31 July 2002
Source: http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=02073002.plt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml

US Department of State
International Information Programs

Washington File

30 July 2002

Current U.S. Military Exercise Is Test of Transformation

(Rumsfeld, Norwegian defense minister speak July 29) (4160)

Millennium Challenge 2002, the U.S. military's current combination of
live field exercises and computer simulations, will be a measuring
stick to determine how well the services act and fight jointly, as
well as a test of the ongoing process of transformation, Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said July 29.

"This exercise will test the forces and equipment that will help us
judge and define both near-term and future capabilities. It will not
only test the effectiveness of the force, but also the progress we
have made thus far in transforming to produce the combat capability
necessary to meet the threats and the challenges of the 21st century,"
Rumsfeld said in a joint media availability with Norwegian Defense
Minister Kristin Devold at the Suffolk, Virginia campus of the new
U.S. Joint Forces Command.

Millennium Challenge 2002, which involves more than 13,500 troops from
all services, takes place from July 24 through August 15, according to
a Joint Forces Command statement on its Web site
[http://www.jfcom.mil/about/experiments/mc02.htm]. The exercises are
designed to explore the military's "ability to conduct rapid decisive
operations ... against a determined adversary," according to the

In addition, Rumsfeld said the exercise "is also a testament to Joint
Forces Command, which has been leading the transformation effort at
many levels, including developing new concepts of warfighting, testing
those concepts through joint experiments, and training both forces and
leaders to operate effectively in joint operations."

Defense Minister Devold said her purpose in attending the exercise was
to see "the future way of exercising."

"I'm here to learn," Devold said. "I'm here to make sure that Norway
will be an even better and more important NATO member in the future
and that we are interoperable and able to do a job together with the
United States in NATO in future operations," she said.

(Note: The Department of Defense had a briefing on July 18, 2002, on
the Millennium Challenge joint military exercises. The transcript of
that briefing is available at:

During the question-and-answer session that followed Rumsfeld's and
Devold's opening remarks, topics included Iraq, the al-Qaida terrorist
organization, and the current situation in Afghanistan.

Following is a transcript of the Rumsfeld-Devold press conference:

(begin transcript)

U.S. Department of Defense
Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
July 29, 2002

(Media availability with Norwegian Minister of Defense
Kristin Krohn Devold)

Staff: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It's my pleasure to
welcome you here to Joint Forces Command at our Suffolk campus here.
And it's also my honor to introduce to you the Honorable Kristin Krohn
Devold, Norwegian Minister of Defense, and Donald Rumsfeld, the
secretary of Defense. They'll each begin with a brief statement and
then take your questions.


Rumsfeld: Do you want to start?

Devold: No, I think you should.

Rumsfeld: I should start.  All right.

There's Buck Kernan. General, thank you so much for your hospitality
today and for the really truly outstanding job that you and your team
do for our country. We appreciate it a great deal.

I might also say that standing next to him is Vice Admiral Ed
Giambastiani, who may very well be moving in this direction some day,
the good Senate willing.

And folks upstairs, hello. (Laughter.) Thanks for what you're doing.

The fact that Kristin, the Minister of Defense of Norway, is here I
think says a great deal about both her dedication to her work and her
country's determination to be a strong and effective NATO partner, but
also the new security environment in which we find ourselves -- the
need to transform and the importance of joint and combined forces and
coalition capabilities.

Norway has been and remains a very valuable ally in Operation Enduring
Freedom, contributing Special Operations forces, clearing mines,
providing tactical airlift, leadership, transport; contributing
dollars to aid the interim government and a back-to-school campaign
and much more.

So I'm delighted that you could be with us today, and welcome.

For well over a year now, the Joint Forces Command and the Department
of Defense have been working on transformation, discussing what it is
and why it's so profoundly important to our country.

This exercise will test the forces and equipment that will help us
judge and define both near-term and future capabilities. It will not
only test the effectiveness of the force, but also the progress we
have made thus far in transforming to produce the combat capability
necessary to meet the threats and the challenges of the 21st century.

MC02, as I'm told it's called -- sounds like fizz water in the old
days -- is also a testament to Joint Forces Command, which has been
leading the transformation effort at many levels, including developing
new concepts of warfighting, testing those concepts through joint
experiments, and training both forces and leaders to operate
effectively in joint operations. The most powerful example of their
success is the war we are now waging against terrorism, which has
tested a good many of the methods envisioned early on, which is why
experiments like Millennium Challenge is so important to future
battlefield successes.

It will help us create a force that is not only interoperable,
responsive, agile and lethal, but one that is capable of capitalizing
on the information revolution and the advanced technologies that are
available today. Of course, as every military leader since the
beginning of time has understood, ultimately it all comes down to the
troops, the men and the women in the service, those who are out there
fighting for our freedom. We owe them the very best, the best tools,
the best technology, the best organization, the best training and the
best leadership. That's what we're testing here today.

