Back to news

May 20, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

Don’t Use COVID As Excuse to Slash Defense Spending

Opponents of defense spending may cite the economic consequences of COVID-19 — huge deficits and ballooning national debt— in an effort to slash the Department of Defense's budget. If they succeed, American military supremacy will erode further, inviting aggression from adversaries and decisively undermining American security.

By on May 20, 2020 at 4:01 AM

Even as many Americans huddle in their homes to avoid the coronavirus, our adversaries have continued to use military power to test and undermine the United States. Since the crisis began, Moscow has sent bombers to probe American air defenses near Alaska. China escalated its belligerent activity in the South China Sea. Iran has harassed U.S. naval vessels in international waters. North Korea launched a barrage of missiles. Hackers have pummeled defense networks and suppliers with cyberattacks. All the while, terrorists have continued attacking U.S. and partner forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Authoritarians and terrorists apparently did not get the memo that they were supposed to play nice during the pandemic. They clearly still believe they can advance their interests and undermine ours with the employment of cyber and kinetic military power.

Despite this, opponents of defense spending may cite the economic consequences of COVID-19 — huge deficits and ballooning national debt— in an effort to slash the Department of Defense's budget. If they succeed, American military supremacy will erode further, inviting aggression from adversaries and decisively undermining American security.

To be clear, the United States did not find itself in this tenuous position overnight. America's military edge has been eroding for years. For many years after 9/11, Washington repeatedly failed to provide the Pentagon with the timely, predictable and sufficient funding necessary to maintain current readiness and modernize its forces.

When confronted with this difficult choice, defense leaders were often forced to postpone vital weapon modernization research and development programs to resource and support the next units to deploy.

Meanwhile, Beijing and Moscow studied how the United States fights wars and undertook comprehensive efforts to modernize their weapons and revamp their operational concepts.

So, by 2018, the military balance of power had shifted so significantly that the National Defense Strategy (NDS) Commission — a group of bipartisan national security experts not prone to hyperbole — sounded the alarm. “The security and wellbeing of the United States are at greater risk than at any time in decades,” they warned. “America's military superiority—the hard-power backbone of its global influence and national security—has eroded to a dangerous degree.”

Thankfully, the U.S. has now emerged from what the 2018 National Defense Strategy called a “period of strategic atrophy” and taken concerted action. With increased defense funding in the last few years and a focus on great power competition, the Department of Defense is undertaking the most significant U.S. military modernization effort in decades.

In order to win the intense military technology competition with Beijing and others, the Pentagon is focusing its research and development on artificial intelligence, biotechnology, autonomy, cyber, directed energy, hypersonics, space and 5G. Simultaneously, the Pentagon and combatant commands are working to develop a new joint concept to employ these new weapons.

Despite these positive efforts, U.S. military supremacy has continued to erode.

Consider Indo-Pacific Command's report submitted in March warning that the military balance of power with China continues to become “more unfavorable.” The United States, it said, is accumulating “additional risk that may embolden our adversaries to attempt to unilaterally change the status quo before the U.S. could muster an effective response.”

This is because America has not yet deployed most of the weapons and capabilities it has been developing and is still crafting its new joint warfighting concept. To be sure, each of the U.S. military services are sprinting to field key systems, weapons, and capabilities in the next few years. But the Chinese Communist Party and its People's Liberation Army are sprinting too, and there is no time to waste.

The bipartisan experts on the NDS Commission recommended that “Congress increase the base defense budget at an average rate of three to five percent above inflation” in the coming years. If Congress ignores its own commission and slashes defense spending, U.S. military supremacy will continue to erode and could eventually disappear.

The far left and libertarians often respond to such arguments by emphasizing the size of the U.S. defense budget. What they fail to mention is that U.S. defense spending, measured either as a percentage of gross domestic product or a percentage of federal outlays, is near post-World War II lows.

That doesn't mean assertive congressional oversight is not needed; there is certainly room for improvement at the Pentagon. Indeed, defense leaders must continue to ruthlessly establish priorities, eliminate waste, and implement efficiencies—while credibly demonstrating tangible stewardship to Congress and taxpayers.

One should not dismiss the severe economic impacts of the coronavirus. The Congressional Budget Office has highlighted the potentially dire consequences for the federal deficit and debt. But Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security's mandatory spending — not discretionary defense spending — is the primary driver, by far, of fiscal unsustainability.

If the American people and their representatives in Congress provide the Department of Defense sufficient resources over the next few years, the U.S. military will be able to complete and field vital modernization programs. This will ensure U.S. troops have what they need and will enable the United States to re-assert the military superiority that has been so beneficial to peace, prosperity, and security.

The coronavirus has certainly demonstrated the need for better domestic health security programs and has delivered a body blow to the U.S. economy. But if political leaders respond by slashing the Department of Defense's budget, Washington risks making American military superiority yet another casualty of the coronavirus.

Bradley Bowman, former advisor to Sens. Todd Young and Kelly Ayotte, is senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/dont-let-the-covid-deficit-hurt-defense-spending

