Global Courant
After years of opposition, Congress finally approves it the Air Force’s plan to retire the A-10 Thunderbolt. This is the right choice, as the A-10 is no longer suited to America’s geostrategic needs. We shouldn’t just get rid of this venerable aircraft, though; in the hands of our international partners, it can continue to advance national interests.
The US government created the A-10 in the 1970s to provide air support for US ground forces. At the time it was an effective counter to the threat of Soviet tanks, and it has served the military faithfully in the decades since.
The A-10 proved especially useful in the Gulf War when it flew 8,100 missions and destroyed thousands of Soviet-era combat vehicles and equipment. It later helped the US destroy hardened enemy positions in the war on terror.
But major military operations in the Middle East have been halted. Today, our greatest adversary is Communist China, whose tanks and emplacements are far more advanced than those of the Soviets or Islamic terrorists.
To prepare to face Beijing in a future conflict, we must make the best use of our limited hangar space and procurement dollars. To do that, we must turn off the A-10, as senior military leaders have called for. This will make room for aircraft such as the F-35 Lightning II, and free up funds for the development and construction of next-generation missiles and missile defense systems, which will be invaluable in any future Indo-Pacific conflict, whether in Taiwan is, the South China Sea or the Korean Peninsula.
However, the A-10 can still do a lot of good if handed over to allies and partners who need it. The most obvious example is Ukrainepreparing for a counter-offensive against Soviet-era tanks and entrenched Russian positions.
At the recent G7 summit, President Joe Biden stated that he is in favor of training Ukrainian troops to operate F-16 Fighting Falcons, a critical first step to allies delivering the planes to Ukraine. But there’s good reason to wonder if an air-to-air fighter makes the most sense. The chief of the defense intelligence service of Ukraine, for example believes Ukraine would do better with A-10s. In addition, F-16s require 6,000 feet of tarmac—increasingly rare in bombed-out Ukraine—to take off and land, while A-10s require only 4,000 feet of unpaved runway.
Story continues
Outside of Ukraine, potential beneficiaries of an A-10 transfer program include African countries in the Sahel battling ISIS and Boko Haram, or even Latin American countries battling paramilitary rebels and jungle drug cartels.
Such a program would be neither unprecedented nor unusual. The US produces and sells vehicles and platforms that the US military no longer uses semi-regularly. For example, the production of the A-29 Super Tucano employs hundreds of Floridians in Jacksonville and supports counter-terrorism operations in Africa and Colombia.
Simply put, it’s smart to phase out the A-10 by handing it over to allies and partners. Not only would it help America adapt to the challenges of the 21st century, it would also help our friends meet their own challenges without major US intervention. That’s killing two birds with one stone: the best form of public policy.
Senator Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is Vice Chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence and Services of the Foreign Relations Committee.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/24708357/macosgaming.jpg?w=150&resize=150,150&ssl=1 "Apple’s new Proton-like tool can run Windows games on a Mac")