And with that, I will turn the microphones over to the Minister of
Defense of Norway.

Devold: Well, first of all, I'd like to thank General Kernan for
inviting me here. I'm going to spend three days in his exercise, or
experiment as he calls it. I hope to learn a lot from that.

At the same time, I'd like to thank Secretary Rumsfeld. The way he has
behaved, the way he has included Norway into his future plans, into
his actions in Afghanistan, has made the relationship between our two
countries better than ever.

One month ago, I visited Afghanistan. I was in Bagram. I was in
Kandahar. I got the opportunity to see with my own eyes the extremely
good cooperation between Norwegian soldiers and American soldiers.

I know that if we are going to cooperate as good as that in the
future, we have to train together. We have to exercise together.
Norway was the host nation of the last NATO exercise, Strong Resolve,
in March. But the exercise you have here now is the future way of
exercising or experimenting. That's why I'm here. I'm here to learn.
I'm here to make sure that Norway will be a even better and more
important NATO member in the future and that we are interoperable and
able to do a job together with the United States in NATO in future

Thank you very much.

Rumsfeld: Thank you.

We'd be happy to respond to questions.

Yes, sir.

Q: Mr. Secretary, one of most novel aspects of this experiment entails
setting up an interagency coordination center. And it's something
you've talked about in the past, where you've taken all the aspects of
a federal power and put them into one place. How would such an asset
help regional commanders and yourself?

Rumsfeld: Well, one example of where it's worked well already, prior
to the global war on terrorism, is in the drug war, where, you think
about it, we have law enforcement, intelligence, military, friendly
liaison services and -- involving State. And the lower down you can
push the coordination responsibility, the quicker the ability of the
local activities to react and to be successful in arresting people or
in interdicting drug activity. And the interagency process located
down at the combatant commanders' level has proved to be quite
successful there.

Clearly, it -- drugs are a global problem. So, too, is terrorism. So
when you're bringing all elements of national power to bear on a
problem, it includes the economic, the political, the diplomatic,
various types of sanctions, intelligence from all sources, as well as
military power. And having the interagency process does not have to
get burdened down in Washington and -- which, you know -- it could
slow anything, if it has to go through that process -- is a big help.
And I think that we've found we're having some success. We have an
interagency group that's functioning in the Pacific Command. We have
one that's in the European Command. We have one that's functioning in
the Central Command.

Q: Are you pleased with what you've seen of that group?

Rumsfeld: Yes, indeed.

Questions?  Yeah?

Q: Mr. Secretary, this morning, I interviewed two sailors and asked
them what they would ask you, their boss. I'm from a local CBS
affiliate, by the way, in Norfolk, Virginia. And one of the sailors
asked, what does the Navy need in terms of ships, submarines, ordnance
to fight the next wave of the war on terrorism? And what does the Navy
need to sort of address this asymmetrical threat that you've talked
about so often?

Rumsfeld: Well, the Navy clearly has to maintain a blue water navy, as
a deterrent against other nations. And second, the Navy has the
important responsibilities of bringing firepower to bear, both from
the sea and from the air.

The asymmetrical threats are going to cause some new challenges to be
faced by the Navy. When I use that word what I really mean are things
other than armies, navies or air forces, those threats: cruise
missiles, ballistic missiles, terrorism, cyber attacks, a host of
things that take advantage of technology that we've developed that's
readily available to the world that can then be used against us in
ways that advantage the attacker.

And there are any number of things that -- for example, we're in the
process of converting I believe it's four strategic submarines to
conventional capabilities over the coming, what, several years?

Staff: About five years.

Rumsfeld: Five years. And so, that's a modification of a role. We're
looking at ships that are somewhat smaller and can operate in areas
close to shores.

One of the problems we face in this world is we're going to have to be
able to cope with people who are using ungoverned areas. Normally,
you're competing against a country with a government. In the period
we're living in, we see that Afghanistan had big areas that were not
governed. There certainly are portions of Pakistan that are governed
in a way that's different than the normal government is governing it.
Somalia is not governed. There are pieces of Colombia that's not
governed. Clearly, Basilan Island in the Philippines was not being
governed, except by the Abu Sayyaf terrorists. And many of those areas
are near water, and so the Navy has potentially a role to play there
as well.

Q: I have a follow-up question to that. Can you talk a little bit
about the F-22 Raptor that the Air Force is looking at? I know that
it's sort of been scaled back, the program. It's also been accused of
sort of being a Cold War relic. As a former aviator yourself, can you
comment on that program?

