Experts urge US logistics revamp in light of Ukraine war

WASHINGTON — American and allied forces must adapt their logistics planning to incorporate lessons from the war in Ukraine, issue experts said at the annual meeting of the Association of the U.S. Army here on Monday.

“Our logistics structure has changed through the time that we were in Afghanistan and Iraq,” retired Army Gen. Mike Scaparrotti, a former commander of U.S. forces in Europe and now a senior counsel at the Cohen Group, said. “It’s not really established for high intensity conflict, nor are we supplied for high intensity conflict.”

This need can be seen in the quantity of U.S. munitions production — and how the war in Ukraine has drained weapons stockpiles.

Since the conflict began in February, the U.S. military has sent enough weapon systems and munitions to Kyiv that it could leave the Pentagon at risk of going under minimum stockpiles requirements for war plans and continue training, according to CSIS . To prepare for a protracted conflict, T.X. Hammes, a distinguished fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies, said preparations must be made to produce enough munitions.

“The other things is that I think we have to think in terms of a long war,” T.X. Hammes said. “Since 1754, any time two healthy powers fight each other, wars are years to decades [in length]. We buy munitions for weeks-long wars.”

The CSIS analysis said that the U.S. inventory of staples in the war in Ukraine, such as High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and javelin missiles, was now limited.

However, just the production of more munitions and weapons systems will not be enough to win a future high-intensity conflict, the experts said. Moving supplies and operations to the front lines will be critical to the U.S.’s mission — as has been seen with Ukraine’s ability to keep supply lines intact.

“Investments in logistics are often subject to cuts because it’s not the ‘tooth,’” Cynthia Cook, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies , said. “But what we’re seeing in this war that the tail is the tooth.”

Despite the U.S.’s shrinking stockpiles of munitions and weapons, Cook said that the armed forces and defense industry should look at the bigger picture: a U.S. military fighting — and producing — alongside its allies.

“What this war shows is also the importance of allies and partners,” Cook said. “Ukraine has pulled from a much wider range of allies than Russia has been able to, and if we think about the U.S. industrial base situated within the industrial base of our allies and partners, then we have more capability and capacity than we do alone.”

Zamone “Z” Perez is a reporter at Military Times. He previously worked at Foreign Policy and Ufahamu Africa. He is a graduate of Northwestern University, where he researched international ethics and atrocity prevention in his thesis. He can be found on Twitter @zamoneperez.

华盛顿——美国陆军协会年会周一在此举行，相关问题专家表示，美国及其盟军必须调整后勤计划，吸取乌克兰战争的教训。

“我们在阿富汗和伊拉克期间，后勤结构发生了变化，”退役陆军上将迈克·斯卡帕罗蒂说道，他曾担任美国驻欧洲部队司令，现在是科恩集团的高级顾问。“它并非为高强度冲突而建立，我们的物资供应也并非为高强度冲突而准备。”

从美国军火产量以及乌克兰战争如何消耗武器库存可以看出这种需求。

据战略与国际研究中心（CSIS）称，自2月份冲突爆发以来，美军已向基辅运送了大量武器系统和弹药，这可能导致五角大楼的武器库存低于战争计划和继续训练所需的最低标准。国家安全研究所杰出研究员T.X. Hammes表示，为了应对持久战，必须做好生产足够弹药的准备。

“我认为我们必须从持久战的角度来考虑问题，”哈姆斯说。“自1754年以来，任何两个实力强大的国家之间的战争都会持续数年甚至数十年。而我们购买的军火却只够打几周的仗。”

战略与国际研究中心 (CSIS) 的分析指出，美国在乌克兰战争中的主要物资库存，如高机动性火箭炮系统 (HIMARS) 和标枪导弹，目前已十分有限。

然而，专家指出，仅仅增加弹药和武器系统的产量并不足以赢得未来的高强度冲突。正如乌克兰保持补给线畅通的能力所表明的那样，将物资和行动运送到前线对美国的任务至关重要。

“后勤方面的投资往往会被削减，因为它不是‘牙齿’，”战略与国际研究中心高级研究员辛西娅·库克说。“但我们在这场战争中看到的是，尾巴才是牙齿。”

尽管美国的弹药和武器库存正在减少，但库克表示，武装部队和国防工业应该着眼于大局：美国军队应该与盟友并肩作战，并进行生产。

库克说：“这场战争也表明了盟友和伙伴的重要性。乌克兰能够利用的盟友范围比俄罗斯广泛得多，如果我们考虑到美国的工业基础与我们盟友和伙伴的工业基础相结合，那么我们拥有的能力和资源就比单打独斗要多得多。”

扎莫内·“Z”·佩雷斯是《军事时报》的记者。他曾就职于《外交政策》和《乌法哈姆非洲》。他毕业于西北大学，毕业论文研究国际伦理和暴行预防。他的推特账号是@zamoneperez。