USAID Leadership Gutted

ComNavOps has often decried the use of the military in humanitarian and disaster relief (HA/DR) efforts, believing those should not be military missions as they detract from combat training and cause unproductive wear and tear on equipment and personnel.  Instead, ComNavOps has proposed funding and equipping an organization like the US Agency for International Development (USAID) to deal with HA/DR and to provide the forward ‘presence’ and ‘deterrence’ that so many want the military to do.
 
Here is a portion of the USAID mission statement from the organization’s web page,
 

… the U.S. Agency for International Development leads the U.S. Government's international development and disaster assistance through partnerships and investments that save lives, reduce poverty, strengthen democratic governance, and help people emerge from humanitarian crises and progress beyond assistance.

A seeming perfect fit for HA/DR, presence, and deterrence, right?  Without going into a lengthy documentation trail, suffice it to say that USAID had become a left-leaning, political tool that was ineffective at its job.
 
The Trump administration has just announced that it has placed 60 senior USAID bureaucrats on indefinite leave, presumably as a prelude to termination.
 

A memo from acting USAID administrator Jason Gray says, "We have identified several actions within USAID that appear to be designed to circumvent the president’s executive orders and the mandate from the American people.“[1]
 
The decision appears to affect nearly every career staffer who holds a top leadership role at the agency, at least in Washington — around 60 officials, the current and former officials said.[1]
 
This action effectively shuts down most of USAID's $22.6 billion in program support.[1]

This is an excellent first step towards refocusing USAID on its core mission.
 
How often do we justify programs and platforms as being good because they will ‘free up’ other units for more important work?  Well, USAID, taking on the HA/DR, presence, and deterrence missions can free up military units and resources to concentrate on their core mission of warfighting.  Perfect, right?  Exactly what everyone calls for, right?
 

There's your disaster relief, done efficiently

Buy USAID a couple of small to medium size cargo ships, load them with disaster relief supplies, and crew them with civilian mariners and there’s your disaster relief effort for free, relative to military costs. 
 
Get the military out of HA/DR and give it to USAID or some similar organization.
 
 
Note:  The FY2025 USAID budget is $42.8B.
 
 
 
__________________________________

 
[1]Redstate website, “Trump Suspends As Many As 60 Senior Bureaucrats for Trying to Evade His Executive Orders”, streiff, 28-Jan-2025,
https://redstate.com/streiff/2025/01/28/trump-suspends-as-many-as-60-senior-bureaucrats-for-trying-to-evade-his-executive-orders-n2184896

Navy Flight Hours Slashed

The Navy has been hinting for some time now that flight hours would be reduced and, possibly, and air wing deactivated due to a large naval aviation budget shortfall.  Details have now been announced.

According to a USNI News website article, non-deployed east coast P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol squadrons will see a 10% flight hour reduction, non-deployed MH-60R/s helo detachments will see a 25% reduction in flight hours, and support units such as Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 1, Fleet Logistics Support Squadron (VRC) 40 that flies the C-2A Greyhound airplane and bring passengers and goods to and from aircraft carriers at sea, C-12 logistics planes, and search-and-rescue aircraft out of Key West will see a 10% reduction in flight hours. The reduced flight hours will last for the remaining 11 weeks of the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.  In addition, most demonstration flights (air shows and the like) have been cancelled. (1)

So, with readiness at historic lows, we’re reducing flight hours.  That’s the Navy’s way to address readiness.

How did this budget shortfall occur?  Don’t we pretty well know exactly how many flight hours we need to operate and train the various aviation units?

According to the article,  

… the shortfall was created by deployed P-8s and MH-60s over-executing due to fleet commander needs in U.S. 6th and 7th Fleets. The aircraft deploy with a certain number of flight hours allotted, and the local commanders are asking the aircraft to operate beyond those hours due to operational needs – particularly the P-8s operating in the Western Pacific, the Mediterranean and other forward locations … (1)

In addition,

Other unplanned events, such as the aviation component of the Hurricane Michael rescue and aid effort, have also contributed to spending money faster than planned, and naval aviation will now have to pare down its spending for the last two and a half months of the year. (1)

One of ComNavOps pet peeves is the use of the military for humanitarian assistance.  Using military assets for non-combat or non-combat training tasks puts unproductive wear and tear on men and machines, subtracts from the finite number of service life flight hours that aircraft have before they have to be rebuilt or retired, reduces readiness, takes away from combat training, and distracts from the mission of warfighting and warfighting preparation.  Now, we see the concrete evidence.  The Navy has specifically cited a humanitarian effort as part of the reason that we will now experience reduced flight hours and even lower combat readiness.

I have no problem with America performing humanitarian assistance missions but not by the military.  There are a number of other organizations who, with a little boost in funding, can perform the mission far more efficiently than the military.

Everything, EVERYTHING, the military does must, MUST, run through the filter of combat effectiveness.  Does the proposed action enhance our combat effectiveness?  If not, we simply can’t do it.  Does humanitarian assistance enhance our combat effectiveness?  No!  Not only does it not enhance combat effectiveness, it actually decreases combat effectiveness.

