Top Air Force Leaders Resign Following Nuclear Component Mishandling

American Forces Press Service ^ | Donna Miles

[SandRat]

WASHINGTON, June 5, 2008 – Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today announced the resignations of Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne and Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley following an investigation revealing a decline in the Air Force's nuclear program focus, performance and effective leadership.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announces that he has accepted the resignations of both Secretary of the Air Force Michael W. Wynne and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley at a Pentagon press conference, June 5, 2008. Defense Dept. photo by R. D. Ward  
(Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.

Gates announced the resignations in the wake of a report detailing the accidental shipment of four non-nuclear ballistic missile nose-cone assembly components rather than the intended helicopter batteries to Taiwan in August 2006.

The report, prepared by Navy Adm. Kirkland H. Donald, director of naval nuclear propulsion, detailed what Gates called a shift of the Air Force leadership’s focus from, and degraded performance related to, its most sensitive mission.

Air Force leaders focused on the problem only after two internationally sensitive incidents -- one involving Taiwan and another in which an Air Force B-52 bomber flew across the United States carrying six armed nuclear cruise missiles, Gates said.

Both incidents could have been prevented if the Air Force had applied proper inspection and oversight, he said. He blamed a “lack of a critical self-assessment culture” within the Air Force nuclear program that might have identified and fixed systemic weaknesses.

Gates noted that he had to intervene personally to ensure a thorough investigation of what went wrong and how.

In the nose-cone incident, the secretary blamed the Air Force and Defense Logistics Agency for using supply system procedures designed to move large amounts of low-value material for shipping the sensitive classified parts.

“The specific cause of this event was the Air Force and Defense Logistics Agency’s sole reliance on, and lack of compliance with, existing supply system procedures to provide positive control of the four forward-section assemblies,” he said.

But Gates said the incident signals far deeper problems.

“During the course of the investigation, other issued indicating a decline in the Air Force’s nuclear mission focus and performance became apparent,” he said. “Rather than an isolated occurrence, the shipment… was a symptom of a degradation of the authority, standards of excellence and technical competence within the nation’s ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) force.”

At a broader level, Gates cited declining expertise in the entire Air Force nuclear program – the result, he said, of lack of top-level focus and emphasis.

None of these problems happened overnight and some have root problems dating back a decade, he said. But Gates cited “contemporary failures and lack of effective oversight.”

In addition to removal of the top Air Force leadership, Gates announced a senior-level task force to recommend improvements needed to ensure accountability and control of nuclear weapons, delivery vehicles and components.

James Schlesinger, a former Defense Department and Energy Department secretary and CIA director, will lead the task force, Gates said. The task force will recommend organizational, procedural and policy changes needed within 60 days. Within 120 days, it will address defense-wide management and oversight of nuclear weapons and related materials and systems.

Gates said he plans to recommend a new Air Force secretary and chief of staff soon. Once they are confirmed, he said he will leave it to them to determine proper disciplinary actions for others identified in the Donald report.

The secretary expressed personal sadness about today’s decision, calling Wynne “a dedicated and honorable public servant” and noting Moseley’s decades of “courageous and devoted service.”

“They both deserve their gratitude for their service,” he said. “I have enjoyed serving with them and deeply regret that the issues before us require the actions I have taken.”

In his resignation letter, Wynne took accountability for the incidents and said he must live up to the same standards he expects of his airmen. Moseley said he takes “full responsibility for events which have hurt the Air Force’s reputation or raised a question of every airman’s commitment to our core values.”

Gates called today a sad day for the Air Force, the Defense Department and him personally, but said it also marks a return to the Air Force’s standards of excellence and accomplishment.

Noting his own Air Force roots, Gates said he stands in solid support of all airmen. “They have my respect, my support and my commitment to do everything I can in my remaining time to work with them and to sustain the tradition of service and excellence that has been the hallmark of the United States Air Force since its inception,” he said.

[WorkingClassFilth]

If only our political ‘leaders’ had the integrity to go away for the idiocy and treason that they continually inflict on America.

