Back to news

April 27, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

Six ways the US can maximize its strategic benefit from defense spending

By: Thomas G. Mahnken

The massive price tag associated with the response to the new coronavirus, COVID-19, coupled with the inevitable impact of the pandemic on the U.S. economy, threatens to blow a hole in the defense budget at a time when the challenges posed by China, Russia, Iran and North Korea show no signs of abating. Leaders in both the executive and legislative branches will need to make tough strategic choices to keep the United States strong in these challenging times.

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, his predecessor Jim Mattis and the bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission all agree that annual increases in the defense budget on the order of 3-5 percent are required to implement the 2018 National Defense Strategy. Even absent the pandemic, the chances of getting such resources seemed uncertain at best. The Trump administration's own budget projections show the defense budget in the coming years as flat or declining. Now, a flat budget more and more appears to be the rosiest scenario.

More worrisome, and increasingly likely, is the possibility of major cuts to the defense budget. Indeed, cuts on the order of 20-25 percent are not unthinkable. Merely pointing out that such a move would jeopardize U.S. security is unlikely to prevent it. Similarly, noting — correctly — that defense spending is one of the most stimulative forms of federal spending may prove insufficient to forestall cuts.

How can the United States realize the greatest economic and military benefit from the defense budget in the coming years? Below are a half-dozen guidelines to help the United States get the maximum strategic benefit from defense spending in this challenging time:

1. Keep production lines going.

Now is not the time to be cutting back on defense production. To the contrary, keeping existing weapons production lines active makes both military and economic sense. The U.S. military is in many ways still living off the Reagan-era defense buildup of the 1980s and is sorely in need of modernization.

Keeping defense production going also makes good economic sense. In a period of rising unemployment, employing as many Americans as possible will help the United States weather the economic storm brought on by COVID-19. The government should also be flexible in administering the cost and schedule of contracts, given the pandemic's impact on the defense-industrial base.

2. Stock up.

Now is also the time to increase orders of things we know that we need but have not purchased enough of, such as munitions. As the NDS Commission found in 2018, the United States has under-invested in precision munitions such as the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile-Extended Range and Long Range Anti-Ship Missile. Ramping up production of munitions and other expendables will not only boost employment but also help the United States better prepare for a future conflict where such munitions will be in high demand.

3. Be selective in divesting.

The United States should also divest itself of aging capabilities but be thoughtful in doing so. It makes sense to retire old ships and aircraft because the cost of maintaining those systems goes up considerably as they age. It makes much less sense to divest relatively new systems that have plenty of life left in them. For example, the Air Force has proposed shutting down production of the MQ-9 Reaper and retiring more than two-thirds of its RQ-4 Global Hawk fleet.

4. Get the most out of what we have.

Whereas economic conditions may have changed, the external threats that we face have not. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop new ways of war, particularly those that use more effective capabilities that we have. For example, as I have argued elsewhere, non-stealthy unmanned aerial systems such as the MQ-9 and RQ-4 offer a cost-effective way to deter opportunistic aggression by China in the Western Pacific or Russia in Eastern Europe.

5. Keep promoting innovation.

A downturn in the defense budget should not become an excuse for conservatism. To the contrary, it should spur innovation. For example, fiscal austerity provides an opportunity to reform the military health care system and downsize basing infrastructure. Now is also the time to explore ways to make military training more effective and cost-efficient through the adoption of approaches such as live, virtual, constructive training. There are also opportunities to realize savings through greater outsourcing of maintenance and logistics.

Whereas the defense primes employ the most workers, in a number of cases smaller companies have been the source of some of the most innovative approaches to defense in areas such as unmanned systems, expendable aircraft, space innovations, networked solutions and cyber. Supporting smaller, innovative companies should thus be a priority.

The Defense Department and Congress should also take an active role in supporting key segments of the defense-industrial base. Areas such as hypersonics, directed energy and unmanned systems that hold the key to effectiveness tomorrow will need support today.

6. Share costs.

Finally, the United States should take every opportunity to promote arms exports, which both create jobs and increase the security of our allies. Much more should be done to increase the speed and predictability of the arms export process. In addition, with few exceptions, U.S. weapons should be developed with export in mind. We should avoid a repetition of the case of the F-22 aircraft, which was designed from birth never to be exported.

We need to learn from the past in developing the next generation of weapons. For example, in recent months, Australian defense analysts have discussed the attractiveness of the B-21 Raider stealth bomber for Australia's defense needs. Export of the B-21 to a close ally such as Australia, should Canberra so desire, should be given serious consideration.

