June 11, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

We prepared for war, but should have spent our money elsewhere

By: Laicie Heeley

As the host of a national security podcast literally named “Things That Go Boom,” I spend a lot of my time thinking about what keeps us safe. And usually these thoughts are pretty focused on big, obvious threats — things like bombs. But with the world seemingly imploding, a global pandemic spreading, nationwide protests against police brutality erupting and world economies tanking, it's clearer than ever that we've been preparing for the wrong crisis. You could say we were preparing for World War III, when we got hammered by World War C.

Staying safe means recognizing what threats we're facing — the ones we're expecting and the ones that might catch us off guard. But we didn't do that. Instead we invested hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons and wars while the coronavirus slipped silently and invisibly across our borders, into our homes and even onto our military aircraft carriers.

The greatest threats of the past decade have come in the form of a deadly virus, climate-related natural disasters, economic meltdowns, and attacks on free and fair elections. So why are expensive weapons systems and massive military installations still a foregone conclusion?

America spends over $700 billion a year on our national defense. That's about a sixth of our overall budget and more than health care, education and all the rest of our discretionary spending combined. And the money is solid, meaning that most of the time, it's not subject to normal swings in the economy. Things are bad? We can't let the military feel the pain. Things are good? The military has to prepare for the next big threat. Bad or good, it's always a great time to invest. You can't put a price tag on security, they say. And they don't.

According to the Watson Institute's Costs of War Project, America's war on terror — which now spans more than 80 countries — has cost taxpayers over $6 trillion since 2001, with no signs of slowing down.

And in its latest budget proposal, the Trump administration proposed spending $20 billion more on military programs than on all other federal programs combined.

Conversely, in 2018, the Trump administration cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's budget by 80 percent, forcing it to scale back its efforts to prevent epidemics in 39 of 49 countries, including China. These and other major cuts to global health spending left the U.S. unprepared for the crisis we're facing now.

As vital American businesses — from my son's preschool to our friends' farm — struggle to survive, the defense industry has unsurprisingly had no such problem. In late April, for example, some contractors received a windfall of business when the State Department approved over $2 billion in weapons sales to repressive regimes like India, Morocco and the Philippines, with more supposedly on the way. The defense industry is doing so well in fact that it is showing up on investment lists as an example of one of the best places to “hedge in hard times.”

Despite their already deep financial pockets, Congress decided to give these huge contractors billions of dollars in coronavirus relief funds. This comes as a bit of a surprise when you consider that the Pentagon just recently diverted $13.3 billion in unused funds for the construction of the president's border wall. And the first-ever audit of the Department of Defense revealed that it failed to spend almost $28 billion from 2013-2018, all the while asking for more funding.

Unfortunately, experts believe this money, which is supposed to be used to help keep workers safe and employed, will instead only help make the companies' executives richer. We're already seeing this play out. Deemed “essential workers” due to the pending arms sales, workers in these manufacturing plants recently went on strike after they were forced to go to work even as a number of their colleagues tested positive for coronavirus.

Flush with additional resources from a growing military budget, and as other departments' budgets have been cut, the Pentagon has also become deeply embedded in domestic affairs. Last year, Defense Secretary Mark Esper went so far as to proclaim election security a core part of the Pentagon's mission, despite the hesitance of past officials to allow such forms of military creep. The separation of the civilian and the military is one of the hallmarks of our democracy. The breakdown of these norms isn't good for our country, and it isn't good for the Pentagon, which has already sounded the alarm on what the military can — and cannot — do to deal with the pandemic.

What's more, the migration of funds to the Pentagon saps other agencies of vital and limited resources. By many accounts, it also makes us worse at winning wars, as the Pentagon foregoes more focused and essential strategic planning in favor of a do-it-all, buy-it-all reality. Consider that some estimates put the annual cost of eradicating homelessness in the United States at about $20 billion, and the cost of eradicating hunger in America at about $26 billion. And consider, in the midst of an outbreak, that we could buy 2,200 ventilators for the price of one F-35.

