The Bunker: The F.O.G. of war

This week in The Bunker: Trump’s ever-evolving war aims make it difficult for the U.S. public to understand his ever-shifting logic for taking the nation to war against Iran; where have all the minesweepers gone?; a $1.5 trillion U.S. military budget buys only “the most essential things”; and more.

The F.O.G.* OF WAR

Iran war’s *Fundamental Objective Gone

It’s kind of bizarre how the Trump administration’s objective(s) in its war on Iran have proven elusive, kind of like the deeply buried Iranian nuclear program that triggered it. It has mercurially morphed into a quicksilver target, closely held and therefore tough to predict, acknowledge, never mind comprehend.

“We’ve got internal metrics that … we represent to the president, who then can decide, how long he’d like to continue in pursuit of those military objectives,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirms. Trouble is, the goals of a war shouldn’t be “internal.” But that’s what happens when you launch a war blissfully ignorant of the realistic goals that you can achieve, and fitfully try to sell the resulting-and-ever-evolving “little excursion” to the American people.

The Bunker, like most sane people, wanted a knock-out punch that sent Iran’s mullahs sprawling across the floor of their Persian Gulf boxing ring. These wholesale sponsors of terrorism and lust for atomic arms deserve it. Just because you don’t like the way the bout began doesn’t mean you don’t want the good guys to win. But it’s increasingly looking like we’re going to end up with an unsatisfying TKO here, or a decision on points. There will be no knock-out blow.

That’s why you end up with regular briefings from the Pentagon podium that Tell. You. Nothing.

Hegseth and Air Force General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have conducted five briefings with what’s left of the Pentagon press corps after Hegseth’s new rules led most traditional news organizations to leave (although they may yet return, following a March 20 court ruling declaring the rules unconstitutional, although Hegseth seems intent on kicking them out, again). But these press conferences are the Miller Light of briefings — “Tastes Great, Less Filling!” — that are long on flag-waving exhortations and well-earned praise for the troops, but offer precious little in terms of information about how the war is actually going.

Think of it as treading water, minus the “t” and “e”.

OVER A BARREL

Right hand, meet left hand

Short of a single nuclear weapon — which it doesn’t have, yet — Iran’s most consequential weapons are the mines it can sow in the Strait of Hormuz to cripple global commerce. U.S. intelligence believes Iran has more than 5,000 of them.

Perhaps not speaking of intelligence, shortly before the U.S. attacked Iran, it sent four minesweepers it had in the Persian Gulf to Philadelphia. After more than three decades spent protecting the strait from Iranian mines, the U.S. Navy sent those Avenger-class minesweepers home for decommissioning on January 9, 50 days before the U.S. began bombing Iran.

But wait! As they say on TV: There’s more!

At least two new minesweepers that showed up in the Persian Gulf last year to replace the Avenger vessels were in a Malaysian port two weeks after the war began. That’s 3,200 miles from the Strait of Hormuz. Several days later, they steamed to Singapore, 3,600 miles from the strait (PROFESSIONAL WAR-PLANNING TIP: Generally, when you want to clear mines from a critical waterway, you move your minesweepers closer to it). The third LCS minesweeper arrived in the Persian Gulf last year, and was last known to be in the Indian Ocean. The Navy hasn’t named the fourth LCS minesweeper. The War Zone, citing photographs the Pentagon had posted online, spotted two of the new minesweepers in the Persian Gulf as recently as January 30 for one, and February 9, for the other. That was 19 days before U.S. bombs began to fall on Iran.

These are specially-outfitted Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), a long-troubled class of Navy vessels, dedicated to minesweeping. These vessels are kitted out with drones and helicopters to hunt down and kill mines, without actually going in harm’s way. “These systems are designed to be employed while the LCS remains outside the mine threat area,” the Navy helpfully notes. Never-mindsweeper, in other words.