The current situation is challenging, with even more difficult times to come. If we are smart, however, we can both keep Americans at work and get what we need for national defense.

Thomas G. Mahnken is president and CEO of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments think tank. He is also a senior research professor at the Philip Merrill Center for Strategic Studies at Johns Hopkins' School of Advanced International Studies.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/24/six-ways-the-us-can-maximize-its-strategic-benefit-from-defense-spending/

On the same subject

  • US Navy inks $9.4B contract for two Columbia-class nuclear missile submarines

    November 6, 2020 | International, Naval

    US Navy inks $9.4B contract for two Columbia-class nuclear missile submarines

    By: David B. Larter WASHINGTON — The U.S. Navy announced Thursday it had inked a $9.47 billion contract with builder General Dynamics Electric Boat for the full construction cost of the lead boat of the Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine, as well as advanced procurement money for the second boat, the future USS Wisconsin. The announcement marks the end of the beginning for the Columbia class, which the Navy has for years said is its top priority. The 12-ship class will replace the retiring Ohio-class submarines. The Columbia is slated to make its first patrol in 2031, and the Navy says it must meet the timeline to maintain continuous sea-based deterrent patrols. The contract also covers continued component testing and engineering, according to the DoD contract announcement. “The contract modification exercises an option for construction and test of the lead and second ships of the Columbia class SSBN 826 and SSBN 827, as well as associated design and engineering support,” the contract reads. From here on out, the program is about getting things in order to prepare for full production in the second half of the 2020s, when the Navy plans to buy one per year, the service's top acquisition official told reporters Thursday. “Now it's really about execution,” said James Geurts, the Navy's head of research, development and acquisition. "It's making sure that now, with the contract in place, transitioning into full construction. ... “The design, maturity of this program surpasses any other submarine we have ever done. We've got a solid design. Now it's moving to design refinement to design complete, and advanced construction into full construction for the first ship. And then not taking our eye off the ball of the fact that we will quickly move into, by the third, annual construction.” Getting the first ship right will be key, Geurts continued. “There's a whole lot of effort to get the first ship out, and get the first ship out right,” he said. “That's necessary, but not sufficient. We've got to make sure the enterprise is ready to execute the full scope of the program so that we can meet the requirements for the nation.” The second hull is fully priced into the contract, Navy officials said on the call, meaning that when the Navy wants to exercise the option planned for 2024, it will not have to renegotiate for the cost of full construction. The Columbia program is a massively expensive undertaking, with the Navy estimating it will run about $7.5 billion per hull over the class. By 2026, when the Navy will be buying one Columbia per year, considering the FY21′s roughly $20 billion shipbuilding request as a guide, Columbia would eat up to 38 percent of the Navy's shipbuilding money at a time when DoD believes the Navy needs to expand the fleet to meet a rising Chinese naval threat. In January, the cost of Columbia drew a blunt assessment from Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Michael Gilday, who said if the Navy is going to expand, it needs more cash. “Here's the deal, we need more money,” Gilday said. "We need more top line. “If you believe that we require overmatch in the maritime domain, if you believe that in order to execute distributed maritime operations and to operate forward in numbers now that we need more iron, then, yes, we need more top line.” Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., who represents the district where GDEB is located, said the contract was a victory for the submarine industrial base, which has been under enormous strain as the Navy ramps up to building two Virginia-class submarines per year and the Columbia class. “This isn't just a milestone for the shipbuilders at EB — the Columbia-class program will also be a major opportunity for industry partners up and down the supply chain for years to come, and a foundational piece for our region's economic future,” Courtney said. "Generations of shipbuilders and manufacturers will get their start working on this multi-decade program, and it's an exciting time to get more people into the pipeline for the jobs and opportunities that will come with the start of this effort.: https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/11/05/navy-inks-contract-for-two-columbia-class-nuclear-missile-submarines

  • Avion de combat européen: "Il faut qu'on y arrive et on va y arriver" selon le patron d'Airbus

    May 6, 2022 | International, Aerospace

    Avion de combat européen: "Il faut qu'on y arrive et on va y arriver" selon le patron d'Airbus

    Invité de BFM Business, le directeur général d'Airbus a assuré que l'Europe avait besoin de développer son avion de combat "pour être compétitive sur le long terme".

  • Crude ground robots emerge on the battlefields of Ukraine, experts say

    December 17, 2023 | International, Land

    Crude ground robots emerge on the battlefields of Ukraine, experts say

    With drones and artillery pouncing on any troop movements along the front lines, unmanned ground vehicles are starting to fill a logistics gap.

All news