Back to news

February 5, 2021 | International, Aerospace

Foreign training programs could become a priority in Biden administration, experts say

Augusta Saraiva, Medill News Service

As the world witnessed President Joe Biden take his oath of office on Jan. 20, he vowed to “repair our alliances and engage with the world once again” as a “strong and trusted partner for peace, progress and security.”

At the Pentagon, that could mean foreign military training programs, some of which came under attack during the Trump administration, could regain their previous status as what former Defense Secretary Mark Esper called a “critical long-term investment.”

These programs were harshly criticized in December 2019 when a Saudi trainee at the Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida, killed three sailors and injured eight more in what the FBI deemed a terrorist attack. The shooter was part of the International Military and Education Training initiative, a State and Defense Department joint initiative that, alongside other programs, brings around 6,000 members of foreign militaries to train at U.S. military facilities each year.

In the aftermath of the shooting, the Pentagon forbade international military students and their families from possessing firearms and ammunition. And as a result of strong calls from Florida Republican politicians for the Pentagon to reassess foreign military training programs, Esper ordered a review of the programs shortly after the Pensacola incident, but also said he supported them, generally.

Even before the incident, the DoD had proposed a 10 percent decrease on the IMET for fiscal year 2020, which began in September 2019. The Senate, however, approved the original budget of almost $115 million.

Over the last four years, the Trump administration took other steps to decrease the role of foreign military training programs. In 2019, it shut down a program to train Afghan pilots after nearly half of its participants were found to have deserted. And in an effort to crack down on Islamic militants, the U.S. blocked Pakistani military members from participating in IMET for over a year between 2018 and 2019.

Despite the changes in priorities under President Donald Trump, international military training programs continue to be a key pillar of U.S. foreign policy. In 2020, the DoD trained over 31,000 foreign military students in its schoolhouses. It also deployed 55 military advisers to 13 ally countries.

Renanah Joyce, a postdoctoral fellow at the International Security Program at Harvard University, said that DoD “has taken steps to improve its assessment, monitoring and evaluation of foreign military training programs, but still really struggles to answer pretty basic questions about the return on investment.”

“One of the one of the reasons why the U.S. government chronically struggled to answer questions about the return on investment is that it tries to achieve so many things with the same tool,” Joyce said, adding that the Biden administration should “think really carefully about not to treat training as sort of a silver bullet, but to think clearly about what the most important strategic goals are.”

To change this landscape, in 2020, the Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended that the State Department implemented a more detailed IMET monitoring and evaluation plan, as well as maintain a record of each participant's “subsequent military or defense ministry career and current position and location post-program.” It also urged the inclusion of more women in IMET.

This revamp is likely to continue under Biden, who is also likely to continue treating foreign military training programs as a key component of U.S. foreign policy, experts say.

“Of all things to be cut in the United States defense budget, this will likely not be one of them, primarily, because it seems very clear from Biden's appointees that the new administration is very concerned with shoring up relations with partners and allies,” said Jonathan Caverley, a professor of strategy at the Naval War College.

With the rise of military competition China and the U.S., however, military training programs are likely to experience a pivot in the composition of its student body, Caverley says. The Biden administration is likely to focus on “competition with China, rather than confrontation,” and that could translate into more training for members of Asian militaries.

“Rather than force on force, it's more of a competition in third party locations, very similar to the Cold War,” he said. “You will see that fewer trainees will come from Afghanistan, from Iraq, from various countries in the Gulf, and you'll see much more of an emphasis on Asian states.”

The Pentagon declined to comment on the future of the programs at this point.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2021/02/03/foreign-training-programs-could-become-a-priority-in-biden-administration-experts-say/

On the same subject

  • Global Defense Spending Decline Expected As Nations Deal with Coronavirus

    April 29, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Global Defense Spending Decline Expected As Nations Deal with Coronavirus

