11 juin 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

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/

Sur le même sujet

  • Despite progress, industry faces ‘very tough roadmap’ to field FCAS by 2040

    10 décembre 2020 | International, Aérospatial

    Despite progress, industry faces ‘very tough roadmap’ to field FCAS by 2040

    By: Vivienne Machi   STUTTGART, Germany — After the decade that has been the year 2020, it may seem like 2040 is centuries away. But for Airbus, the scheduled in-service date for Europe's next-generation combat aircraft and weapon system feels just around the corner. The Future Combat Air System (FCAS) industry partners have made significant progress on the pan-European, multi-system effort despite the hurdles of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, Airbus, along with its co-contractors Dassault Aviation and Indra, face a “very tough roadmap” to finalize system designs, begin preliminary development, launch production, and get the systems into service, said Bruno Fichefeux, FCAS leader for Airbus, during the company's annual trade media briefing Dec. 9. The 18-month Joint Concept Study and Phase 1A of the demonstrator portion are progressing well, but the companies need to move quickly to reach key technology maturation phases, he said. “This is a major de-risking and speeding approach towards the future development program, to ensure that we are on time on expectation.” France, Germany and Spain have teamed up on the FCAS program, which includes seven next-generation technology pillars: a sixth-generation fighter jet, multiple “remote carrier” drones, a next-generation weapon system, a brand new jet engine, advanced sensors and stealth technologies, and an “air combat cloud.” In September, the nations' three air forces worked together to down-select the five preferred architectures that will help inform the program's follow-on phases, Fichefeux said at the virtual briefing. The goal for 2021 is for FCAS to enter the preliminary demonstrator development phase for the next-generation fighter and the remote carrier aircraft. Those contracts are currently in negotiations, he noted. Starting in 2021, the FCAS will go from spending a “few million” euros to “billions,” he added. “It's a massive step forward [that] we want to initiate next year.” Observers can expect to see some major design choices after those negotiations are complete; for example, whether the next-generation fighter will have one or two seats, Fichefeux said. Airbus' unmanned aerial systems team has moved forward with efforts related to the remote carrier and manned-unmanned teaming technologies. Jana Rosenmann, the company's UAS leader, said at the briefing that her team had submitted their proposal for Phase 1B of the FCAS demonstrator portion that is scheduled to begin next year. The team is studying two remote carrier designs. “We are looking at both a smaller, expendable remote carrier, as well as a larger, conventional-sized remote carrier, looking in the direction of a loyal wingman to fly together with the combat aircraft,” Rosenmann said. Airbus is the lead contractor for the remote carrier pillar. The program has some new partners on board, Fichefeux shared Wednesday. In April, Airbus teamed up with the German Ministry of Defence for an eight-month pilot program bringing non-traditional startups and research institutes into the FCAS fold. Eighteen organizations worked on 14 separate program elements, spanning the entire range of technology pillars. Those efforts have led to concrete results, to include a first flight-test-approved launcher of an unmanned aerial system from a transport aircraft; a secure combat cloud demonstrator; and a demonstrator of applied artificial intelligence on radio frequency analysis. These 18 partners could be picked up for subcontracts later on in the program, Fichefeux noted. The plan is to “mature these pilots step by step, and then it could develop into real contracting participation within the FCAS development,” he said. “There is a perspective to bring them on board at a later stage.” Meanwhile, Airbus also announced Wednesday that its Spanish subsidiary was selected as lead contractor for the low-observability pillar of the program. Airbus Spain will also lead Madrid's contribution to the next-generation fighter pillar. Indra serves as national lead for the entire program since Spain joined FCAS in early 2020, and also heads the sensor pillar while contributing to the combat cloud and simulations efforts. The finalization of the low-observability contract “completes Spain's onboarding as an equal nation across all FCAS activities,” Airbus said in a release. “The signature closes a ten-month process of onboarding Spain as the third nation.” The program will begin testing low-observability technologies early in the demonstrator phase, Fichefeux confirmed. Both the fighter aircraft demonstrator and the remote carrier will have stealth capabilities when they begin flight tests, which are expected as early as 2026. Then the team will need to work on issues such as how to factor in the future engine's heat signature, and how to integrate sensors and antennae, Fichefeux said. Low-observability “is part of almost all pillars, and the aim of this maturation is to prove” what works and what won't work, he noted. Along with a personal deadline, the FCAS program may also face schedule pressure from Europe's second sixth-generation fighter program. The United Kingdom, Italy and Sweden have teamed up on the Tempest program, with a current goal of delivering new fighter aircraft to the nations' militaries by 2035. When asked whether the two fighter programs may converge at some point, Fichefeux noted that that would ultimately be a government decision. “That is our responsibility, on the industry side, is just not to lose time waiting,” he said. “If the governments want to define a path of convergence, we will support it in due time.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/12/09/despite-progress-industry-faces-very-tough-roadmap-to-field-fcas-by-2040/

  • Joint ODNI, FBI, and CISA Statement | CISA

    5 novembre 2024 | International, C4ISR, Sécurité

    Joint ODNI, FBI, and CISA Statement | CISA

  • Canadian govt organization to market Bombardier surveillance plane for export despite rejection by Canadian military

    26 novembre 2023 | International, Aérospatial

    Canadian govt organization to market Bombardier surveillance plane for export despite rejection by Canadian military

    Export markets considered for Bombardier multi-mission plane

Toutes les nouvelles