[caisson71]

We should insist on the same values for Congress, even if we have to fire every swinging one.

[The Great RJ]

I am pleased the blame moved up to where it should have been ...at the top. The handling of nuclear weapons should never have been allowed to become so slipshod.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

This is just the official excuse. There are a lot of reasons:

1) Interfering with getting Predators and Reapers to the front, because they wanted manned aircraft.

2) The tanker deal. Giving the contract to Northrop/Grumman-EAD instead of Boeing made a heck of a lot of powerful enemies.

3) Other contract disputes, where they were on one side, and the SecDef and the administration were on the other side.

[Mr Rogers]

I’m not a Gates fan, but I have to agree it was time to fire the CSAF. The CSAF has focused on the wrong things. The cut of 40,000 (sometimes discussed as 60,000) active duty USAF personnel without a change in the mission was badly done. And if you do the same with a lot less, and drive it on $$ rather than efficiency - you get lower standards.

And while the Predator problem is as much Gates’ fault as the CSAF, it reflects a lack of concern for our current fighting.

[ThomasPaine2000]

There's an old saying in the Air Force.... “You can delegate authority, but you can not delegate responsibility”

[SandRat]

Same one we had in the Army.

[Tailback]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The Air Force has problems. When an entire branch of the military is run by pilots, you get a very unbalanced approach. What should happen in this instance is the highest ranking AF specops officer should be made CSAF. There needs to be a serious shift in the way the AF thinks and it needs to start both at the top and bottom. The pipeline kids coming out of basic training that I went to tech school with were a joke. They got ONE day of training on the M-16!

Let me write that again to emphasize my point. They got ONE day of training on the M16 in basic! In a professional military that becomes smaller and smaller, where Air Force and even Navy personnel are being cross-tasked into potential combat duties, that is unacceptable!

Now don’t get me wrong, AF spec ops guys are just as high speed as their counterparts. AF security forces get just plain awesome weapons training compared to what I saw in the Army. When I was shooting competetively with the NG the majority of really good pistol guys at the nationals were the AF security forces. That being said, the rest of the AF has no freakin’ clue about defending themselves.

I’m beginning to think that the military needs to go to a “comprehensive boot camp” mentality where all of the services new recruits go through the same blocks of training to include hand to hand fighting, bayonet training, BRM (basic rifle marksmanship) based on the USMC model, and all the other stuff like first aid/combat lifesaving etc...

The USMC model of “Everyone is a Rifleman first” should be every single services way of thinking. Yes, that means you too AF and Navy.

I also think that potential officers should go through the same exact boot camp as everyone else. I don’t care if you spent 4 years in ROTC or got an appointment to an academy. If GI Joe can do it, then you can do it also. (probably) Such a policy would prevent uncomfortable situations like an Air National Guard General having to be shown how to eat an MRE. (yes I really saw that happen)

[glorgau]

I’m beginning to think that the military needs to go to a “comprehensive boot camp” mentality where all of the services new recruits go through the same blocks of training to include hand to hand fighting, bayonet training, BRM (basic rifle marksmanship) based on the USMC model, and all the other stuff like first aid/combat lifesaving etc...

That cuts out most females...

[Mr Rogers]

What in the world makes you think M-16 training is a critical skill for the USAF?

If we have someone deploying in a role where the M-16 is needed, we train them. Before going to Afghanistan, I qualified on the Army course at Ft Sill.

However, the M-16 is irrelevant for the vast majority of our people. We don’t DO hand-to-hand fighting. You cannot launch aircraft that way!

As a WSO/EWO, I’ve taken my fair share of shots at pilots, but pilots are not what is wrong with the USAF. Too many reductions leading to a one-mistake Air Force (unless you are senior, in which case you can screw up ALMOST as often as you want), too many data-links leading to the stifling of initiative, and too many GOs who got their rank because Daddy was a GO before them - that is where our problem lies.

It is a lack of leadership at the top - yes, and a lack of seriousness about the war we are in. But it isn’t just the USAF - the Army ran Afghanistan, and I saw little or no sign of intelligence or efficiency in the senior ranks there, either.

