Defense and Technology Supplement: Train Wreck Coming?

LAST summer the General Accounting Office set off a minifirestorm on Capitol Hill when it reported that the Clinton Administration’s Future Years Defense Program (FYDP, or, in Pentagon parlance, the “fiddip”) could be underfunded by $150 billion or more over fiscal years 1995- 99. Some observers suggested that the defense program was headed for a “train wreck”—a precipitous decline in the effectiveness of U.S. military forces. By last summer the Administration conceded that, by its own estimates, the defense program was underfunded by nearly $50 billion.

Following the congressional elections, President Clinton took steps that the Administration claimed would eliminate the “mismatch” between programs and funding, primarily through a combination of cuts in defense modernization ($8 billion), more favorable assumptions regarding future inflation ($12 billion), and increased funding ($25 billion). The President’s action purportedly provided sufficient resources to achieve the two top priorities: maintaining U.S. forces’ readiness, and modernizing aging military systems, such as Army and Marine helicopters, Air Force cargo aircraft, and Navy attack aircraft.

About the Author

Andrew F. Krepinevich Jr.

Mr. Krepinevich is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

Featured Tags

Department of Defense

LAST summer the General Accounting Office set off a minifirestorm on Capitol Hill when it reported that the Clinton Administration’s Future Years Defense Program (FYDP, or, in Pentagon parlance, the “fiddip”) could be underfunded by $150 billion or more over fiscal years 1995- 99. Some observers suggested that the defense program was headed for a “train wreck”—a precipitous decline in the effectiveness of U.S. military forces. By last summer the Administration conceded that, by its own estimates, the defense program was underfunded by nearly $50 billion.

Following the congressional elections, President Clinton took steps that the Administration claimed would eliminate the “mismatch” between programs and funding, primarily through a combination of cuts in defense modernization ($8 billion), more favorable assumptions regarding future inflation ($12 billion), and increased funding ($25 billion). The President’s action purportedly provided sufficient resources to achieve the two top priorities: maintaining U.S. forces’ readiness, and modernizing aging military systems, such as Army and Marine helicopters, Air Force cargo aircraft, and Navy attack aircraft.