|
AFTER nearly a century of history, the "Silent Serv ice" will go dark in the Northeast if the U.S. Navy's submarine base in New London, Connecticut, is closed as recommended recently by the Department of Defense.
All of us who care about our national defense will not sit silently and allow this grossly mistaken recommendation to go forward. The fight now goes to the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC), which can — and should — reject the plan.
As a senator from Connecticut, I am, of course concerned with the effect this closing would have on my state's economy — estimated at $1.3 billion annually and about 14,000 jobs.
Closing New London — along with Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Maine and Fort Monmouth in New Jersey — is also part of a continuing and unhealthy trend of shifting military facilities to southern and western states, removing national defense and contact with the military from the daily lives of Northeasterners.
But these factors alone, although critically important, are not reasons enough to keep a base open.
I oppose closing New London for three reasons:
* It is bad military policy.
* It is flawed financial and budgetary policy.
* And it will cripple an industry and workforce vital to our national defense and manufacturing competitiveness.
Let's start with New London's value as a military base. New London is one of the few ports in the United States with the infrastructure and capability to handle nuclear powered vessels. That capability is a strategic national asset that once lost, will never be recovered.
New London also offers the quickest access to deep water and the polar route under the ice caps of the increasingly pivotal Pacific Ocean.
New London also provides great synergy by having the submarine base, the Naval Submarine School and Electric Boat — the dean of global submarine builders — all located within a few miles of each other.
This proximity clearly enables gains in production, research, maintenance and training as the skilled technicians who build and maintain the submarines work side-by-side with those who operate them and those who train the next generation of submariners.
Closing New London would leave the United States with just two east-coast submarine bases — Norfolk, Va., and Kings Bay, Ga. This increases the risk to the entire fleet should one or both ports become incapacitated in an attack, sabotage or natural disaster.
While the military value of New London alone should be enough to keep it open, there are financial considerations as well.
We have been down this road once before. During the last round of base closings in 1993, the BRAC Commission found that the Defense Department's recommendation to close the New London sub base meant substantial new spending would be required at the bases slated to receive the submarine squadrons.
I remember when the chairman of the 1993 commission, former Rep. Jim Courter, said he thought it was strange to spend millions of dollars for new facilities when the submarines already had a safe home with great facilities.
That is truer today than it was then. The Department of Defense has pegged the net cost to close New London at about $345.4 million over three years and claims that it will save a total $1.6 billion over 20.
I am more than skeptical. We have yet to see the data used to determine that figure. But I know that New London's nuclear-handling capabilities also make closing it very problematic.
The Pentagon estimates the cost of environmental cleanup of the base at just $23.9 million. This looks like a staggering underestimation given that the sub base contains 15 identified Superfund sites.
The amount of money it would actually take to make New London safe for private development would itself likely dwarf the savings the Pentagon anticipates from closing the base.
Once they examine the facts, we are confident the BRAC commissioners will not allow the "Silent Service" to slip away from Connecticut waters and into history.
The evidence will clearly show that the submarine mission should continue proudly from New London —- "the Submarine Capital of the World" — in defense of our nation and its values around the world.
Sen. Joe Lieberman is a Connecticut Democrat.
|
