In Support of a U.S. Defense Department

This is a guest contribution from H.A. The author is using a pseudonym for professional reasons.

Most Americans probably assume (if they consider it at all) that the hundreds of billions of dollars the Department of Defense spends each year goes toward the defense of the United States. To some extent, that’s true. Tellingly, however, the Obama administration’s new defense strategy is entitled “Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership.” That’s because the Pentagon’s focus is not on defending the United States but on defending other countries. It’s a strategy based on the idea that only U.S. deterrence, achieved through military presence, . . .
read more

CNAS Gets in on the Defense Cut Circuit

Someone remarked on Twitter recently that when the ‘coindinistas’ at CNAS are advocating defense spending cuts you know the cause has hit mainstream. While reducing the entire CNAS organization to one topic is a bit unfair (they work on a lot more than just COIN), there is some truth to that statement. The public debate has shifted immensely over the past few years, with lots of task forces and commissions offering their own proposals for cutting the U.S. defense budget over the next decade or so.* Earlier this month CNAS added their contribution to the debate with the report . . .
read more

The procurement problem

The U.S. military wants the best. It spends tens of billions of dollars each year developing new weapons systems, but the quest for the best is not an endeavor without obstacles. My fellow contributor Matt Fay pointed to the MEADS system the other day, a system that has little strategic benefit beyond placating allies in Europe and basically duplicates a better system, the Patriot PAC-3.

There are multiple other programs with a history of problems, but none as big in terms of budget or ambition as the F-35, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter. A new article in . . .
read more