Cuts to U.S. Army cause for concern

Lawmakers should have seen the Pentagon’s announcement about major force reductions coming a mile away.

Brig. Gen. Randy George said Thursday that the current fiscal environment is forcing the Army to cut its ranks by 40,000, from its current state of 490,000.

That environment is largely the result of political wrangling in Washington and the failure of Congress to pass regular budgets that would allow the Pentagon to properly plan ahead.

What’s more is the cuts announced this week do not include reductions expected when sequestration takes effect. That process will slash another 30,000 soldiers in October unless Congress takes some preemptive action.

To be fair, the troop reductions are not the purview of Congress alone. They fulfill the Obama administration’s strategic vision for the future of the U.S. military. The president has long emphasized his desire to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and set the country on postwar footing, including a significant force realignment.

All of that seemed to make sense when Obama first took office. Hopes of creating a more efficient, streamlined and nimble military force after years of expensive and cumbersome overseas conflict seemed like a rare shared goal in Washington.

But in the ensuing years, the international landscape has significantly changed.

The rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the threat of Russian aggression and the continued fears of al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists throughout the Middle East and North Africa have all reignited debates about what role the U.S. should play in addressing challenges to its security.

Even the president found it necessary to send additional troops back into Iraq as recently as June, in an attempt to boost local forces combating the advance of the Islamic State.

If the current cuts are compounded by reductions under sequestration, George warns, “the resulting force would be incapable of simultaneously meeting current deployment requirements and responding to overseas contingency requirements of the combatant commands.”

In the wake of so many emerging threats, more cuts would not only be irresponsible, they could be dangerous.

This story was originally published July 10, 2015 at 7:39 PM with the headline "Cuts to U.S. Army cause for concern."