On the same subject

  • DARPA Wants to Find Botnets Before They Attack

    September 12, 2018 | International, C4ISR

    DARPA Wants to Find Botnets Before They Attack

    By Jack Corrigan The defense agency awarded a contract to develop a tool that scours the internet for dormant online armies. The military's research branch is investing in systems that automatically locate and dismantle botnets before hackers use them to cripple websites, companies or even entire countries. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency on Aug. 30 awarded a $1.2 million contract to cybersecurity firm Packet Forensics to develop novel ways to locate and identify these hidden online armies. The award comes as part of the agency's Harnessing Autonomy for Countering Cyber-adversary Systems program, a DARPA spokesperson told Nextgov. To build botnets, hackers infect internet-connected devices with malware that allows them to execute orders from a remote server. Because the virus sits dormant most of the time, the owners of infected devices rarely know their computer, smartphone or toaster has been compromised. Through the HACCS program, DARPA aims to build a system that can automatically pinpoint botnet-infected devices and disable their malware without their owners ever knowing. Launched in 2017, the program is investing in three main technologies: systems that uncover and fingerprint botnets across the internet, tools that upload software to infected devices through known security gaps, and software that disables botnet malware once it's uploaded. Packet Forensics' technology falls under that first category, the DARPA spokesperson said. Eventually DARPA plans to integrate each of those technologies into a single system that can spot, raid and neutralize botnet-infected devices without any human involvement. Because the tool would only target botnet malware, people could continue using the devices just as they had before, the agency said in the program announcement. During phase one of the three-part project, Packet Forensics will build a technology capable of scanning some five percent of global IP addresses and detecting botnets with 80 percent accuracy. By the end of the program, DARPA anticipates the system to analyze 80 percent of the global internet and correctly spot botnets 95 percent of the time. The effort is scheduled to last to four years, with the first phase running 16 months. Later phases include additional funding. https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2018/09/darpa-wants-find-botnets-they-attack/151182/

  • Support growing for review of Ligado interference information

    May 14, 2020 | International, C4ISR

    Support growing for review of Ligado interference information

    Aaron Mehta As the Department of Defense and its allies attempt to stop Ligado from moving forward with plans the Pentagon says will harm the Global Positioning System, consensus is growing around the idea of an independent review of the testing the Department had completed for interference. The dispute stems from the Federal Communications Commission's decision to approve Ligado's request to use L-Band spectrum, first reported by C4ISRNET April 10. Now the question is whether Pentagon tests showing that Ligado's plan would interfere with GPS signals vital to military, commercial and civilian technologies are still relevant, given mitigation plans from the company. A May 6 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the issue underlined a fundamental disconnect between the two sides over technical testing of Ligado's capabilities, a he-said-he-said situation where both sides claim the data shows the other is comprehensively wrong. That disconnect is an issue for Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., the chairman of the SASC and a vocal supporter of the Pentagon's position. “What I took away from our hearing last week was that the results of DoD's testing just don't match up with the testing the FCC relied on to make their decision; in fact, I'm concerned they were looking at different things,” Inhofe told C4ISRNET this week. “It seems to me the FCC didn't really give DOD's analysis — which was done in conjunction with eight other federal departments — fair consideration,” Inhofe continued. “While I trust the Pentagon's conclusions, I think we'll all sleep better at night if we have more independent testing done to verify just how Ligado's plan will affect our GPS signals.” While not saying who should do the verification, Inhofe's comments match up with calls from a trio of non-defense trade groups that in the last few days have specifically called for the National Academy of Sciences — a non-profit, non-governmental research institute that can play a role as a neutral arbiter — to take a fresh look at the data gathered by both the Pentagon and Ligado and weigh in. On May 8, Securing America's Future Energy and the Intelligent Transportation Society of America tweeted that NAS should specifically lead a new round of testing, while Dana Goward, president of the non-profit Resilient Navigation and Timing Foundation, also supported the idea in a May 11 op-ed for C4ISRNET. “Congress must select a technically competent and impartial entity such as the National Academy of Sciences to fill this role. This entity must review the work that has been done and conduct any further analysis needed to inform policy makers,” Goward wrote. “The technologies involved are mature. Testing methodologies are well established. This will not be an onerous task.” Pausing the FCC's decision while launching a review of the testing data would likely require approval from the Commerce committees. House Energy and Commerce Committee ranking member Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., suggested further work would be redundant. “We must ensure that this decision maintains our national and economic security, which is why this technology was tested, modified, and tested again, several times before the FCC reached its decision,” Walden said in a statement to C4ISRNET. The Pentagon, thus far, has been reluctant to agree to further technical testing, with Dana Deasy, the department's Chief Information Officers, shooting down the idea in a May 6 call with reporters. However, Defense leaders are now open to an independent review of existing test data, according to Lt. Col. Robert Carver, a department spokesman. He said in a statement the Pentagon would “support an impartial third party, one with demonstrated expertise in GPS testing, conducting a thorough examination of all data collected during the preceding decade of testing. “We emphasize any such examination must be conducted by a party with unquestioned capability, capacity and experience in this arena. We believe a painstaking examination of existing test data will confirm the results of all previous tests, including the limited tests funded by Ligado, that Ligado's proposal will result in interference to GPS even at the one-decibel level,” Carver said. “Any testing, or evaluation of prior testing, must address protection of the GPS service, the frequency band assigned to it, and all receivers intending to use that service." A Ligado spokesperson declined to comment. In the meantime, the department continues to push through the formal process to request the FCC change its mind. That would be a tough path forward for any vote that passed unanimously with five votes, as it would require three members of the commission to change their mind. It may be even more difficult given the comments from Deasy, Inhofe and others indicating the FCC purposefully kept DoD out of the loop as it was making its decision. In a statement after the hearing, an FCC spokesman blasted “all of the untrue statements” made by officials, called claims of unanimous opposition in the government “blatantly false,” and saying assertions that DoD was blindsided are “preposterous.” “The bottom line here is that the FCC made a unanimous, bipartisan decision based on sound engineering principles,” the spokesman said. “We stand by that decision 100% and will not be dissuaded by baseless fearmongering." Joe Gould in Washington contributed to this report https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/2020/05/13/support-growing-for-review-of-ligado-interference-information/

  • Hezbollah says it’s using new weapons in battles with Israeli troops

    November 12, 2023 | International, Land

    Hezbollah says it’s using new weapons in battles with Israeli troops

    The group has been sending unmanned surveillance and reconnaissance drones into northern Israel, some of which were shot down.

All news