On Aug. 9, Defense Secretary Robert Gates unveiled the Defense Department's plan to trim unnecessary expenses so the savings can be reinvested in war-fighting capabilities, such as un-manned aerial vehicles, multi-mission Navy ships and helicopters.

This initiative is needed at a time when the U.S. economy is struggling and troops are fighting and dying in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yet Gates' crusade is about much more than dollars and cents or the current wars. It is about exercising the sustainability so vital to future security.

Sustainability has long been a hallmark of military strategy. As military theorist Carl von Clausewitz wrote, "A prince or a general can best demonstrate his genius by managing a campaign to suit his objectives and his resources, doing neither too much nor too little."

Research has concluded that nations that develop more impartial, responsive and sustainable systems for buying equipment are able to maximize their military power.

History bears out the truth of these insights. During World War II, Axis powers were plagued by organizational waste that compounded challenges. Italy was hindered by administrative incompetence, and Japan and Germany suffered from rivalries between civilian and military leaders that slowed their output.

Cumbersome Soviet structure

Similarly, during the Cold War, the Soviet Union was overburdened by its wasteful but enormous military economy, which was driven by industrial supply instead of strategic demand. Soviet leaders were unable to reorganize in order to keep up with the U.S. militarily, and the USSR's bloated defense sector sapped its overall strength and contributed to its eventual demise.

Though the U.S. was able to defeat these enemies, past success does not guarantee future security, given the dangers of the 21st century. Technological advancement and globalization are making it easier for hostile groups to acquire deadly capabilities. With no more than a laptop and Internet connection, cyber terrorists can launch synchronized, untraceable attacks against U.S. networks.

The U.S. government faces an inherent disadvantage in defending against such attacks because its unwieldy bureaucracy cannot move as nimbly as smaller, more decentralized adversaries. To overcome this reality, the U.S. must hedge against uncertainty by cultivating processes that rapidly identify emerging threats, consistently generate high-quality solutions and quickly reorient toward agreed-upon priorities.

This is the exact strategy that Gates is seeking to pursue through his sustainability initiative. But one year is not enough.

The Defense Department should make this year's effort, in which the military services are forced to identify and trim a specified amount of unnecessary administrative spending, an annual part of the defense budget process.

Give it to the experts

If the services perform poorly or resist the plan, a panel of impartial experts could be convened to offer recommendations to Pentagon leaders.

In this way, the Defense Department would make the trimming and reinvestment of fiscal underbrush an ingrained part of its preparation for future contingencies.

Policymakers should remember how sustainability has affected outcomes in war throughout history.

The Pentagon's initiative is not just about bean counting. It is about fostering processes that effectively transform America's vast resources into usable political and military power that can help protect the U.S. against the uncertain challenges ahead.

———

Travis Sharp is a researcher at the Center for a New American Security, a nonpartisan national security think tank in Washington.