGLAND
SECRETARY OF THE NAVY
12
JULY 2001
Mr.
Chairman, members of the Committee, good
morning.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak
with you today.
The CNO, Commandant and I are grateful
for your continuing support to keep the Navy
and Marine Corps the very best in the world.
Let
me begin by saying the Navy and Marine Corps
remain a strong and potent arm of our
Nation’s military forces.
They have maintained a forward presence
in all corners of the globe ready to perform
any mission called for from humanitarian
relief to interdiction operations.
Able to deploy on short notice the Navy
Marine Corps team provides the theater and
regional commanders a well trained and
effective fighting force.
In
his remarks at the Naval Academy graduation,
President Bush said "we must build forces
that draw upon the revolutionary advances in
the technology of war that will allow us to
keep the peace by redefining war on our terms
-- a force that is defined less by size and
more by knowledge and swiftness… and that
relies heavily on stealth, precision weaponry
and information technologies."
I am in full agreement with this
challenge and, while naval forces inherently
fit the President’s vision, some
modifications and alignments may be needed to
meet these goals.
But
such changes are best made with a full
understanding of the uses to which Navy and
Marine Corps units are being put today.
For instance, forward deployed naval
forces are present around the world and are
central to assuring the availability of the
sea lines through which international commerce
and key resources such as oil flow.
Also, as Theater Commanders-in-Chief
develop their comprehensive Theater Engagement
Plans (TEP) in support of the National
Security Strategy and National Military
Strategy, the Navy and Marine Corps play
particularly important roles in TEP execution
by virtue of their regular forward presence.
And lastly, we know that naval forces
are regularly called upon to execute combat
tasking on short notice in distant parts of
the world.
From the time my predecessor testified
before this committee on 10 February 2000,
Navy or Marine forces have engaged in combat
over the skies of Iraq, in humanitarian
support in East Timor, South America and in
Europe.
Looking
forward, it is useful to note that for some
time the sea services have undertaken an
evolutionary shift from operations
predominantly on the open seas to operations
that include the littoral: an evolution that
has underscored the requirement for improved
data networking; tailored battle management
systems and sensors; and innovative ideas for
employing Marines that are attuned to the
difficult littoral environment – afloat and
ashore. This
shift in focus generates a need to look at our
equipment across a broader mission
range…such as time-critical strike,
ballistic and cruise missile defense; littoral
and deep water anti-submarine warfare;
intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance;
air and ground mobility; and
expeditionary maneuver warfare.
We
also recognize that we need to recapitalize
our force -- by that I mean building new
platforms -- for the future.
For instance, even as the average age
of our ships has been steadily increasing to
its present average of 16 years -- and
trending upward for the next five or so years
-- our building rates have not been keeping
apace. Likewise,
the average age of Navy and Marine Corps
aircraft is about 18 years… close to the age
of those Sailors and Marines who maintain
them. However,
the shape of the Navy of the future may
change, as we work to develop a new national
military strategy that takes new threats and
new opportunities into consideration.
Here also building aircraft in
sufficient numbers… ideally at economical
orders of production… is called for.
We
have precious few new programs to recapitalize
our forces other than systems like DDG 51,
F/A-18E/F, and the new carrier under
construction, USS RONALD REAGAN.
In fact, projected replacement
aircraft, such as the F/A-18 E/F and the Joint
Strike Fighter do not meet the entire need
under current plans, as there are no
replacements scheduled for the EA-6B, P-3, or
E-2 aircraft and some of our helicopter fleet. New funding may be needed, but I also intend to identify some
funding sources through process improvement.
Modernization
of our current force is also an imperative
because of the requirement to be able to
prevail if called upon in the near term.
Nonetheless, it is prudent to accept
reasonable risk by some reduction of
expenditure in these accounts in order to make
available assets for recapitalization for the
future.
With that backdrop. I intend to make
the most of our Navy-Marine Corps team by
focusing on four strategic areas: combat
capability, people, technology,
and business practices.
First,
as this Committee is well aware, the primary
purpose
of the Navy and Marine Corps is to deter,
train for, and when necessary, fight and win
our Nation's battles.
In remaining faithful to this charge,
combat capability, which includes readiness,
must be our primary emphasis.
In all our decision-making, we will ask
the question, "Does this task, program,
organization or facility materially contribute
to improving our combat capability?"
Likewise we will recognize that what
has worked in the past may not always succeed
in the future.
Therefore, the department will invest
more in technical and doctrinal
experimentation, and in new and different ways
of accomplishing our mission.
Let me emphasize, our mission is, and
will remain, joint.
We are committed to the concept
“One Team, One Fight.”
