Retour aux nouvelles

27 mai 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

Will defense budgets remain ‘sticky’ after the COVID-19 pandemic?

By: Eric Lofgren

Congress' unprecedented fiscal response to COVID-19 has many in the defense community wondering whether belt tightening will hit the Pentagon. On May 19, the Congressional Progressive Caucus wrote a letter arguing for substantial defense budget cuts to support additional spending on the pandemic. Nonprofit progressive supporters have been asking to cut a much larger $350 billion each year from the Pentagon in their “Moral Budget” proposal. What the progressives perhaps do not fully appreciate is the “stickiness” of defense budgets.

In economics, stickiness refers to rigidity in the movement of wages and prices despite broader economic shifts pushing for new equilibrium. The phenomenon is apparent in defense budgets as well. Most expectations are that the fiscal 2021 budget will remain over $700 billion.

Consider an analogy: the 2008 financial crisis. Lehman Brothers collapsed just a couple weeks before fiscal year 2009 started, leaving that $666 billion defense budget largely beyond recall. The following years' budgets were $691 billion, $687 billion, $646 billion and then finally in FY13 a more precipitous 10 percent fall to $578 billion. It took four years for the Pentagon to really feel the squeeze of the financial downturn.

The uninitiated may believe COVID-19 happened with enough of lead time to affect the FY21 budget. Congress received the president's budget in February 2020 and has until the start of October to make targeted cuts without encountering another continuing resolution.

The defense budget, however, represents the culmination of a multiyear process balancing thousands of stakeholder interests. It reflects a vast amount of information processed at every level of the military enterprise.

The Pentagon's work on the FY21 budget request started nearly two years ahead of time and includes a register of funding estimates out to FY25. Moreover, defense programs are devised and approved based on life-cycle cost and schedule estimates. Cuts to a thorough plan may flip the analysis of alternatives on its head, recommending pivots to new systems or architectures and upsetting contract performance.

Not only are current budgets shaped by many years of planning, but they get detailed to an almost microscopic level. For example, the Army's FY21 research, development, test and evaluation request totaled $12.8 billion, less than 2 percent of the overall Pentagon request. Yet the appropriation identifies 267 program elements decomposing into a staggering 2,883 budget program activity codes averaging less than $10 million each.

Congressional staff is too small to understand the implications of many cost, schedule and technical trade-offs. To gather information on impacts, the Pentagon is thrown into a frenzy of fire drills. More draconian measures, like the FY13 sequestration, leading to indiscriminate, across-the-board cuts can sidestep hard questions but comes at a significant cost to efficiency.

Targeted cuts at a strategic level, such as to the nuclear recapitalization programs and other big-ticket items, can expect stiff resistance. First, there is real concern about great power competition and the damage that may be wrought by acting on short-term impulses.

Second, targeted programs and their contractors will immediately report the estimated number of job losses by district. Before measures can get passed, a coalition of congressional members negatively impacted may oppose the cuts. Resistance is intensified considering the proximity to Election Day. Budget stickiness is built into the political process.

The FY22 budget is perhaps the first Pentagon budget that can start inching downward. More than likely, severe cuts aren't in the offing until FY23 or FY24 at the very earliest. That gives time for policymakers to reflect on the scale of the rebalancing between defense and other priorities.

In some important ways, congressional control of the Pentagon through many thousands of budget line items restricts its own flexibility. For example, continuing resolutions lock in program funding to the previous year's level until political disagreements can be resolved. The military cannot stick to its own plans, much less start new things. If budget lines were detailed at a higher level, such as by major organization or capability area, then the Pentagon could make more trade-offs while Congress debates.

Similarly, if the Pentagon had more budget flexibility, then Congress could more easily cut top lines and allow Pentagon leaders to figure out how to maximize with the constraint during the year of execution. Congress could gain the option to defer the hard questions that can make cuts politically difficult.

The Space Force recently released a proposal for consolidating budget line items into higher-level capability areas. It reflects the idea that portfolio-centric management is an efficient method of handling rapid changes in technologies, requirements or financial guidance resulting from economic shocks. Until such reforms are pursued, expect defense budgets to remain sticky.

