THE AIR FORCE IS BOMBING THE NAVY

Among the several leitmotifs that have disfigured the half-hearted engagement of our people and leadership in debating the Iraq War, which has made it look like crass adventurism, has been the role of private contractors fulfilling formerly military -- sovereign -- roles. To describe this as outsourcing has always troubled me because of the issue of sovereignty. A computer contract is one thing, taking life is entirely different.
The following item is from Strategy Page. Simply put, the Navy has created a private company to do its aerial refueling which delivers the goods at a third the price the Air Force charges. I do not know whether the Air Force treats the Navy as a private client and gouges it (possibly) but the numbers in this article suggest something is terribly amiss in the Pentagon and the Air Force. This comes in the wake of a controversy surrounding the competition to build a new tanker which was delayed for years when Sen. McCain and others disclosed there was material and major corruption between Boeing and the Pentagon in the air tanker program. The old contract was scrapped, a few people went to jail, Boeing got new management and did not win the rebidded contract.
Eisenhower warned us in 1961 and we ignored the warning. We have seen in the mismangement of this war very disturbing evidence of incompetence and corruption. I am sure it is a scintilla of what is out there. Now if we had won in a cakewalk, whatever that could possibly mean, nobody would pay attention. But we have certainly not and this provides us the opportunity for a long overdue review. We can expect nothing from Congress which is the Pentagon's sole domestic client. And whether we stay in Iraq or withdraw rapidly, we still have vast forces overseen by the Pentagon, outdated and obscure national security doctrines, and a foreign policy that looks to the past. We need to explode a half century of covert relationships between Congress, the Pentagon and the Defense Establishment.
We need a comprehensive National Security policy which supports a foreign policy supported by the American people. We need a procurement and manpower policy that supports the doctrines we adopt. I am sure we need to close the Pentagon but that is another discussion. If the profiteering from fuel is applied to food, can you imagine what we are paying so our troops in Iraq have a good selection of ice cream for lunch? The implications of this are mind-boggling.

Privatizing Aerial Refueling

March 20, 2008: Now we have private contractors providing in-flight refueling services. Their biggest customer is the U.S. Navy. That's because the navy has long depended on the U.S. Air Force for most of its aerial refueling needs. But the air force tankers are so heavily used with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, that the navy often finds itself at the end of the line and out of luck. The navy has long improvised, using C-130s, S-3s and even F-18s to provide some in-flight refueling capability. But nothing beats the air force KC-135s. So the navy helped (with refueling contracts) establish a private aerial refueling outfit.

Omega Refueling Services, Inc., was established last year, and currently has two Boeing 707s (the civilian airliner version of the KC-135) and one DC-10 operating as aerial tankers. Congress went along with this deal because Omega delivered fuel more cheaply than the air force. Currently, it costs the air force about $17.50 per gallon to deliver fuel in the air. Omega can do this for $7 a gallon. Noting this, Congress ordered the air force to establish a pilot program, to see if this kind of service would work for the air force. The air force is not too enthusiastic about this.

On paper, Omega should work on a large scale. Most of the aerial refueling takes place outside of combat zones. The air force objects because of qualms about being able to order contractor refueling aircraft to a combat zone. That's an official qualm. Unofficial objections have more to do with losing aircraft and people in uniform to private firms. Those numbers are one of the ways you keep score in the Pentagon. Historically, armies and navies have been outsourcing logistical functions for thousands of years, and even some combat functions as well. The air force knows this, but fears that the contractors will demonstrate a cheaper way to run parts of the air force, bringing into doubt the quality of current and past air force leadership. Of course, Omega has another advantage it's military customers don't have, it can provide its services to anyone, and does. Although the navy gets dibs.