Summary

In its ongoing global realignment of U.S. forces and installations, the Department of Defense (DOD) plans to reduce the number of troops permanently stationed overseas, consolidate overseas bases, and establish a network of smaller forward locations with limited personnel. Realigning the U.S. overseas posture involves closing obsolete and redundant bases, constructing new facilities costing billions of dollars, and ensuring that other needed infrastructure is in place to support realigned forces and missions. These significant changes to force structure both in the United States and overseas are being implemented to enhance operational efficiencies and ensure access during future contingency operations. DOD requests for overseas military construction projects extend around the world including Europe, the Pacific, Southwest Asia, and Central America. For fiscal year 2010, DOD requested approximately $1.5 billion, or 7 percent, of the regular military construction request for overseas military construction. The Congress has supported the DOD's efforts to reassess and realign its overseas posture to better respond to emerging security challenges, but the Senate Appropriations Committee has expressed concerns about the department's ability to effectively manage and accomplish such an ambitious program as well as the fidelity of the global basing plan given the rapidly changing global security environment.

The Department of Defense has taken positive steps toward establishing an integrated process to assess and adjust global defense posture; however, we identified two shortcomings in the department's approach. First, DOD has not reported on global posture matters in a comprehensive manner. DOD strategic planning guidance defines global defense posture in terms of three elements: host nation relationships, DOD's facilities and military presence in country, and DOD activities overseas. Stakeholders we contacted described global defense posture in terms of their primary functions, such as U.S. Southern Command's reference to conducting military operations in coordination with interagency partners or the U.S. Navy's depiction of posture in terms of where its maritime platforms and assets are stationed around the world. However, OSD Policy officials acknowledged DOD's global posture reports have emphasized only initiatives that have a direct impact on facility requirements, because the congressional direction to produce the report emphasized military construction costs. As a result, Congress may not have the full context in which to consider DOD's global posture requirements. Second, geographic combatant commands have not established a consistent approach to monitor initiative implementation, assess progress, and periodically report on results because DOD has not yet developed global posture implementation guidance. DOD strategic planning guidance issued in 2008 requires each geographic combatant command to produce a theater campaign plan and specific posture requirements for its given area of responsibility. These plans and posture requirements are to be updated annually, and posture requirements will continue to be modified based on these plans. Because of the potentially significant operating and support costs that future locations may entail, the services resist assuming management and funding responsibilities for them. DOD has not fully defined or reported total costs for DOD's global posture strategy. DOD's 2008 Report to Congress estimates the total cost for all global defense posture initiatives at $9 to $12 billion, which is essentially unchanged from the amount reported in 2004. DOD's cost estimate for the 2008 Report to Congress was based on the data used to develop the DOD fiscal year 2009 budget request. Approximately $3.4 billion of DOD's estimate covers funding from fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2013. The remainder of the $9 to $12 billion cost estimate is allocated to an unspecified period beyond 2013. However, the DOD's cost estimate likely understates the total costs associated with restructuring DOD's global posture, because it does not report the total cost of each initiative, assumptions about host nation support, the full share of U.S. obligations, or sustainment costs.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Recommendations for Executive Action