These aluminum-hulled ships are apparently not as good as the wooden (and consequently mine-eluding) Avenger-class hulls they’re replacing. The Pentagon’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation issued its annual report earlier this month that said (PDF) “the Navy has not provided sufficient data from operational employment of [the LCS’s mine-fighting systems] to determine operational effectiveness of the [LCS ships] with Mine Countermeasures Mission Package.” Countering mines is tedious, lackluster work, which may be one reason the Navy has kept it on the back burner despite years of warning that it is a serious vulnerability. But the strait’s fate doesn’t seem to preoccupy the White House. “At a certain point,” Trump said March 20, “it will open itself.”

Well, at least those old Mine Countermeasures (MCM) ships made it home safely before the Iran war broke out. Their final voyage “required detailed planning, coordination, and disciplined execution to ensure the safe transport of the decommissioned MCM’s,” the Pentagon said.

As for “safe transport” of 20% of the world’s oil? Not so much.

“MOST ESSENTIAL THINGS”

Why more is never enough

After spending an estimated $16.5 billion for the first 12 days of its war with Iran, the Pentagon is seeking at least $200 billion for the war. All of a sudden, Trump’s “little excursion” is sporting a big price tag. “It takes money to kill bad guys,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said March 19. Added the commander-in-chief: “It’s a small price to pay to make sure that we stay tippy top.”

Of course, not everyone sees it that way. “Members of Congress would be ignoring their constituents by funneling more tax dollars into this operation,” Greg Williams, director of the Center for Defense Information here at the Project On Government Oversight, says. “Neither policymakers nor the public have gotten a clear answer on how, exactly, this funding will keep our service members or American civilians safe.” Indeed, Congress is leery.

The Bunker has spent close to a half-century trying to figure out how much the Defense Department spends on various wars and weapons. There are only two certainties: it’s impossible to tally, and more than you can imagine.

When we focus on the costs of wars and weapons, we talk about today’s costs and ignore tomorrows. We may be shocked at spending $485 billion on the Pentagon’s projected buy of 2,470 F-35 fighters, but too often overlook the $1.58 trillion it will take to keep them flying in the future. The same holds true with wars: We try to count the immediate costs, but rarely include what it will take to tend to the veterans who are fighting the war, the costs of repairing or replacing the hardware consumed by the conflict, and the interest paid on debt to fund the war.

But such accounting shouldn’t come as a surprise to a Defense Department that is spending nearly $1 trillion this year. Fact is, the Trump administration wants $1.5 trillion for the U.S. military in 2027. That might be enough to fund a second production line for the B-21 bomber, among other things.

But guess what (no peeking!) — that still won’t be enough.

“We had to cut down significantly to get to” that $1.5 trillion cashgasm, Jules “Jay” Hurst, the Pentagon’s top money man, told a defense-industry confab March 17. “We had more ideas and more concepts on how to spend the money ... so we took a long time to trim that down to the most essential things.” Saying that spending $1.5 trillion on the U.S. military next year will buy only “the most essential things” requires a new definition of either “essential” or “dollars.” Probably both.

WHAT WE’RE READING

Here’s what has caught The Bunker’s eye recently

→ Better late than never…

The U.S. wants to sell $16 billion in weapons — mostly to counter drone and missile threats — to Jordan, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates, Defense News’ Eve Sampson reported March 19.

→ Second thoughts?

Backers of the venerable A-10 attack plane say the Pentagon, eager to retire the Air Force’s storied Warthog, should reconsider given its role in killing Iranian boats in the Strait of Hormuz, Defense One’s Thomas Novelly reported March 19.

→ Stealth radar

Starting this fall, new F-35 fighters will be delivered to the U.S. military without radars for an unknown length of time because their new radars aren’t yet ready to fly and the old ones don’t fit, Michael Marrow, Valerie Insinna, and Diana Stancy of Breaking Defense reported March 19.

Thanks for calling up The Bunker on your radar screen this week. Consider forwarding this on to friends and foes so they can subscribe here.