Not so fast, Lt. Col. Cooper! First, let's discuss the value of right sort of airpower to support national security strategy

By Liesl Carter

Best Defense guest respondent

Over the past week, there have been three articles on Best Defense discussing Air Force Total
Force. As a colleague of Luke
Ahmann and someone who has sat across the table from Mr. Al
Robbert from RAND, I am inclined to focus my comments on their discourse,
but the latest article in this series, by Lt.
Col Tom Cooper, makes an important point about airpower and how the current
tit-for-tat cost comparison debate detracts from the critical need to focus our
efforts on what is the right air component our nation. Lt. Gen Charles Stenner echoed these
sentiments when he said, "I am done with dueling costs." So, I agree cost
comparisons are only as strong as the assumptions they are founded on and do
not advance the question of "What is right for our nation's defense?"

During the past decade, the strength
of our total air force has been tested and has proven to be exceptional. The active and reserve components are equally
ready and capable of meeting the operational airpower requirements of the
combatant commanders. And I agree with
Lt Col Cooper that "the Air Force embraced the reserve component as a cheaper
way of ensuring capacity was available for the nation to provide airpower." This statement recognizes that the airpower
discussion cannot be divorced from a force structure decision. While Lt Col Cooper would like the cost
discussion to disappear, a critical conversation about the force structure
needed to provide airpower is imperative.

If cost is set aside, then what are the right principles
that should guide the proper mix of active and reserve components? Lt Col Cooper's point -- that the required
airpower needs to support national strategy -- is the key. This strategy requires the air force to
maintain a certain capability and capacity to meet a future spectrum of
conflicts. The service also needs to
ensure these forces are accessible. While these factors of capacity, capability, and accessibility have
associated costs, there are other intangible factors that should also be part
of any force structure equation. These
include the effects of force structure decisions on the civilian-military gap
and the retention of human capital. With
these five principles (capacity, capability, accessibility, civilian-military
relations, and retention of human capital) in mind, what force structure best
supports the airpower required for our nation's defense?

The new Strategic Defense Guidance states the military will
be able to "deter and defeat aggression by any potential adversary" and that we
will be able to "project power despite anti-access area denial challenges." The
military will do this by protecting "its
ability to regenerate capabilities that might be needed to meet future, unforeseen demands, maintaining
intellectual capital and rank structure that could be called upon to expand key
elements of the force," and embracing the concept of reversibility. These national strategic priorities drive a
force structure that maintains the most capability (e.g. modernized A2AD
weapons and niche skills) and most capacity (airmen and equipment)
available. It also requires the maximum
retention of human capital possible, so as not to lose the operational
experience gained over the past decade.

Cutting the reserve component is not the solution. By keeping a larger proportion of force
structure in the reserve component, the Air Force supports the national
priorities, embraces the concept of regeneration and reversibility, and
maintains the highest level of experience and rank necessary to meet an unknown
future. While cost comparisons, such as
the RAND study, are interesting, they are a small piece in a much larger
puzzle, and neglect the concept of value. The whole picture must consider what airpower capability and capacity is
required to support the strategic guidance while maximizing the intangible
value of the force. A move towards
maintaining a larger proportion of the total air force in the reserve component
is what will provide the best airpower for our nation's defense.

(Note:
Interview conducted with Lt. Gen Charles E. Stenner on February 22, 2012)

Liesl Carter is
currently a national security fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School. She has
served in both active and reserve components of the U.S. Air Force, and is an
airline pilot in her civilian role. She holds a B.S. from the U.S. Air Force
Academy and an M.A. from George Washington University.