战略与国际研究中心-The-Uncertain-Cost-Of-Wars_50页_1mb

Summary of "The Uncertain Cost of War(s)"

Core Content

This document explores the challenges of accurately assessing the costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the reliance on emergency supplemental funding for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), and the difficulties in projecting future war costs. It also discusses the Obama Administration's attempts to institutionalize war funding within the regular defense budget.

Main Points

• Historical Cost Comparison: The combined costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are estimated as the second highest in U.S. history after WWII, surpassing Vietnam in real terms by 2008.
• Defense Spending Trends: While defense spending is relatively high compared to the Clinton era, it is historically low as a share of GDP and total federal outlays.
• OCO Funding Challenges: OEF and OIF have been primarily funded through emergency supplemental spending bills, which complicate the accurate assessment of real war costs.
• Cost Estimation Variability: Different agencies (GAO, CBO, CRS, DOD) provide varying estimates of war costs due to the dual budgeting system and the lack of transparency.
• Institutionalization Efforts: The Obama Administration attempted to integrate OCO funding into the initial budget request, increasing oversight and reducing the reliance on supplemental funding.
• Future Cost Uncertainty: Future war costs are highly dependent on exogenous factors such as conditions on the ground and political will, making projections unreliable.

Key Information

Part A: The Wars We Fought

• The CRS estimates the combined costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as the second highest in U.S. history after WWII.
• Defense spending as a share of GDP and total federal outlays is currently lower than during any other wartime era since WWII except the Gulf War.
• Public perception often overestimates the economic burden of war, but actual data shows that the burden is relatively low.

Part B: Costing and Budgeting Current and Future Overseas Contingency Operations

• OCO Funding Method: The DOD has relied on "emergency" supplemental funding for OEF and OIF, which are submitted mid-fiscal year after the initial budget.
• Dual Budgeting System: This method has led to two concurrent budgets: the initial budget and the supplemental budget for OCO.
• Estimation Challenges: The lack of transparency in war costs leads to underestimation and misinformed policymaking, resulting in inefficient use of resources and increased deficit spending.
• Cost Variability: The GAO, CBO, CRS, and DOD all provide different estimates, highlighting the difficulty in determining accurate war costs.

Part C: Breaking Bad Habits? Institutionalization of War Funding in FY 2011

• The Obama Administration and the DOD attempted to institutionalize war funding within the FY 2011 budget request.
• OCO funding was submitted simultaneously with the base budget, allowing for more oversight by Congress.
• The FY 2011 OCO request is roughly equivalent to the total FY 2010 OCO funding, suggesting a shift toward more predictable budgeting.
• However, the likelihood of an emergency OCO request in FY 2011 still depends on unpredictable developments in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Part D: Looking Ahead

• Projections of Future Costs: Accurate projections are difficult due to the uncertainty in past cost assessments and the influence of exogenous factors.
• CBO Projections: The CBO estimates that future defense spending will continue to decline as a share of GDP, reaching 2-3% by FY2025.
• Troop Levels and Costs: Troop levels in both Afghanistan and Iraq have fluctuated significantly, with the CBO estimating that a 30,000 troop reduction could save billions in future spending.
• Medical and Operational Costs: Military medical costs have risen sharply, largely due to entitlements for non-active duty members, not directly war-related expenses.
• Uncertainty in Future Costs: Future costs are highly contingent on factors outside the control of the DOD and Congress, such as on-the-ground conditions and political support.

Conclusion

The document underscores the complexity and uncertainty in war cost estimation, the impact of emergency supplemental funding on budgetary processes, and the challenges in projecting future costs. It highlights the need for more transparent and consistent budgeting practices to improve strategic planning and resource allocation.