Rumsfeld: I could. (Pause.) (Laughter.) I don't think I will.
(Laughter.) I'll tell you why. This is almost August. We completed the
defense planning guidance. Out of it came a number of studies that had
to be performed. Those studies are under way, one of which involves
the F-22 as well as many other of our weapon systems. And what we have
to do in this period immediately ahead is to let those studies get
done, take a good look at them, and then see how they all fit into the
capabilities we need in the new security environment of the 21st

And if I start talking about one weapon system, then I'm going to be
asked about another, and I would be doing it without having had the
benefit of the studies that are under way. And so not only am I
disinclined to talk about a single one, it is not possible to talk
about them together, which is what my job is, is to look at them
together and fashion a budget that would go to the president sometime
in November or December and then go to the Congress in January or
February, because you don't know what those studies are going to

Q: Mr. Secretary, over the weekend, yesterday, U.S. and British
warplanes bombed a communications site in Iraq. I understand that six
times there's been some sort of skirmish in Iraq in the last month
alone. What do you attribute to the step-up in hostilities there? And
moreover, we keep seeing this war plan and that war plan; what's the
future hold? What's next?

Rumsfeld: Well, as to what's next, needless to say, you'd be --
(chuckles) -- the last one to know. (Laughter.) Not you personally.
(Laughter.) You collectively.

The -- I'm trying to think what one could say. I do not believe -- I'd
have to go back and check, but I do not believe that there have been a
notable pickup in the number of response firings that the Northern and
Southern no-fly-zone watches have been engaged in the last two, three,
four weeks. What they are there for, those U.S. and British aircraft
flying out of the region, is that Saddam Hussein had several U.N.
(United Nations) resolutions where he agreed not to have weapons of
mass destruction, where he agreed to not fly in certain areas, where
he agreed to not reinforce his troops down south, where he agreed not
to attempt to intimidate his neighbors, the Kurds or the Shia or
others, and to not increase his military capability in certain ways.

What's been taking place is they have been firing at coalition
aircraft, U.S. and British, from time to time, and when they do, we
fire back. And we fire back at those things we can find which seem
appropriate. And clearly one of the things that's appropriate are
communications systems, because it's the communications and the fiber
optics that they've been putting in that enable them to cue a variety
of radars and have a better success rate of tracking our aircraft.

So you can expect that there will be, on a weekly basis, these
exchanges. And our purpose would be to punish and destroy things that
are of military value to him, that are in many ways inconsistent with
the U.N. resolutions that we're enforcing.

Q: (Inaudible) more punishment in the future?

Rumsfeld: Well, we'll just have to see.

Q: What do you think about -- Mr. Secretary, if I could, just on that
subject, what you're talking about is this policy of containment that
has been ongoing for some time. Some of your -- some of the brass at
the Pentagon appear to be very comfortable with that, as opposed to
planning for something much larger. I'm sure you saw the report in
Sunday's Post. What do you think about --

Rumsfeld: You don't believe everything you read in the newspaper, do
you? (Laughter.)

Q: Not in the comics section.

Rumsfeld: (Chuckles.)

You know, the Pentagon's a big place -- hundreds and hundreds of
thousands of military personnel, hundreds of thousands of civilian
personnel. Any reporter who wants to can go find one or more and --
that'll have a position on any issue, all the way across the spectrum.

Then what they do is they write stories that seem to fit what they
feel might make a good story. And they go around and ask questions
until they find people that say those things, and then they print.

Now I don't know. I -- they don't say who those people are. So I can't
go and say, "Gee, have you got a better idea?" Can't seem to do that.
Who they are no one knows. It's a big mystery, and life's like that.

All I can tell you is that the senior military have every opportunity
in the world to work with the senior civilians. In fact, I probably
spend more time with General Pete Pace and General Dick Myers and the
chiefs of the services and the combatant commanders than I do with my
wife. I'm on the phone with Tom Franks, I would guess, two or three
times a day. I probably meet with him once every two weeks, including
tomorrow. Don't draw any conclusions from that. (Laughter.) We've got
a lot going on and he's got a big area of responsibility.

But they all have every opportunity in the world to express their
views, to discuss things. And they do, and they do it intelligently
and they do it constructively, and they don't do it to the press. Now,
if they're not doing it to the press, somebody else is doing it to the
press, and it's obviously somebody who knows a heck of a lot less than
they do.

Q: If I can follow. There's this concern about weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq. Why not just go hit them? Why wait for something
-- for the future?

Rumsfeld: The Iraqis have a great deal of what they do deeply buried.
The Iraqis have benefited from American spies defecting to the Soviet
Union or Russia and providing information as to how we do things, and
then they proliferate that information on how another country can best
achieve denial and deception and avoid having the location -- precise
location, actionable locations -- of things known.