    Experts see domestic projects taking priority over national security in the coming years. After five straight years of growth, global defense spending is expected to decline in the coming years as nations deal with the economic fallout of the coronavirus pandemic, analysts say. In 2019, global defense spending topped $1.9 trillion, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute's latest tally. The U.S. represents 38 percent of the world's defense expenditures and with China, the two superpowers account for 52 percent of the world's defense spending. But because of COVID-19, experts anticipate a shift government spending worldwide toward domestic projects and away from weapons and the military. “What we can expect is that spending [is] really going to decrease,” Nan Tian, a defense spending expert with the institute, said Tuesday during a Stimson Center webcast. “We've seen this historically following the [2008 and 2009 financial] crisis where many countries in Europe really started to cut back on military spending.” Even before the coronavirus sent the global economy into a tailspin, U.S. defense spending had been predicted to flatten in the coming years. Now with trillions of dollars being spent on massive coronavirus stimulus packages, flat defense spending levels could wind up being a best-case scenario. “In today's world with [coronavirus], flat defense budget, I think, is what everybody is hoping for because it could go the other direction; it could go negative,” Hawk Carlisle, president and CEO of the National Defense Industrial Association and a retired four-star commander of Air Combat Command and Pacific Air Forces, said in an interview Tuesday. “This is going to be years to climb out of.” One reason for the expected spending dip: the deficit. Regardless of the results of the November presidential and congressional elections, deficit reduction is likely to become a priority. A recent estimate pegs the 2020 deficit at $3.8 trillion. But it is expected that a Trump re-election would keep Republicans in more of a spending mood. “If the presidency goes to a Democrat, then Republicans are going to get more about being fiscal conservatives again sooner,” Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, said during a Monday webcast. “If Trump wins a second term, we probably have another year or two reprieve from that.” Mackenzie Eaglen of the American Enterprise Institute is wary that lawmakers eager to reduce federal spending in the wake of coronavirus bailouts could enact a deficit-cutting measure akin to the Budget Control Act of 2011, which capped defense spending annually between 2013 and 2021. “The Budget Control Act by another name ... could come as fast as next [fiscal] year,” she said on the same webcast. While defense and security spending is typically a top priority of Republicans and defense-minded Democrats, stabilizing the U.S. economy and healthcare could become a higher priority regardless of who wins the election and control in Congress. Among voters in both parties, there is wide public support for reducing expensive overseas military interventions. DON'T MISS The Pentagon Will Use AI to Predict Panic Buying, COVID-19 Hotspots How China Sees the World Did the Coronavirus Escape from a Chinese Lab? Here's What the Pentagon Says The 1918 flu and the U.S. military Haircuts in a Time of Coronavirus? “[I]solationism may exert a countervailing force, as there is demand to steer resources away from defense and towards domestic needs (healthcare, education, jobs),” Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, wrote in an April 23 note to investors. “[W]e are seeing that awarding disproportionate resources to military spending may be weakening the resilience of other sectors in our economy,” Mandy Smithberger — director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, part of the Project on Government Oversight — said on the Stimson Center webcast. “I think we are going to be seeing real political debate about how much money should go to military spending, how much we should be prioritizing arms sales and interests of the defense industry,” she said. Unlike the past decade when foreign arms sales, to some extent, were a backstop to weapon makers amid U.S. defense spending declines, this time around will likely be different since the world economy is dealing with coronavirus. Smithberger said low oil prices could weaken the buying power in the region that spends heavily on U.S. weapons. While the U.S. and China remain the top two defense spenders, last year India and Russia jumped ahead of Saudi Arabia, which fell to fifth on the list. Germany climbed from ninth to seventh — jumping ahead of the U.K. and Japan. NATO allies collectively spent just over $1 trillion. All of that spending is likely to drop. https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2020/04/global-defense-spending-decline-expected-nations-deal-coronavirus/164997

  • Argentina eyes surplus CH-46 helicopters as Mi-17 replacement

    September 21, 2023 | International, Aerospace

    Argentina eyes surplus CH-46 helicopters as Mi-17 replacement

    Argentina was unable to perform maintenance on its Mi-17s because of Russia's ongoing war against Ukraine.

  • Swiss Air 2030 program clears hurdle of external review — with tweaks

    May 10, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Swiss Air 2030 program clears hurdle of external review — with tweaks

    By: Sebastian Sprenger COLOGNE, Germany — Switzerland should package the proposed buy of 40 or so combat aircraft as a unique track under the $8 billion Air 2030 program, according to a new study commissioned by the defense ministry. This, the study argues, will increase the chance the purchase will be approved in an eventual national referendum. The conclusion is part of a report by former Swiss astronaut Claude Nicollier, who was tasked earlier this year by the new defense minister, Viola Amherd, to critique the envisioned air-defense reboot. The recommendation speaks to the government's strategy of seeing the aircraft acquisition through a circuitous decision-making process in a country with a strong plebiscitary tradition. Buying the aircraft makes up the lion's share of the Air 2030 program, at roughly $6 billion. The purchase of ground-based, air-defense weaponry accounts for the rest. The current Cabinet plan is to pursue the aircraft and ground-based, anti-missile weaponry as a package deal, allowing the populace to vote on both segments en bloc in the likely event that a referendum is called. But advocates for new aircraft, which includes Nicollier, contend that the need for new planes is so great that the decision should be teed up without any distractions whatsoever. “In my opinion, it is wise to choose this track for the combat aircraft, after the past experiences of our direct democracy,” Nicollier wrote in his report. “It is ... useless to mix another weapon system to this next battle, which concerns only the plane and which promises, as usual, to be much more emotional than professional.” Nicollier's comment refers to a previous Swiss decision about replacing parts of its aging combat aircraft inventory, composed of F-5 Tiger and F-18 planes, five years ago this month. At the time, the population voted down the government's pick of the Saab Gripen E following a grueling campaign by advocates and opponents that quickly left the realm of national security arguments. Some believe that putting a specific aircraft model out for a referendum contributed to the program's defeat, a mistake that the defense ministry wants to avoid at all costs this time around. According to a statement on the ministry's website, Nicollier's analysis, submitted in French, recommends that the population should get the chance to vote on the aircraft acquisition only in general terms, leaving the choice of aircraft model up to the government later on. The competitors for the aircraft procurement are Airbus with the Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin with the F-35A, Boeing with the F-18 Super Hornet and Dassault with the Rafale. Saab and its Gripen E also are taking another go at it. Nicollier's report will probably be seen as good news for the industry contenders. For one, it supports the idea that Switzerland must quickly act to modernize its abilities to control the national airspace at a time when traditional geopolitical fronts in Europe are becoming murky. In addition, it proposes a path for the aircraft acquisition that appears mindful of lessons learned from the Gripen debacle of 2014. Cabinet officials are expected to debate the Nicollier report in the weeks ahead and determine how its recommendations will shape the Air 2030 program, a Swiss defense ministry official told Defense News. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/05/09/swiss-air2030-program-clears-hurdle-of-external-review-with-tweaks

All news