A Trillion Dollars a Year – Will It Buy America a Better Defense?
While the Pentagon had a very Merry Christmas, American taxpayers only received a lump of coal.
The U.S. Congress approved an Omnibus Spending Bill that gave the funds to the Pentagon $45 billion more than originally requested – a record $816.7 billion dollars – out of $858 billion for the national defense establishment. The Veteran’s AdministrationThe Intelligence Community requested $301.4 billion. This is not deferred defense spending. Military Intelligence Program. There’s also probably something squirreled away at the Department of Homeland Security, but you get the picture.
And don’t forget the interest on the money the U.S. borrows, much of it from foreigners, to pay for national defense.
And that’s not enough for some.
H.R. H.R. defense hawksThe defense budget should be increased to 4.5% GDP or $1.2 trillion. McMaster justifies the budget hike American “restraint” China and Russia are to blame for the aggressive moves of China and Russia, which will be shocking news to residents of Afghanistan and the Middle East who were at the cutting edge of U.S. restraint.
Recently, however, McMaster claimed The United States is “underinvested in defense” and is unable to deter China, and positively noted Japan’s intent to double its defense budget. General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff advocates for a 3%-5% real increase To the budget each fiscal year “preparing the military to meet the threats of the future while fighting the battles of today.”
Stephen Semler, analyst, observes that “In just two years, Biden has signed off on over $1.72 trillion in military spending — $737 billion more than what the infrastructure bill and Inflation Reduction Act provide over *ten* years” That’s what it is all about $240 billion The omnibus bill spending “nonmilitary programs” It is for “military- and law enforcement–related activities.”
And, in 2022, the U.S. spent almost a defense budget’s worth of money – $724 billion – on interest on the public debt.
However, despite this record-breaking payday the military is set up for failure in the future.
Maj. Gen. John Ferrari, US Army (ret.) has pointed out that the Pentagon’s unrealistic, that is, too low, inflation assumptions Are hiding a future $75 billion shortfall. “hollow force” It will be more difficult to do so in the 1980s. According to the National Defense Industrial Association, the Pentagon will need $42 billion more next year in order to make up for the loss. inflation losses, and that from 2021 to 2023 the total loss of the Pentagon’s buying power will exceed $110 billion.
And even if inflation moderates in line with the administration’s hopes, the military will still be in trouble as defense sector inflation It is usually 20 basis points higher that the Consumer Price Index and, according McKinsey,: “DoD could lose over $100 billion in purchasing power within five years if the economy reenters a period of high inflation and low nominal topline increases in the defense budget, similar to what happened in the 1970s.”
This means that there will be lots of yelping to get more money.
What if the military receives less money?
Kevin McCarthy, House Speaker, accepted the Freedom Caucus demand. freeze federal spending Defense could be cut by 75 to 100 billion dollars at the 2022 level,
The hawks did not react as expected. However, William Hartung, an analyst, was able to predict the outcome. argues that a near-trillion-dollar defense budget hasn’t deterred guys like Putin and Xi, but it has enriched the five biggest defense contractors that swallow between $150 and $200 billion of the defense budget, and deliver most major weapons behind schedule and over budget. He advises to pay attention to 2021
The Congressional Budget Office study “that outlined three options for saving over $1 trillion in Pentagon spending over the next ten years without damaging our defense capabilities.”
The military is desperate for cash and its reputation suffers.
The Ronald Reagan Institute’s November 2022 national defense survey It was found that only 48% of those surveyed reported the results. “a great deal of trust and confidence in the military” – up three points from 2021, but still down 22 points from 2018. The survey also found a continued decline from 2021 in confidence in the military’s ability to keep the country safe (50% down from 57%) and act in professional and nonpolitical manner (35% down from 40%).
And the feelings about the military’s politicization both the left-right and right are equally valid, although for different reasons, the right tends to be more dominant. “woke” The left and programs are concerned about the presence of far-right extremists among the ranks.
Large majorities support increased spending, defense and border securityThere is also interest in learning more engaged foreign policyAn increase in foreign assistance. A Rasmussen poll has shown that 50% of likely voters are not aware of the results. disagreed It was an omnibus bill that cost $1.7 trillion and had 4,155 pages. “disaster” The U.S. may be open to the idea of a cheaper way to engage in the world, which could mean that the American public might be more open to the idea. $8 trillion After 9-11, the United States won.