Eric Lofgren is a research fellow at the Center for Government Contracting at George Mason University. He manages a blog and podcast on weapon systems acquisition. He previously served as a senior analyst at Technomics Inc., supporting the U.S. Defense Department's Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/05/26/will-defense-budgets-remain-sticky-after-the-covid-19-pandemic/

Sur le même sujet

  • How the Marines want to provide information on demand

    25 septembre 2020 | International, C4ISR

    How the Marines want to provide information on demand

    Mark Pomerleau The Marine Corps wants to provide information on demand. However, sensing, harnessing and acting upon the vast amounts of data produced daily is an enormous challenge and now the Corps is turning to its 2019 blueprint for the information environment. “If you were building a house, you would never just hire plumbers, framers, roofers and say build me a house,” Jennifer Edgin, Assistant Deputy Commandant for Information, said Sept. 22 during a virtual panel as part of Modern Day Marine. Rather, she noted, most would start with the design of the house and how things connect. “That's how we began with our journey in the Marine Corps Information Environment Enterprise, by publishing a blueprint. That outlined our future state vision, our case for change and the major muscle movements that we were tackling with that,” she said. Published in March 2019 and classified as “controlled unclassified information,” the blueprint is a unified technical, physical and business model that documents the design of the Marine Corps Information Environment, Edgin told C4ISRNET in written responses to questions. It connects users with data to support a mission and codifies the policies, standards, services, infrastructure, technical design and architectural elements required to deliver capabilities to Marines. Extremely technical in nature, the blueprint is meant to guide the development and employment of capabilities needed and provides acquisition officers guidance and constraints while also conveying a common language. The first iteration covers five key areas to include digital transformation, governance, transitioning to the cloud, standardization and information dominance. “The future state of warfare requires the Marine Corps to think differently, encourage innovation, and embrace new business models for change that focus on enhancing the access, capabilities, and user experience throughout the Information Environment,” Edgin said. “This blueprint unites and aligns efforts to digitally equip Marines for the future ... The benefit of the blueprint is that it articulates information that cannot easily be visualized. For example, it is very easy to see physical assets like trucks or planes however, it is difficult to articulate information technology assets and visualize how they are employed.” Edgin noted yesterday that the Marine Corps Enterprise Network modernization plan followed the blueprint, taking the blueprint and breaking it down into action plans. Taken together, both documents are meant to guide a transformation the office of the Deputy Commandant for Information is seeking to realize, one that provides secure information on demand leveraging technologies such as cloud computing, resilient mesh networks and emerging technology such as machine learning. “Information doesn't have a geographic boundary,” she said, “you're seeing more of that cross functional team, cross functional approaches where we can really harness all of the best and brightest of authorities and ideas so that we can provide that information on demand.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/it-networks/2020/09/24/how-the-marines-want-to-provide-information-on-demand/

