Publication	Business Day
Date	2011-09-28
Reporter	Wyndham Hartley
Web Link	www.bday.co.za

Flaws of new defence review worry expert on military policy

The South African National Defence Force in late 2011 has a whole host of hi-tech weapons that it cannot afford to operate optimally due to a shortage of funds ­ which makes the recently announced defence review a vital necessity.

Launched more than a month ago, it is being chaired by pre- 1994 defence minister Roelf Meyer. The first defence review was completed in 1998, about two years after the defence white paper. That review was largely ignored when the strategic weapons package was bought in late 1999.

Now the opportunity has arisen for defence policy and force design to be tailored to the changing role of the defence force and indeed the politics and conditions in Africa under which it will have to operate. But there have been some doubts whether the terms of reference of the defence review committee will allow this to be achieved.

Greg Mills, of the Brenthurst Foundation, in a recent discussion document, sounded the first warning by noting that the new defence review would be "a committee reporting to the minister with their recommendations. Such a defence review should, however, take place within the context of the establishment of a national security policy framework. It must also be consultative and public.

"The relative absence of public or parliamentary input and consultation into what essentially is a back-room drafting process is of concern not only given its influence on the budget, but also as it pertains to security capabilities and foreign policy."

Among the 12 members of the review committee are North West Premier Thandi Modise , ambassador Thenjiwe Mtintso, Moses Khanyile, Phandelani Motoma, Nonkonzo Molai, Col G Seape, Nick Sendall, Helmoed Romer Heitman, Adm Philip Schoultz, Tony Yengeni, Godfrey Giles and Charles Nqakula .

Democratic Alliance defence spokesman David Maynier says the interim national defence force service commission "was absolutely correct to recommend that there needs to be an extensive and properly funded defence review". However, Mr Maynier is concerned that the process may be flawed, and this could have major implications for the defence force.

"It is not clear to me that the … committee, under the leadership of Roelf Meyer, is geared up to implement a full-scale defence review that effectively resets the mandate, capabilities and funding levels of our defence force. We cannot afford to get this wrong."

Dr Mills also question s the purchase of hi -tech weaponry. " Ongoing experience with the (defence force) illustrates, however, that good equipment and good-quality people need good training to turn it all into genuine capability.

"Without meeting this formula, expensive kit is not worth having. Modest but well-trained forces offer a much greater (and more influential) capability than hi -tech equipment that is useless because insufficient people can be trained to use it."

Part of the problem is that the review committee will not be considering or recommending the levels of funding which the defence force should enjoy.

"At the heart of any force design is the necessity of deciding which league you want to play in ­ and then fund at that level. Put differently, there’s no point in buying a luxury SUV if you can’t afford to fill the tank or replace the tyres," Dr Mills says.

Turning to the situation in Africa which the defence review should address, Dr Mills paint s a bleak picture. "Rag-tag rebels zig-zagging in armed pick-ups across the Libyan desert. Egyptian soldiers stone-facedly monitoring demonstrations on Tahrir Square from their tanks.... An army, only in name, preying on its people in the Congo, or standing between Zimbabwe’s electorate and democracy."

Since independence, African armies have tried to transform themselves from a paramilitary into a more conventional set-up only to return to paramilitary establishments . "Against this backdrop, what sort of armed forces and equipment is SA … able to operate for the next generation? "

Stressing the need for an honest and transparent debate, Dr Mills concludes : "Any defence review worthy of the name should examine three key issues. Strategic environment: what do threats look like over the next 20 years? Capabilities: current and projected. Affordability: what can we afford ­ in financial and manpower terms, not just to buy, but to operate?"

With acknowledgements to Business Day and Wyndham Hartley.

*1       This is Defence Acquisition 101.

Simply put, it is likes this :

If one owns an independent island rich with valuable coconuts, vulnerable to seaborne cocopoachers, but with few inhabitants for protection, what does one do?

Does one spend all ones time and energy protecting one's coconuts at all costs?

Does one allow the cocopoachers just to run rampant over one's cocopatch while one imbibes cocopunch and gets the occasional bit of nookie under the cocopalm?

Or is there a different and more optimal solution.

Nay, one sells some of the cocoharvest and then uses the proceeds to hire guards and purchase the necessary equipment for them to perform their duties.

This may involve deep blue water frigates armed with anti-ship missiles, anti-air missiles, 76 mm naval guns and 35 mm dual purpose guns to prevent the cocopachers from approaching the island within the 400 km coconut exclusion zone in their seagoing dugout canoes with their microlight air escorts.

Or it may not.

The chief cocoplanter and his brains trust quickly work out the strategic threat, the capabilities needed to practically and affordably thwart such a treat for the visible future of typically 15 to 30 years.

With this lot, Helmoed Romer Heitman will surely deduce that nine MEKO200AS-class frigates from Blohm+Voss GmbH, owned by Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems and armed with French weaponry will be absolutely essential to protect the nuts. These in turn will need to be protected from under the sea by four Type 209 diesel-electric coastal submarines from HDW, owned by Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems. They will have to be protected from the air by 29 Gripen JAS fourth generation light fighter aircraft from Saab A/B, with no weapons at all. To train the  pilots for the Gripens the cocoplanters will just have to have 24 Hawk 120 jet trainer aircraft from BAE Systems with glass cockpits made to replicate those of the Gripens. Six Super Lynx 300 maritime helicopters are absolutely required to extend the range of the frigates right to the edge of the known world. Should the cocopachers be able to breach the seaward and air defence (mainly because the sailors were all asleep) and the Gripens had no fuel, then 104 Main Battle Tanks from Giat of France would be a nice touch for last ditch defence and to cheer up de Gaulle and Chirac for not getting a main package the first time round. As offsets, one or more of the equipment providers could build a condom factory on the island to supply its dozen inhabitants plus the hired help. They could also establish garlic plantations and an escargot nursery.

Tony Yengeni will settle for an  ML430 4x4 SUV so that he can inspect the defences and get away from the wife for a little nookie on the side.

Quite what Roelf will think is anybody's guess.

Hopefully RAdm Schoultz will provide a bit of two feet on the ground sanity.