- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
July 13, 2009
Exclusive: U.S. Should Build (And Sell) More F-22 Fighters
Congress, even with a Democrat majority in both houses, may reject a major cut in defense spending proposed by the Obama Administration. In the 2010 defense budget, production of the Air Force F-22 Raptor air superiority fighter was to be halted at the 187 aircraft already funded. The Air Force had wanted a minimum of 243 Raptors, and had originally envisioned flying over 300 of these fifth-generation warplanes, the most advanced in the world. The need is to replace aging F-15 Eagle fighters, of which 522 still serve. The F-15 first flew in 1972 and its performance has been surpassed by the Russian Su-27, which China is building as the J-11. In an era of rapid technological change, American security cannot depend on aircraft designed four decades ago.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates halted the program as part of his “rebalancing” of military capabilities, which is actually an exercise in tilting American forces toward the low end of the conflict spectrum. In a May 2008 speech, Gates said “any major weapons program, in order to remain viable, will have to show some utility and relevance to...irregular campaigns.” He believes the future will see more insurgencies like Afghanistan, not confrontations with well-armed nation-states. Such one-dimensional thinking would endanger America’s strategic superiority against the most dangerous threats.
The Senate Armed Services Committee has added seven F-22s to its defense authorization bill, and the House Armed Services Committee wants to buy parts for the production of 12 more Raptors. The cost of building seven more jets would be $1.2 billion, less than 1 percent of what was given to just one company, AIG, during the bailout of Wall Street. Yet, Congressional appropriators are having to search hard for ways to fund the program. Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ) have vowed to halt the program during floor debate to save money. President Barack Obama has threatened to veto any defense bill that calls for more F-22s, though such a threat is not credible at a time when our forces are in combat.
There is a need to keep the F-22 assembly line open until either the current or a future administration recognizes the dangers to U.S. security posed by the advance in armaments possessed by large, rogue states like Iran, resurgent powers like Russia, and “peer wannabe” rivals like China. Thousands of highly skilled people are employed building F-22s, and the program has a supply chain that is critical to the future of the U.S. defense industrial base. Once closed down, it would very difficult, if not impossible, to reconstitute. It certainly could not be done fast enough to meet a crisis.
Another way to keep F-22s in production and on their way to the front is to sell them to allies like Japan. Tokyo has made known that it wants Raptors for the same reason the USAF wants them, to replace aging fighters, in this case its 80 obsolete F-4EJ Phantom IIs. Japan is in a tough neighborhood, facing Chinese, Russian, and North Korean threats. It is rearming and seeking a closer alliance with the United States. Tokyo is clearly worried about American reliability, a concern that could be relieved by continuing the history of joint U.S.-Japan procurement of weapon systems. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) is at the center both of funding the F-22 program and facilitating sales to Japan. Rep. David Obey (D-WI), chair of the House Appropriations Committee, is the main obstacle, having placed a ban on F-22 sales. A compromise would require that some of the most advanced technology in the plane be removed from the export version.
I attended a day-long seminar in April sponsored by two Japanese think tanks; the Sasakawa Peace Foundation and the Ocean Policy Research Foundation. The panels of experts on Asian geopolitics were preceded by statements from the current Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso and former prime minister Shinzo Abe. Both cited the rise of China as a dangerous development that called for Asian democracies from India and Australia to Japan and the United States to work in concert to protect peace and stability.
Prime Minister Aso noted in a prepared statement read by Japan’s ambassador, “China’s advancement to the ocean is particularly spectacular. The Chinese Navy is proactively modernizing. We also have information that China is working to build aircraft carriers. China’s opaque expansion and modernization of its military, including the Navy, may greatly impact the maritime security environment which is so important to both Japan and the U.S. Moreover, Russia is increasingly more actively engaged in military activities in the Far East.”
Former Prime Minister Abe, present in person, echoed Aso’s arguments, and even compared, without naming names, the rising Chinese threat to that posed earlier by the Soviet Union. He stated that during the Cold War, Japan was the “cap in the bottle” past which the Soviet fleet could not pass from its Pacific base at Vladivostok. He then observed that the “Japanese island chain can fulfill the same role against another power if it pushes the envelop.” Geographically that chain could be seen as extending all the way south to Taiwan and the Philippines, forming a base for containing Chinese ambitions.
Australia’s latest defense white paper also warns of Beijing’s expansion and refers to “our key strategic partners (the United States, Japan, and increasingly India)” in the same formulation as used in Japanese circles. It is understood that, “Japan's alliance with the United States has been a key stabilising feature of the postwar regional security environment and will continue to play a vitally important role.” Speaking in Perth May 1st, Japanese Foreign Minister Hirofumi Nakasone endorsed the Australian assessment, "Certainly in relation to China, as you've indicated over the last 21 years, China has continued to increase its military expenditure in double-digit figures, and from the point of view of the region it is an issue of some concern.”
In response to North Korea’s nuclear test in May, the U.S. deployed a squadron of twelve F-22s to Okinawa in case of an open clash with Pyongyang. Selling to Japan the 50 F-22s it wants would put several squadrons in position on a permanent basis.
Secretary Gates wants to replace the unbuilt F-22s with more F-35 Joint Strike Fighters which are cleared for sale to Japan and Australia. The F-35 is an excellent fighter-bomber, but it is not designed to win control of the air so that strike aircraft can operate without enemy interference. As Loren B. Thompson of the Lexington Institute has argued, “the F-35 isn't as stealthy as the F-22 in some aspects. It also isn't as fast; it isn't as maneuverable; it can't fly as high; and it can't go as far when flying supersonic missions.” He concludes, “Japan has decided that buying the F-22 is the next best thing to having its own nuclear arsenal.”
So while Congress should move ahead with funding more F-22 production for the USAF, it should also authorize Raptor sales to our Japanese allies so our forces can fly together against common threats.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor William R. Hawkins is a consultant specializing in international economic and national security issues.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
