17 juillet 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

The case for robust defense spending

By: Rep. Rob Wittman

President John Adams once wrote: “National defense is one of the cardinal duties of a Statesman.” These words are as true now as they were when they were written in 1815. However, unlike in 1815, the weight of these words seems lost on some in Congress.

As Congress moves forward with the National Defense Authorization Act and the passage of the defense appropriations bill, there are irresponsible calls for blanket cuts to defense spending that are either misguided or willfully ignorant of the role the U.S. military plays in maintaining global stability.

In a time where China continues its unprecedented aggressive actions, such as pushing into contested territory in India, attempting to subdue Hong Kong and continuing to antagonize partner nations in the South China Sea; where Russia advances its malign global state-building agenda through overt means while simultaneously using paramilitary mercenaries such as the Wagner Group to do the Kremlin's more insidious bidding; where Iran continues to terrorize the Middle East; and where North Korea remains a global nuclear threat, our response cannot be to cut our defense budget by nearly 50 percent, as suggested by some members of Congress.

Simply put, there is no shortage of global powers who wish to see the United States, our partners and allies falter and fail.

Ultimately, national defense is not just about protecting the homeland — it is about preventing conflicts from escalating, eliminating future threats and deterring those who have malicious intent toward the American people. Unfortunately, the world is not a benevolent place. The United States isn't fighting terrorism in Syria and Iraq for fun, we aren't protecting shipping lanes in the Pacific Ocean because we have nothing else to do, and we aren't working to bring the structural change needed to protect human rights against oppression across the African continent because of boredom. The United States military engages in these operations because no one else will, and we take up the mantle to bring stability to this dangerous world because we support peace and democratic institutions.

Bringing stability to the globe and protecting our homeland comes at a price — it requires strong, robust funding of the Department of Defense.

This does not mean to suggest there isn't waste, excess or duplicative programs within the Department of Defense. However, we are fortunate right now to have Pentagon leadership in Secretary Mark Esper and Deputy Secretary David Norquist who are tackling this problem head-on through their departmentwide review that has already yielded at least $5.7 billion to be reallocated for higher priorities. On top of this, every year the congressional Armed Services committees continue to work to refine, streamline and root out waste in the Pentagon through reformative NDAA provisions.

For example, I led the aircraft carrier block-buy contract that saved nearly $4 billion for the taxpayers, and I have a bill out right now to do multiyear procurement on amphibious ships that would save at least $1 billion. While these are just two examples, one can imagine the type of savings that are to be found if we continue to extrapolate these types of actions out to our defense acquisitions at large. Additionally, Congress must work with the department to examine the audit and eliminate and reduce functions that are redundant or deemed no longer mission-critical, which will save the taxpayers billions of dollars.

This is how Congress must address the defense budget — to make it streamlined and effective, and to find the mechanisms and authorities needed to make sure our dollar works harder than the yuan or the ruble. While this anti-defense spending rhetoric may play well for a certain form of politics, we must remember blanket cuts don't cut out the waste, it eliminates the programs that are easiest to cut, necessary training exercises, and emerging programs that are going to make the difference between life and death on the battlefield for our service members.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/07/16/the-case-for-robust-defense-spending/

Sur le même sujet

  • China could lose 95% of ballistic, cruise missiles under strategic arms control pact, says new analysis

    8 juin 2020 | International, Terrestre

    China could lose 95% of ballistic, cruise missiles under strategic arms control pact, says new analysis