Along with our sister services and
allies, we will organize, equip and train to
fight jointly, recognizing that forward
deployed naval forces are integral to the
combined efforts of all the armed services.
Second,
my very highest priority is our men and women
in uniform, their families and our civilian
workforce.
During my confirmation hearings, I
commented that any capital asset purchased by
the Department of the Navy has no value to the
nation until it is manned by highly motivated
and trained people.
Therefore, as we plan for the future,
we need to first be sure that our personnel
policies will provide us the people and skills
we require for our future systems.
In
this regard, emphasis needs to be placed on
“Quality of Service” – achieving a
higher quality workplace as well as a higher
quality of life for our Sailors, Marines,
active duty and reserve, and civilians and all
of their families. The goal will be to create an environment where our men and
women can excel at their chosen profession,
unimpeded by factors that divert their
attention from work and sap their morale.
This includes state-of-the-art tools,
cutting-edge training, competitive
compensation and efficient health care, and an
operational tempo that considers the
individual, as well as the family. Fostering a
positive working environment where young men
and women believe they contribute meaningfully
to their units will encourage them to want to
stay and grow with our team.
When people want to stay with a group,
others will want to join that group.
Retention is a great recruiting tool!
Third, the application of advanced
technology is central to our Nation’s
military strength.
I am concerned, however, that the
application of technology in the military has
for a generation lagged its commercial
availability.
This is a high priority in our combat
systems, but also includes technology for
training, testing and management systems.
Technological advances are central to
the priorities set forth by the President and
Secretary of Defense as we shift from the 20th
century force, to the more lethal and agile
one of the 21st.
Technology will emphasize networks of
information and communications as well as
improvements in sensors and weapons.
Initiatives are on going to translate
such concepts as the Navy’s Netcentric
Warfare and the Marine Corps Expeditionary
Maneuver Warfare into reality.
The Naval War College’s Navy Warfare
Development Command and Marine Corps Combat
Development Command along with numerous Fleet
Battle Experiments are but one example of the
testing of new concepts, equipment, and
doctrine in both the joint and naval
environments.
But
technology is changing fast, so care must be
taken to plan for future advances by
anticipating logical insertion points early in
the design process.
This preplanned improvement schedule
combined with spiral design should allow for
the delivery of increased combat capability
over a shorter period of time. Also important,
U.S. systems need to have designed into them
conduits that allow our allies to participate
to the best of their significant capabilities
at increasing levels of complexity. It goes without saying that embarking on this technological
transformation will necessitate we recruit,
train, and retain bright and intelligent
people to operate and maintain these systems.
Fourth,
our management team should be more
process-oriented, working on ways to improve
“how we do business” rather than
concentrating only on specific programs and
products.
To do that, we need to know where we
are and to have clear visibility of where we
are going.
Measures and metrics provide the tools
to do so and as such, will be a key element of
our process-oriented management strategy.
Our cold war acquisition infrastructure
and regulations have been described as a
“voracious dinosaur consuming dollars which
should be applied to the real mission.”
It is time to change.
Borrowing applicable business practices
from commercial industry is a logical step.
While the Navy and Marine Corps will
always need good leaders in their primary
combat arms arena, the Department of Navy will
also develop leaders with a better
understanding of business strategies, cost
control and rapid and flexible design.
The
Department has embraced the use of teams for
integrated product and process development.
We intend also to focus on activity
based costing to better understand the actual
price we are paying for a platform or system,
both for acquisition and equally importantly
for support over the life of the system.
These initiatives should help to free
resources to recapitalize our operating
forces, establish processes that leverage
commercial capabilities, maintain excellence
and attract and retain quality people.
The world has changed a great deal over
the past decade. But one thing, has not changed:
the Navy and Marine Corps needs to
deter, train for, and when necessary fight and
win our Nation’s battles.
As we steam into this new century, I am
reminded that forward presence provides an
essential benefit for our nation.
The Navy and Marine Corps, and in fact
the entire U.S. military, contribute to a
stable global environment allowing our economy
and our citizens to prosper along with other
nations and peoples throughout the world.
The stabilizing benefits of American
military strength are key to our national
interests and the well being of the
international community.
The investment by our nation in its
military to underwrite this prosperity is,
indeed quite modest.
I
look forward to working with the Congress, the
Secretary of Defense, and our sister Services
to meet the challenges in the next year and
beyond. The
changes and transformations I have discussed
constitute a start at the beginning of the new
century.
Thank you for your time this morning
and your continued support for our Sailors,
Marines…active and reserve… our civilians
and their families.
The
statements made in this testimony are
contingent upon the results of Secretary
Rumsfeld’s strategic review.
I ask that you consider them in that
light.
|