We must stop using the military for humanitarian missions.  Let’s buy USAID or some such organization a few cargo ships, fund some extra personnel, and let them do the mission instead of sending a carrier battle group to hand out meals.

The evidence is right here, in black and white.  Humanitarian missions hurt our military.

The other aspect of this is the insatiable appetite by local commanders for assets - assets whose use produces little discernible benefit.  Our prolific use of flight hours in the Med hasn't settled Iran down.  If anything, it's exacerbated the situation.  As I've said, we need to either kick some butt and enforce peace or leave.  Trying to exist in between is gaining us nothing and, likely, costing us.

Has China become a better world neighbor and tempered their runaway military buildup because we flew more P-8 patrols?  Not in the least!  So why are wasting airframe hours watching them if we're not going to do anything about it?

The local commanders will always want more assets under their control.  It's how they justify their existence.  We have to start saying no to mission requests.

We're running our military into the ground conducting pointless tasks and degrading our warfighting readiness.  The idiocy must stop!

______________________________

(1)USNI News website, “Navy Reducing East Coast Flight Hours to Cover Costs of Overflying P-8s”, Megan Eckstein, 16-Jul-2019,

https://news.usni.org/2019/07/16/navy-reducing-east-coast-flight-hours-to-cover-costs-of-overflying-p-8s

Bold Alligator Scaled Back

The Armed Forces of the United States and the Navy, as our focus on this blog, exist to fight wars.  There is no other mission.  Everything else is a secondary, time wasting exercise.  If we aren’t fighting a war then we should be preparing for war.  Instead, the Navy’s time is filled with useless tasks that detract from the main mission.  A case in point is the humanitarian assistance that is being provided to hurricane areas at the expense of combat training.  As USNI News website describes it (1),

“The Navy and Marine Corps’ Bold Alligator 17 international amphibious exercise will still take place this month but will be scaled down due to ongoing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief missions after Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria.”

“However, due to ongoing HA/DR missions in Puerto Rico, many of the forces set to participate in the major live exercise will not be available anymore.”

So one exercise had to be scaled back a bit.  What’s the big deal?  Well, the big deal is that Bold Alligator is not just a small exercise.  It is the main amphibious exercise for the Marines/Navy. 

“Bold Alligator … is now the East Coast’s premiere amphibious force training exercise.”

Worse, the exercise, despite being the main training exercise, is only occasionally conducted as a live exercise so it is absolutely vital that the opportunity for live work be taken.

“Bold Alligator was last conducted as a live exercise in 2014, with the 2015 installment meant to be a simulated event. Last year’s live exercise was postponed a year, with the services opting instead to conduct a pierside live, virtual and constructive event to prepare for this year’s highly integrated exercise between traditional amphibious forces and the carrier strike group needed to help set the conditions for amphibious operations.”

Does it really matter if a ship or two misses the exercise?

“Expeditionary Strike Group 2 leadership was set to serve as the Commander of the Amphibious Task Force aboard amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD-3). Now, ESG-2 and Kearsarge are no longer available for BA 17, along with 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7), amphibious transport dock USS New York(LPD-21), dock landing ship USS Oak Hill (LSD-50), hospital ship USNS Comfort (T-AH-20), aviation logistics support container ship SS Wright (T-AVB 3), and elements of Naval Expeditionary Combat Command and 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing – all of which are tied up with the ongoing HA/DR response, according to a U.S. Fleet Forces Command statement.”

That’s a lot of assets that will miss the premier combat training exercise of its type and a rare and vital chance for live training.  The very reason for the existence of the exercise is being curtailed.

“On the Marine Corps side, without Kearsarge and other amphibious ships, many planned amphibious landing events have been canceled … “

So, a vital and rare opportunity, which only comes once every two or three years, is going to be watered down and many units will miss it entirely so that the Navy and Marines can deliver food and water?  Let me repeat.  The Navy has only one mission – war or training for war.

The U.S. government has many assets and organizations at its disposal that can provide humanitarian assistance but the military should not be one of them.  Humanitarian assistance missions degrades the readiness of our forces, puts unnecessary wear and tear on equipment, and racks up precious flight hours on aircraft. 

This is a shining example of the failure of the Navy to say “no” to a non-mission essential task request.  The Navy’s failure to say no is why we have ships and crews sailing with lapsed certifications.  Instead of training and perhaps learning basic seamanship, navigation, and combat, we have crews spending their time delivering supplies.  Instead of providing our ships and aircraft with maintenance to restore readiness, we’re sending them to deliver supplies – a job that any commercial cargo ship can do far more cost effectively and efficiently.

We are tasking our Navy with gender issues, sensitivity training, diversity programs, biofuel experimentation, climate change planning – in short, everything but war and training for war.

___________________________________

(1)USNI News website, “Bold Alligator 17 Exercise Scaled Down Due to Ongoing Humanitarian Assistance Mission in Puerto Rico”, Megan Eckstein, 13-Oct-2017,

https://news.usni.org/2017/10/13/bold-alligator-17-exercise-scaled-due-ongoing-humanitarian-assistance-mission-puerto-rico