There has been an extremely interesting case of some
contention between the Department of Defense and the United States Congress
unfolding over the last few weeks. As we
have been studying the nuanced ways in which elements of foreign policy is put
together as collaboration between the Executive Branch and Congress, it is interesting
to observe a very specific case of it taking place. In this instance, there was contention
between the two over planned equipment procurement for Afghanistan.
The Department of Defense is buying Russian helicopters as aid to give to the Afghan Air Force as the United States prepares to largely depart the country over the course of the next year. Specifically, as late as August the Pentagon had plans to spend $1.1 billion over several years on 63 Russian Mi-17 helicopters to outfit the Afghan military. This plan quickly drew the ire of Congress. Their concerns were fueled by the questions of why the US would be willing to send money to Russia (specifically to their state-owned primary arms-exporter Rosoboronexport) and why the Pentagon would buy Russian and not American helicopters.
Mi-17s in Kabul. Photo by Forbes. |
The Department of Defense is buying Russian helicopters as aid to give to the Afghan Air Force as the United States prepares to largely depart the country over the course of the next year. Specifically, as late as August the Pentagon had plans to spend $1.1 billion over several years on 63 Russian Mi-17 helicopters to outfit the Afghan military. This plan quickly drew the ire of Congress. Their concerns were fueled by the questions of why the US would be willing to send money to Russia (specifically to their state-owned primary arms-exporter Rosoboronexport) and why the Pentagon would buy Russian and not American helicopters.
Congress expressed outrage that the Pentagon was willing to
support the Russian Rosoboronexport (the only source for the Mi-17s) while Rosoboronexport has beenselling weapons to the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. "Doing business with
the supplier of these helicopters has been a morally bankrupt policy, and as a
nation, we should no longer be subsidizing Assad's war crimes," Senator Cornyn, the Senate’s second-leading Republican
said in a statement in November.
The opposition to the
plans were bipartisan. "The lack of
straightforward information from the Pentagon on the ability of American-made
helicopters to meet the mission in Afghanistan is but another factor severely
undermining their credibility and justification for pursuing this sorely
misguided procurement," stated Rep. Rosa DeLauro, a high-ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee. In fact, in August a dozen Senators from both parties called for
the Pentagon to sever its ties to Rosoboronexport.
In November, the Pentagon made a concession of sorts to the
Congress when it announced it would not be buying further helicopters from the
Russians for this purpose. The Pentagon
decided to cancel their $345 million request for 15 additional helicopters,
although their $572 million procurement of 30 Mi-17s from June was still in
place. In all, the total number of the
Russian helicopters bought by the Defense Department for the Afghan military should
be capped at 86.
A United States Army CH-47 Chinook. AP photo. |
More recently, deeper questions have arisen as to why the
Mi-17s were chosen over the American CH-47D helicopters made by Boeing in
Pennnsylvaia, commonly called “Chinooks,” in the US Army. Pentagon officials had reportedly cited a
2010 Top Secret report which they claimed stated that the Russian helicopters
were a better choice for Afghan situation.
However, the Associated Press has obtained unclassified excerpts which
seem to suggest otherwise. According to
the excerpts, the US Army’s Chinook was found to be "the most cost-effective
single platform type fleet for the Afghan Air Force over a twenty year"
period. The American helicopter has a
greater payload and can fly at nearly as high altitudes as the Russian Mi-17s. Even the DoD’s claims that the Mi-17s would
be more cost effective are appearing suspect, as the prices of the mi-17s have
continued to rise.
It is true the Afghan Air Force is already familiar with the
Russian helicopters and would face a significant learning curve for the
operation and maintenance of the Chinooks.
However, the excerpts of the 2010 report envisioned a transitional
scenario in which the American helicopters would be introduced and integrated into
the Afghan fleets gradually. This plan never
materialized. Perhaps the commitment to
the timeline for withdrawal of American troops weighed in on the Pentagon’s decision.
No comments:
Post a Comment