It doesn't have to be this way. While some may see the Pentagon budget as a sacred cow, it's not. Reconsidering our spending to invest more heavily in the programs that really keep us safe is not only possible, but long overdue.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/06/10/we-prepared-for-war-but-should-have-spent-our-money-elsewhere/

On the same subject

July 24, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

$21B for defense reportedly included in COVID aid proposal
By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The White House and Senate Republicans are nearing an agreement on a $1 trillion-plus economic rescue proposal that would also seek $21 billion for defense, according to a draft obtained by the New York Times on Thursday. The emerging GOP proposal would include $11 billion in payments to contractors under the Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act, which allowed firms serving the federal government to seek reimbursement for pandemic-related expenses. However, amid reports of internal divisions―over the defense money and other aspects―Republicans delayed the rollout to at least next week. Defense trade associations, along with dozens of industry executives, have conducted a vocal lobbying effort across government to secure the money as they grapple with the economic damage wrought by the coronavirus pandemic. It was unclear from the draft document — essentially a list of priorities and amounts — what the remainder of the defense funding would be for. The line item in the draft read only: “$20 billion — Defense total ($11 billion of which is for 3610 payments to contractors.” The funding follows $10.5 billion the Pentagon previously received under the CARES Act. The emerging proposal would include another round of stimulus payments to individuals, additional aid to small businesses and a partial extension of enhanced unemployment benefits, according to a summary circulating on Capitol Hill that was obtained by the New York Times. The defense portion would be a boon to the Pentagon and its suppliers, but it's by no means a done deal. The White House and Senate Republicans, which took months to draft the proposal, faced more delays this week over internal disagreements ― as well as coming negotiations with Democrats, who have sought as much as $3.5 trillion for coronavirus relief. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, told reporters that staff are working to finalize text of the agreement, which was expected to be released as a group of bills instead of one piece of legislation. Underscoring the difficulties, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Thursday rejected the GOP's “piecemeal” approach, saying the proposal fell “very short.” It omits Democratic priorities like food assistance, aid to prevent evictions, hazard pay for essential workers, and aid to states and communities, they said. Since officials with the Department of Defense have called for defense reimbursements in the low double-digit billions, warning that they would otherwise have to raid modernization and readiness accounts for the funding, some analysts have predicted Congress would address the need. “We expect the Senate's version of the next COVID-19 relief package to include money for Section 3610 impacts and related cost impacts,” Roman Schweizer of the Cowen Group wrote Thursday in a note to investors. “We think this money will be small compared to the total cost of the bill (~$1T+) and will be included in the final bill. This will be positive for defense [firms] and allow DoD to protect investment accounts. We expect a lengthy, complicated process for cost recovery.” In a Senate floor speech earlier in the week, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe said Congress ought to follow through on Section 3610 with appropriations, or risk delays and cost overruns in weapons programs as well as attrition in the defense industry's workforce. “Defense industrial companies have done a great job in ensuring that their suppliers — primarily thousands of small businesses — stay open and keep their employees paid,” said Inhofe, R-Okla. “In the CARES Act, we gave DoD the authority and the tools to reimburse these companies to keep the defense workforce strong. But the DoD needs money to use these tools.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/07/23/21b-for-defense-in-draft-covid-aid-proposal-report/
March 18, 2022 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

L’Italie va porter son budget militaire à 2% du PIB
L'Italie a décidé d'augmenter ses dépenses militaires, afin d'accorder 2% du PIB à sa défense, comme prévu par l'OTAN. Mercredi 16 mars, la Chambre des députés a approuvé un ordre du jour qui engage le gouvernement à poursuivre l'effort destiné à moderniser et à mieux équiper les armées, autorisant une hausse des dépenses d'environ 15 Mds€ par an. L'Opinion du 18 mars
March 26, 2019 | International, Aerospace

F-35: What The Pilots Say
by Linda Shiner In my interviews with F-35 pilots, one word repeatedly came up: “survivability.” Surviving the Lockheed Martin F-35's primary mission—to penetrate sophisticated enemy air defenses and find and disable threats—requires what the fifth-generation jet offers: stealth and a stunning array of passive and active sensors bringing information to the pilot. The F-35 can see trouble coming—ahead, behind, or below the aircraft—far enough in advance to avoid a threat or kill it. Faced with multiple threats, the sensor suite recommends the order in which they should be dispatched. U.S. forces first took these capabilities into combat last September, when Marine F-35Bs struck the Taliban in Afghanistan (five months after its combat debut with the Israeli air force). More than 360 of the multi-service aircraft—Air Force F-35As, Marine short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing Bs, and carrier-capable Cs—have been delivered to 16 U.S. airbases and to seven other countries. Reaching these milestones has not been easy. The program's difficulties and its cost—$406 billion for development and acquisition—have been widely reported. But now the F-35 is in the hands of the best judges of its performance, its pilots. I asked eight of them—test pilots who contributed to the jet's development as well as active-duty pilots—about their experiences. Here, in their own words, are their answers. Full article: https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-most-critical-test-180971734/

All news