[muawiyah]

Department of Air Force also has responsibility for a large number of defense intelligence satellites.

For a variety of reasons their leadership elite managed to force through the idea that human assets in foreign countries could be eliminated without risk simply through total reliance on Air Force and CIA spy satellite systems.

That's why we end up not knowing where and when the Iraqis shipped out their WMMD.

I'd suggest the people allowed to resign today probably ought to be recalled to service for later punishment by an Administration interested in holding them accountable for bad intelligence.

[ThomasPaine2000]

Maybe, it’s just a “military” thing (LOL). I do not think it’s a concept that most civilians understand...

[SandRat]

You mean like

You manage accountable property items, but you Lead People?

[Tailback]

What in the world makes you think M-16 training is a critical skill for the USAF?

Other than the fact that kids straight out of tech school are being involuntarily sent to Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan and serving as TCN escorts or convoy security even though their AFSC has nothing to do with combat arms or security forces? Well nothing of course. I mean, why would some AF IT tech need to know how to handle an M16 when they're doing convoy security through Basra?

[JRios1968]

Too many reductions leading to a one-mistake Air Force (unless you are senior, in which case you can screw up ALMOST as often as you want), too many data-links leading to the stifling of initiative...

You have no idea how right you are.  I was considered to be a "fast burner," a "fire-breathing" maintenance officer...then I went to a munitions depot unit, commanded by a guy whose prior assignment was the Pentagon, who was followed by another Pentagon flunkie.  Two people, both at least 3 years away from the REAL Air Force...who were used to saying "I'm from General So-and-so's office..." and would get their way, ALWAYS.

They were not pleased with my emphasis on "Our Mission First, Our People ALWAYS," to the point that I was continuously demeaned in front of our people, followed by less-than-glowing evaluations.

Needless to say, I did NOT make my next rank, and suddenly became a complete pariah, getting awful assignment offers...leading me to leave active duty for the Reserves, even though I had been offered to stay in until retirement.  BAD move...I didn't get promoted in the Reserves either (remember I still had the awful evals written by people who had worked for big GOs in the Pentagon...) and now I am completely out of the Air Force.

Contrast my situation with that of a few guys I knew in my Year Group (1992) who were caught sleeping with the enlisted girls or driving drunk, and are now entering the promotion zone for Lieutenant Colonel.

[Tailback]

However, the M-16 is irrelevant for the vast majority of our people. We don’t DO hand-to-hand fighting. You cannot launch aircraft that way!

So what you're saying is that you're a desk jockey and not a warrior? The British conducted a very effective bayonet charge during the invasion of Iraq. Your mentality is a perfect example of why the AF is becoming less relevant to the modern battlefield. What happens when all the combat aircraft are unmanned?

I have news for you, the military is going to get even smaller in the future and the expectation will be that they be just as capable. The AF better get with the program.

[Mr Rogers]

You stupid sack of crap - what part of AIR FORCE do you not understand? How in the hell do you do a bayonet charge in an airplane?

Pull your head out of your land-bound butt and understand that not everyone in the military works on the ground. Sailors on boats don’t need to do hand-to-hand combat. The only time I would be exposed to hand-to-hand combat would be if I went down behind enemy lines - which I never did, and none of those who did that I’ve talked to ever needed to fight hand-to-hand either.

It will be a long time before UAVs can replace manned aircraft. If you don’t understand that, then you don’t understand enough to take part in an intelligent discussion.

[Mr Rogers]

Those going to Iraq are thoroughly drilled in how to use an M-16. Many enlisted are trained regularly in it anyways. But it is not even close to being a primary weapon for the USAF. If it were, we would be called the USMC.

[Mr Rogers]

I’m at a NAF now. Trying to get someone to make a decision is like pulling teeth. I can’t get someone to take responsibility to order a chair or software, let alone make any real decisions. The attitude seems to be, “If you don’t decide, you can’t be blamed!”

However, I’ve spent enough time with the Army to know they can be just as bad. One of my last meetings in Afghanistan was 2 hours long, discussing when the next BDE staff meeting should be held.