The military isn’t the only public institution suffering a bad reputationHowever, it is used to basking on public esteem and may not know how it can recover.
The military leaders’ actions in the aftermath of the violence at the Capitol on January 6 may have contributed to the slide in the survey.Th. And the chaotic retreat from Kabul in August 2021 – the first time the American people witnessed a defeat in real-time – also probably pushed the poll numbers lower.
The Pentagon called it a “defeat in Afghanistan”. “mission transition,” Social programs are more important than battle skills for commanders, a growing epidemic sexual assaultAn all-time record suicide rateThe inability or unwillingness to pass an exam. “clean audit,” self-dealing by senior officers…no wonder the services are missing their recruiting targets, which will further weaken support for big defense budgets as a family with someone in uniform is more likely to support the Pentagon’s requests.
America’s military leaders may be unreconciled by the ending of the Cold War with the Soviet Union, which wasn’t marked by a victory parade through Red Square, but by Soviet citizens angry because the planned economy couldn’t deliver decent household appliances. They missed the Big Game, and they may be convinced that a small proxy war with Russia will help taxpayers forget about Afghanistan’s defeat and all the lost lives and dollars.
Unique in the world’s militaries, the Pentagon doesn’t think it is responsible for defending its country’s borders.
Instead of defending America, it defends American interests, which are often the mutable interests of the political class, and are not viewed overseas as positively as they are in Washington, D.C. green rooms and think tanks, many staffed by people whose children aren’t in uniform.
The military is an enterprise. It relies on a generous budget to not just pay itself, but also the captive defense contractors that build weapons and provide services – and hire former servicemembers. It’s not “Military, Inc.” Like in Pakistan Or Egypt but the military’s economic interests are often opposed to those of the American people, calling to mind Eric Hoffer: “What starts out here [the U.S.] as a mass movement ends up as a racket, a cult, or a corporation.”
NATO Secretary General and President Joe Biden have been calling for sacrifice To defeat Russia and bring Ukraine into NATO and the European Union, Stoltenberg admits “it could take years…even if the costs are high, not only for military support, also because of rising energy and food prices.”
The U.S. Congress will be giddy gifted in 2022 $113 billion In war aid and economic assistance to Kyiv, but nobody has publicly discussed the cost of replacing military equipment shipped to Ukraine. However, the U.S. Secretary to the Navy has admitted that the aid has been depleted The stocks the U.S. must have for its own defense.
According to the, a lot of the weapons shipped to Ukraine are at risk of being diverted. Organized Crime Index Which reports “Ukraine is believed to have one of the largest arms trafficking markets in Europe. While it has long been a key link in the global arms trade, its role has only intensified since the beginning of the conflict in eastern Ukraine.”
In other words, just because it is fighting Russia, Ukraine hasn’t become more virtuous.
Right on time, we discovered that weapons intended for Ukraine were in the possession of criminal gangs In Finland, Sweden and Denmark, as well as the Netherlands. Boko Haram and ISIS Africa.
The American taxpayers will be grateful for a quick resolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict so that NATO can be handed to Europe and the U.S. can focus on Asia. France can finally get its European Union Army.
NATO was wrong to imagine that the Russian army would be more dangerous than they imagined. Congress should address this analytic shortfall publicly. Europe should be able defend itself. NATO was not a true coalition. It was simply America defending Europe. While the generous U.S. budget enabled Europe to spend its money for social welfare and industrial protection.
The Freedom Caucus budget cut may get the attention of the E-Ring and motivate some reforms, though Congress can’t put all the blame on the Pentagon as it legislated many of the military’s inefficiencies into existence.
Congress should consider multi-year defense budgets to relieve contractors’ planning uncertainty and reduce the cost of weapons systems; giving DoD authority to spend Operations and Maintenance Funds are spread across multiple fiscal years in order to reduce budget volatility and the “use it or lose it” Mentality; another round military base closings To drive infrastructure savings; review domestic content legislation (the “Buy America Act”), and reexamining big-ticket programs like the $1.7 trillion dollar F-35 combat aircraft that has been plagued by delays, cost overruns, and technical faults, such as structural weaknesses, software glitches, faulty ejection seats, and a modernization program that is four years behind.
