Defense budget: some clues have emerged, but more uncertainty ahead.

• Author: Farrell, Lawrence P. Jr.
• Position: President's Perspective

* The political season is upon us, and much of the rhetoric adds little visibility to the direction for defense. If one looks beyond the 2012 election, there are several political and budgetary hard points, some of which will drive and even trump strict defense budget considerations.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

There are also fine details emerging from the defense budget, which are sure to roil the debate. Remember, Congress has to act on and pass the budget before it gets to the president for signature.

So far, we know that the Defense Department's base budget request for fiscal year 2013 is $525 billion--down from $541 billion in 2012--with $89 billion for overseas contingency operations. The base budget remains flat out to 2017, with no inflation protection, at approximately $523 billion per year. OCO funding is not projected beyond 2012. Recall that the services, the Army especially, are dependent on OCO funding not "falling off a cliff"

There is a fairly even drop of about 5 percent from 2012 to 2013 in the major accounts. Only research-and-development spending comes down at about half the rate of the other accounts. When OCO is factored in, procurement ends up with about 10 percent of the take. It should be noted that the procurement share of the budget is 18 percent but its share of cuts is 38 percent. The Air Force and Army pay most of the bills. The Air Force, with 11 percent of the budget, pays 23 percent of the bill. The Army, with 18 percent of the budget, pays 53 percent of the bill. The Navy comes out best with a 25 percent share of the budget but paying only 7 percent of the bill.

One can trace these shares and reductions directly to the president's "pivot to Asia" strategy. The Air Force pegs its cut of A-10 squadrons to the strategy, which backs away from a full two-war demand. The Air Force also says that with a reduced force, it must rely more on mukirole assets (read F-35), versus single-mission assets like the A-10.

The Army's cuts to manpower translate to fewer requirements for vehicles and combat support. This decrease is directly related to the strategy which explicitly backs away from extended stability operations.

The Navy retains 11 carrier battle groups, but retires some cruisers and a mix of old support ships such as oilers. Left unsaid is where Navy force structure goes with the low ship procurement rate programmed across the 2013-2017 budget.

Finally, there are new details on the changes to healthcare for military...