Experts from the CNAS Defense Strategies and Assessments Program participated in a panel discussion on defense spending. Senior Fellows Jerry Hendrix, Paul Scharre, and Elbridge Colby focused on maintaining readiness for today’s threats while modernizing the force for future challenges. The experts assumed a two percent increase in defense spending above PB17 levels – a realistic level given political dynamics. By investing in a diverse high-low mix of forces for the range of DoD missions, rather than attempting to field a one-size-fits-all “utility infielder” force, Hendrix, Scharre, and Colby modernized the force while maintaining capacity.
More from CNAS
ReportsThe Poison Frog Strategy
Introduction How could Taiwan and the United States respond if China seized one of Taiwan’s outlying islands, such as Pratas/Dongsha (hereafter Dongsha) in the South China Sea...
By Chris Dougherty, Jennie Matuschak & Ripley Hunter
ReportsImproving Joint Operational Concept Development within the U.S. Department of Defense
Executive Summary For the first time in nearly four decades, the DoD is developing joint warfighting concepts designed to counter advanced military rivals—specifically China a...
By Paul Benfield & Greg Grant
CommentaryWhy the Pentagon Should Abandon ‘Strategic Competition’
The U.S. Defense Department has recently been taught it too needs to say the magic word in every force, capability, or resource request. But the magic word isn’t please; it’s ...
By Becca Wasser & Stacie Pettyjohn
CommentaryDon’t Sweat the Small Stuff: Getting Force Design Right in the Next National Defense Strategy
Biden should narrowly focus the DoD on high-end deterrence against China and Russia instead of strategic competition or managing an expanded array of lesser threats....
By Stacie Pettyjohn & Becca Wasser