According to a Reagan Institute poll, Americans want to continue to interact with the world. They recognize that China poses the greatest threat to the U.S. However, only 40% believe the U.S. should remain in the global arena. “More engaged and take the lead” (51% in February 2021; this is down from 51%). This may give less room for military adventure and allow diplomacy to play a greater role. Only 25% of respondents worry about Pentagon bosses. “Military leadership, such as officers and generals” as the best in world (down 8 percentage points from 2021).
If Congress balances funding for diplomacy as well as the military and defense services that were deformed by the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, and the subsequent response to 9-11, engagement with the rest of the world can be improved.
Learn More “resources,” This is money. The State Department, Commerce Department and U.S. trade representative will be given clear instructions by the White House to help de-securitize international relations. They will emphasize free and fair trading, since foreign policy that does not provide economic benefits to the U.S. is a hobby for bureaucrats.
As support for an indefinite involvement in Ukraine slipping, now may be the time to push Ukraine, America’s proxy, to restart negotiations with Russia, especially as the Republican Congress is dubious about sending even more aid to Ukraine.
Another to-do item is to examine the effects America’s sanctions policy has on trade and finance, as seen in the distortion of world supply chains – and the attendant shortages and price jumps that damage U.S. military readiness – caused by U.S. sanctions on Russia, and whoever else is the villain du jour.
Washington’s eagerness to sanction anyone and everyone is partly responsible for the BRICS effort to create a new reserve currency OPEC is a hot topic. selling oil to China In exchange for Yuan, the United States will be permanently weaker.
Instead of parroting the Pentagon’s wish for budget increase of 3%-5% above inflation to fund another round of “great power competition,” the Republicans should hold hearings on how the nation’s financial challenges will affect its strategic choices, and discuss the opportunity costs of the proposed unprecedented defense spending levels that are crowding out other important discretionary spending, taking the opportunity to remind the military of Bernard Brodie’s maxim, “Strategy wears a dollar sign.”
Recently, Congress announced the creation of a bipartisan congressional committee commission “will examine President Joe Biden’s 2022 National Defense Strategy and craft recommendations for its implementation.” Although the names of familiar faces are used to attack the commission, there aren’t any economists who can examine the true cost of the defense strategy over the long-term and educate the public about the amount of debt that the Pentagon expects them all to assume.
General Omar Bradley, the renowned commander of World War 2 observed. “Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics.” In a time when the U.S. no longer commands the world’s economy as it did in 1945, America’s commanders must also talk economics so they will understand an enemy that can bring a government to heel, the “bond market vigilantes.”
In future wars, the Pentagon will have to understand war’s impact on the global supply chain before the commanders make their recommendations to the President, who will also have to consider the supply chain effects on the U.S. and world economy.
The war may be fought in a way that minimizes shocks to the global economic. This will go against the grain and tend to forget about the military establishment. “the economy” Great benefits program and cool gear get you paid.
Pentagon leaders should focus on rebuilding the military’s reputation with the public by:
- Starting a conversation about how the military can help defend the country’s borders. In the U.S., this is regarded as a civilian, law enforcement function, but it’s time the taxpayers get something back for the money they grant the Pentagon every year, despite the aversion of the brass to this mission.
- Ending the military’s epidemic of sexual assault and suicide, which are probably motivating responsible parents to keep their children away from military service.
- Senior officers must adhere to certain standards. The Fat Leonard bribery scandal Current investigation into retired General John Allen Incorrectly lobbing foreign interests is a sign to military leaders that they must stop preaching morality and ethics to their troops and instead practice what they preach. Additionally, lifetime ban The loyalty of retired senior officers who have worked for foreign interests is evident to them.
- Being upfront with the public about the true cost of the Pentagon’s future strategy, which is a greater threat to the public fiscal health than anything Putin or Xi can dream up.
If the Pentagon was a publicly-traded company, the board of directors would have fired the managers and would themselves be the target of a shareholders’ lawsuit. American taxpayers may be reluctant to “pay any price, bear any burden” For an expensive military, whose record since 1945 can be charitably described as “mixed” and is failing to deter America’s enemies.
James Durso (@james_durso), regularly comments on foreign policy and national-security matters. Durso spent 20 years in the U.S. Navy and has served in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and other countries.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