    By: Mike Yeo MELBOURNE, Australia — China could stand to lose almost all of its ballistic and cruise missiles if it were to sign a new strategic arms control treaty, according to a new regional security assessment. The analysis, titled “The End of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty: Implications for Asia,” is one of the chapters of the annual Asia-Pacific regional security assessment published by the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank. IISS' report was released June 5 and covered regional security topics such as Sino-U.S. relations, North Korea and Japanese policy. China could lose 95 percent of its ballistic and cruise missile stockpile if it signs a treaty similar to the 1980s Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, according to the chapter's co-authors Douglas Barrie, a senior fellow focused on military air power; Michael Elleman, the director of the Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Policy Program; and Meia Nouwens, a research fellow focused on Chinese defense policy and military modernization. The treaty, signed between by the United States and the Soviet Union in 1987, banned all ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles systems with ranges between 310 and 3,420 miles (500-5,500 kilometres). The U.S. withdrew from the INF Treaty in August 2019, citing Russian violations of the agreement with its development and fielding of the 9M279 missile, although Russia denies that the missile violated range restrictions. However, the IISS report suggested the U.S. withdrawal was done with an eye toward China's missile arsenal, which has grown to what is believed to be the world's largest inventory of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles. IISS' own figures estimate China possesses more than 2,200 missiles that fall under the INF Treaty's restrictions. These short- and medium-range missiles are important assets in exerting pressure on Taiwan, which China sees as a rogue province and has vowed to reunite with the mainland, by force if necessary, although it continues to describe its fielding of ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles as solely for defensive purposes. Given these missiles provide China with what Barrie described as a “comparative advantage” in the region, it's unlikely the country would willingly sign a potential arms control treaty like the INF Treaty. The U.S, for its part, has already started testing missiles previously prohibited by the treaty, and there have been suggestions that the country might deploy such missiles to the Asia-Pacific region to address an imbalance in such weapons between itself and its rivals without solely relying on air- and sea-launched cruise missiles. (Those cruise missiles existed under the INF Treaty, as they did not violate the pact.) The report cautioned there is a two-fold risk in deploying such weapons to the Asia-Pacific. Chief among those: exacerbating Chinese concerns that the missiles will be positioned for use against it, increasing the potential for a response from China that could lead to an “action-reaction cycle of weapons development and deployment” and continued regional instability. The U.S. is also faced with the quandary of basing any potential INF-busting systems, with regional allies and partners unlikely to accede to locating such missiles on their territory, partly because of the diplomatic and economic reprisals Beijing could inflict on them. And there's precedent here: China targeted South Korea's economy in response to and expressed its distaste at the deployment of a U.S. missile defense system on South Korean soil in 2017. As for the U.S. territory of Guam, basing missiles there would limit their utility due to the distances involved. The IISS report also raised questions about whether U.S. moves to develop and deploy weapons previously prohibited by the INF Treaty will bring China to the arms control negotiating table. However, the think tank conceded that not deploying such weapons is also unlikely to persuade China, noting that that Beijing has shown little appetite for participating in any form of strategic and regional arms control. https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/06/05/china-could-lose-95-of-ballistic-cruise-missiles-under-strategic-arms-control-pact-says-new-analysis/

  • French Military Launches Development Of Future Joint Light Helicopter

    31 mai 2019 | International, Aérospatial

    French Military Launches Development Of Future Joint Light Helicopter

    Program Based On Airbus Helicopters H160 Brought Forward To 2021 The French Minister of the Armed Forces, Florence Parly, has announced that the launch of the Joint Light Helicopter (Hélicoptère Interarmées Léger; HIL) program has been brought forward to 2021. The HIL program, for which the Airbus Helicopters' H160 was selected in 2017, was initially scheduled for launch in 2022 by the current military budget law. Launching the program earlier will enable delivery of the first H160Ms to the French Armed Forces to be advanced to 2026. During a visit to the Airbus Helicopters headquarters, the Minister also revealed the full-scale mock-up of the H160M that will be presented on the Ministry of the Armed Forces stand at the next Paris Air Show. The helicopter was also given its official name and will be designated as “Guépard” (“Cheetah”) by the French Armed Forces. The H160 was designed to be a modular helicopter, enabling its military version, with a single platform, to perform missions ranging from commando infiltration to air intercept, fire support, and anti-ship warfare in order to meet the needs of the army, the navy and the air force through the HIL program. “We are proud that the HIL is considered a strategic program. I would like to thank the Ministry, the French Defence Procurement Agency DGA and the armed forces for their trust and for the close collaboration which helped create the conditions for the program to be brought forward within the framework of the current military budget law. This will make it possible to speed up the replacement of the older generation of aircraft, while optimising the support and availability of the French State's helicopter fleet,” said Bruno Even, CEO of Airbus Helicopters. “Our teams are committed to delivering an aircraft in 2026 that meets the needs of the French armed forces in terms of availability, performance and capability, thus enabling it to rapidly become the new benchmark on the world's medium-lift military helicopter market.” Built around a platform that will enter service next year, the HIL program will benefit from many of the advantages inherent in the civil H160, particularly in terms of support, with simplified maintenance and lower operating costs than the previous generation of helicopters in this category. http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=5c30e0d6-3111-42dc-a6fa-63252c17dd58

  • US Marines get new cyber boss

    9 juillet 2021 | International, Naval, C4ISR, Sécurité

    US Marines get new cyber boss

    The new leader also commands the Marine Corps Forces Space Command.

Toutes les nouvelles