Murtha axes military information operations for FY2010

Congressman John Murtha, the powerful House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee chairman, has cut out more than half of President Obama's fiscal year 2010 budget for military information operations (IO) and has singled out specific programs that he demands be terminated. He is also demanding that the Pentagon give Congress a real strategy and explanation of military IO before any funds be authorized for spending.

While the military strongly needs such prodding by Congress to help it focus on more effective strategies and tactics in IO, I'm worried that Rep. Murtha is cutting too deeply and too quickly. Reforms are absolutely needed, but the issue really has to be discussed in detail first, and given careful consideration. According to House Appropriations Committee report language apparently written by Murtha's office:

[President Obama's] budget request includes nearly one billion dollars for Department of Defense information operations (IO) programs. The Committee has serious concerns about not only the significant amount of funding being spent on these programs, but more importantly, about the Department's assumption of this mission area within its rules and responsibilities. Much of the content of what is being produced, and certainly some of the largest cost drivers in these programs, is focused so far beyond a traditional military information operation that the term non-traditional military information operation does not justly apply. At face value, much of what is being produced appears to be United States Military, and more alarmingly non-military propaganda, public relations, and behavioral modification messaging. The Committee questions the effectiveness of much of the material being produced with this funding, the supposed efforts to minimize target audience knowledge of United States Governmental sponsorship of certain production materials, and the ability of the Department to evaluate the impact of these programs.

It's tempting to try to explain Murtha's objections as knee-jerk opposition to the US military mission, or, perhaps, to the relative lack of Information Operations money being "invested" in the congressman's district.

However, some of Murtha's criticism appears justified, and this is the fault of the Department of Defense. For example, the congressional report says that the Pentagon has made "woefully inadequate" justifications for the budget request, which has grown from $9 million in FY2005 to $988 million in FY2010.

More damningly, Murtha's staff writes, "the [Defense] Department's response to attempts by the Committee to obtain a meaningful explanation of funding for these programs clearly indicates that Departmental oversight of these efforts is disorganized, and that a thorough understanding of their scope within the Department's leadership is incomplete."

Unfortunately, based on my experience, I have to agree.

However, I do not agree with Murtha's objection to military IO's broad expansion in "non-traditional" areas - in this case, the military is entirely correct in the direction it's taking. It's the vision and execution that's the problem, and the failure to keep Congress informed. This is a throwing-out-baby-with-bathwater problem. Murtha now wants to axe big parts of military IO, even though he doesn't really understand the concept himself.

His report continues, "The Committee believes that the Department of Defense, and the Combatant Commands which drive the demand for information operations, need to reevaluate IO requirements in the context of the roles and missions of the United States military along with consideration for the inherent capabilities of the military and the funding available to meet these requirements." No problem there. However, Murtha says he is gutting more than half of the requested IO budget before that reevaluation is done, with his staff deciding which programs the Pentagon should eliminate immediately:

"In support of this evaluation, the Committee has determined that many of the ongoing IO activities for which fiscal year 2010 funding is requested should be terminated immediately. The programs for which funding is specifically denied are identified in the classified annex to this report. Accordingly, the Committee has reduced requested funding for information operation programs in the various Service appropriations accounts in which they have requested by a total of $500,000,000."

But wait - there's more. Murtha is nit-picking the war effort, and wants the Pentagon to write its entire IO vision, strategy and programming into a single document for Congress - a document that invariably will be leaked to the press. The report continues:

"Of the remaining funds provided for information operations, the Committee directs that no funds shall be obligated or expended until 30 days after the Secretary of Defense submits a report to the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate of the Department's IO programs. This report should encompass the period from fiscal years 2005 through 2010 and include all Department of Defense information operation programs for which base budget, supplemental, or overseas contingency operation funds have been appropriated or requested. The report shall include: program strategies, target audiences, goals, and measures of effectiveness; budget exhibits at the appropriations account and sub-activity level; spend plans (including positions and other direct costs); and production and dissemination mechanisms and locations. The report shall include an annex for the inclusion of necessary explanatory and supporting classified information. The Secretary shall submit this report in writing not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act."

Meanwhile, Murtha will have military information operations put on hold around the world until he gets his report.

There's no question that such a re-evaluation of IO is in order, and no question that much of the current programming has often been poorly conceived, poorly executed, and wasteful. Lots of reforms are in order. But Murtha's nitpick-with-a-machete approach isn't going to help. Congress has to come up with a more mature and sophisticated way of addressing the issue.

Comments

[pembelian pulsa listrik]

And now comes something even more intriguing, which electricity little alchemy is hard to see with your naked eye. But electricity little alchemy you see it's quite bright now, and when it picks up some of the charge it will then spread out because it, it will not get through?