  • Forces spéciales : l’innovation au centre de leur réussite

    23 avril 2019 | International, Terrestre

    Forces spéciales : l’innovation au centre de leur réussite

    De nos jours, les forces spéciales (FS) font face à un ennemi toujours plus insaisissable et plus rapide, doté de capacités tactiques et technologiques de plus en plus sophistiquées. Riches d'un retour d'expérience (RETEX) innovant et d'une réelle connaissance du terrain, les unités FS contrent cette tendance en s'inscrivant dans une démarche de recherche et d'innovation au profit de leurs unités et de l'armée de Terre. Les forces spéciales font face à un environnement changeant dans lequel l'ennemi non étatique est pourvu de capacités opérationnelles modernes comme les matériels de vision nocturne, les drones ou encore les missiles antichars. Pour répondre à ces mutations, le commandement des forces spéciales Terre (CFST)développe et améliore constamment ses capacités opérationnelles pour disposer d'une longueur d'avance sur ses ennemis. Comme l'explique le commandant Xavier, chef du bureau étude et prospective du CFST : « Pour le CFST, l'enjeu est de conserver le juste niveau d'asymétrie technologique qui contribue à la supériorité opérationnelle des détachements opérant sous le contrôle opérationnel du commandement des opérations spéciales ». Des combattants impliqués Ainsi, le retour d'expérience (RETEX) des combattants des forces spéciales éclaire le CFST sur la réalité des engagements et la nature de la menace. Débriefer la mission est une seconde nature des FS. La particularité au sein des unités FS, c'est que la boucle est très courte. En effet, le soldat va pouvoir rapporter son RETEX directement à son chef de corps, qui traitera à son tour directement avec les différents organismes internes et les industriels. Il permet de tirer leçon des engagements opérationnels pour y apporter une réponse adéquate. Les soldats FS peuvent aussi inscrire leurs idées dans le cadre des missions pour l'innovation participative (MIP). Organisée par le ministère de la Défense, ces MIP permettent de favoriser l'émission d'idées de la part du personnel, puis de favoriser la diffusion et le déploiement opérationnel des innovations qui en résultent. En 1991, Un colonel du 1er régiment parachutiste d'infanterie de marine (1er RPIMa) de Bayonne a réalisé le projet d'un véhicule léger, d'une masse à vide inférieure à 1,2 tonne, permettant d'améliorer les capacités d'investigation et d'intervention ponctuelle d'équipes spécialisées du 1er RPIMa. D'une autonomie de 1 000 km en terrain varié, sommairement protégé, le véhicule dispose d'un équipage de trois hommes en mesure de se servir d'armes lourdes d'infanterie et antichar. En 1996, dans le même régiment, un officier supérieur a créé un système d'architecture modulaire portable permettant l'acquisition, le traitement et la transmission en temps réel d'images pour le renseignement, du thé'tre d'opérations vers la métropole. Une organisation favorable à l'innovation A son niveau, le CFST doit fait face à un cadre normatif très contraignant. Entre les modalités d'attribution de matériels et leur mise en service, les règles et les clauses entre les entités publiques et privées, le CFST doit s'adapter pour impacter le moins possible la durée d'acquisition de matériels. De plus, le cycle d'innovation habituel (au sein des unités conventionnelles) est extrêmement long et non adapté aux besoins souvent urgents des FS. Le CFST cherche donc à le réduire au maximum. « A ce jour, nous avons réussi à ramener la durée du cycle d'innovation à 6 ans contre 15 à 20 ans pour les unités conventionnelles » explique le commandant Xavier. De plus, le CFST est doté d'un bureau études équipements et prospectives (BEP) ayant pour responsabilité principale, le développement capacitaire des forces spéciales Terre. C'est une structure vouée à l'innovation. Spécifique au FS, le BEP est décliné dans chaque unité, puis au niveau supérieur au sein du CFST qui prend ensuite contact avec le niveau décisionnaire : l'état-major de l'armée de Terre. Gr'ce à cette organisation, le BEP recueille le RETEX directement en régiment et s'attache à appréhender de manière globale la somme des faits et événements qui lui sont rapportés. En terme de prospective, il étudie les évolutions prévisibles des adversaires et les technologies susceptibles d'asseoir la supériorité opérationnelle de nos armées ou au contraire de la remettre en question. Il évalue ensuite les options de réponse et propose le développement d'une nouvelle capacité ou l'évaluation d'un équipement en vue de son acquisition. Fortes de leur volonté d'innovation, les forces spéciales jouent un rôle essentiel dans la supériorité capacitaire de l'armée de Terre. « Actuellement, nous nous intéressons aux nouvelles solutions de mobilité, aux capacités offertes par les drones, l'impression 3D, la gestion de l'information et de l'énergie » conclut le commandant Xavier. L'ensemble de ces démarches ne se limite pas à adapter seulement les capacités opérationnelles des FS, il sert ainsi l'ensemble des forces de l'armée de Terre. https://www.defense.gouv.fr/terre/actu-terre/forces-speciales-l-innovation-au-centre-de-leur-reussite

  • Aerojet Rocketdyne reprimands chairman over attempt to oust CEO

    20 mai 2022 | International, Aérospatial

    Aerojet Rocketdyne reprimands chairman over attempt to oust CEO

    The conflict between Aerojet's chief executive and executive chairman became increasingly rancorous as 2021 proceeded with the Lockheed acquisition stuck in limbo.

Toutes les nouvelles