$140 billion allocated for new weapons program
we're asked by our convictions and tradition and compassion to build a culture of life (George W. Bush)
Tim Bowles
Associate Editor
|
A gargantuan transformation effort is underway in the military, spearheaded by a program called Future Combat Systems (FCS) that will supplement the Army's goal of transitioning to a force that can rapidly deploy anywhere in the world with maximal firepower. FCS is planned to be a highly integrated network of 18 systems, consisting of manned and unmanned ground vehicles, aircraft, sensors and munitions and will link a soldier to real-time information about his surroundings and potentially re-define the way war is fought.
About one-third of the Army would be equipped with these systems at an estimated cost of $140 billion over 20 years, making it the most expensive weapons program the military has ever undertaken. FCS is the largest of the 70 new weapons systems the Pentagon is planning to develop at a cost of $1.3 trillion.
While development of FCS has already started and contracts awarded, the program is fraught with potentially lethal hurdles, from technological to monetary to philosophical.
In a report on its viability released March 16, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) criticized FCS on a variety of fronts: "FCS is at significant risk for not delivering required capability within budgeted resources … The program's level of knowledge is far below that suggested by best practices or DoD policy: Nearly 2 years after program launch and with $4.6 billion invested, requirements are not firm and only 1 of over 50 technologies is mature. As planned, the program will attain the level of knowledge in 2008 that it should have had in 2003. But things are not going as planned. Progress in critical areas—such as the network, software, and requirements—has in fact been slower … Given the scope of the program, the impact of cost growth could be dire."
Boeing was awarded a $21 billion contract to act as the coordinator for FCS, although on April 6 the Army announced it would review the terms of the contract after intense criticism from Sen. John McCain. The original contract exempted Boeing from government audits and limited the government from being able to negotiate jobs, which are required under the federal Truth in Negotiations Act.
Part of the broader Army transformation initiative to is to develop and deploy robot soldiers that will have a variety of tasks from guarding weapons depots to engaging in combat with humans. Already in Iraq, robots are defusing road side bombs, and an armed version of this model capable of firing 1,000 rounds per minute is about to be introduced.
Gordon Johnson, team leader of the robotics development under the U.S. Joint Forces Command described the possible robot warriors as "more lethal, more mobile, and more survivable. They will have faster reaction times and have more and superior sensing capabilities … And, from an economic perspective, they are cheaper than humans."
"The lawyers tell me there are no prohibitions against robots making life-or-death decisions," Johnson has also stated.
The implications of robot warriors have largely escaped debate. Robots could potentially save human lives in combat, but they also might lower the threshold for going to combat.
As Robert Finkelstein of Robotic Technology said in a New York Times interview said, "There is a lag between technology and doctrine. If you could invade other countries bloodlessly, would this lead to a greater temptation to invade?"
For more information on any of the aforementioned topics, visit any of the following Web sites or news articles:
GAO report:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05428t.pdf
FCS:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/fcs.htm
Robots:
http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2003/pa072903.htm
NY Times
"A New Model Army Soldier Rolls Closer to the Battlefield" Feb. 16, 2005
"Drive to Build High-Tech Army Hits Cost Snags" March 28, 2005