Third, there is enormous flow of things across the Iraqi border.
They've got billions of dollars from their oil for food. Instead of
buying food for the children, they're buying weapons. They're buying
dual-use capability. A biological laboratory can be on wheels in a
trailer and make a lot of bad stuff, and it's movable, and it looks
like most any other trailer. So the idea that it's easy to simply go
do what you suggested ought to be done from the air, the implication
being from the air, is a misunderstanding of the situation. They have
chemical weapons. They have biological weapons. They have an enormous
appetite for nuclear weapons. They were within a year or two of having
them when the -- Desert Storm got on the ground and found enough
information to know how advanced their program was. They've kept their
nuclear physicists and scientists together in a kluge, and they're
continuing to work. So it is a bigger task than that suggests.

Moderator: Ladies and gentlemen, we have time for a follow-up.

Rumsfeld: You going to ask the minister a tough question?

Devold: (Laughs.)  You take all the tough questions.

Q: (Inaudible) -- reports from Afghanistan that another assassination
attempt on leadership there has been foiled. Do you have information
on that and if it involved anyone -- U.S. troops that are protecting?

Rumsfeld: I have not heard it. I've been in meetings all morning, and
-- but I think one has to know that there are people, there are
al-Qaida and Taliban still in Afghanistan. There are also people who
for nothing to do with Taliban or al-Qaida would prefer to be in power
and that therefore, they may do things that are unhelpful to the
interim government. What's taken place is that the Taliban is out of
that country. The al-Qaida are dispersed and no longer functioning in
large groups or training terrorists. The loya jirga, the grand
council, met. Hundreds of people got together and decided who they
wanted to lead that country. And Chairman Karzai is the presiding
person for the next two years or 18 months now of the transitional
government. And we can expect that there will continue to be
firefights and people shooting and things happening. It's an untidy
place. But -- and it's not unique to that country. There are plenty of
countries where people get shot at. I'm mean, I'm from Chicago.

Q: (Off mike) -- personal.

Rumsfeld: I didn't mean it, Mayor Daley.  (Laughter.)

Q: General Clark, other U.S. officials saying today that Osama bin
Laden's son, Saad, had been more active, rising in importance in
recent months as his father's activities have faded. Does this sound
correct to you? And how much are you concerned about the possibility
of another bin Laden on the rise?

Rumsfeld: Well, I have said from the beginning that if Osama bin Laden
disappeared, which would be nice, that it would not change greatly the
al Qaeda operations; that there are three, four, five, six, seven
people who could -- who know where the bank accounts are, who know the
key players, who know the key planners, and are perfectly capable of
running that operation. Whether the son ends up being one of them, one
never knows until there's a sort that takes place.

Q: But you haven't seen an increase in his power or  -- 

Rumsfeld: I didn't say that.

Q: Have you?

Rumsfeld: I didn't comment on it.


Q: Mr. Secretary, how will experiments like Millennium Challenge help
achieve the goal of transforming the military and help us be better
able to take on these asymmetrical threats?

Rumsfeld: What this exercise or experiment is doing is it is pulling
literally hundreds of people into a process where they are required to
connect with each other, to talk to each other, to be interoperable,
to be joint, to think joint, and to focus on goals that are not
service-centric but nation-centric, combatant commander-centric, and
-- as opposed to service-centric.

And one of the most difficult tasks we have is that we have these
services that have wonderful histories and traditions and they used to
go off and fight and do things. An Army could fight, and a Navy could
go fight someplace, and an Air Force could go fight someplace. Those
days are gone. These services -- the combatant commander couldn't care
less where the power came from, which service it came from, that he
needs to put on a target. He doesn't care if it's Army air or Navy air
or Air Force air. He wants to take care of a target and he wants to
impose lethal damage on something, he wants to stop some bad people
from doing something.

And the problem we've got in the service, in the defense
establishment, is each service tends to come straight up, and they've
got their Navy things and their Army things, their Air Force things,
their Marine things. And that's nice, but that is not how anyone's
going to fight. And it is an exercise like this, and it's the work of
the Joint Forces Command, it's the work that Buck Kernan and his team
have been doing to bring in all kinds of people from these four
services and put them in that process so they understand that; that
they begin to think that way and they recognize the value that accrues
to our country, if they are able to think and behave and, in the last
analysis, fight that way.

We simply have to find ways to get more people joint earlier. We
cannot allow each service to come up with their own weapons systems
that have not been thought through in the context of how we're going
to use them in the battlefield. We cannot let individuals grow up and
not have -- fine officers, talented, brave, dedicated, patriotic --
and have them service-centric and not understanding the linkages that
have to exist between the services. We can't let that happen.

What happens in the Department of Defense -- and it runs me up the
wall -- is each service comes up with their things, and then I look
out here to a combatant commander who's got to go do a job, and how in
the world do you get those four things into a single fighting force at
the end? It's a train wreck right in here; right in that area is a
train wreck every year when you're trying to do the budget, every year
when you're working on things. It's just a meat grinder trying to pull
things together because they didn't start coming together earlier at a
lower level. And we're going to fix that. I'll be the meat grinder.

Thank you.  (Applause.)

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)