March 30, 2018

A Balanced Defense

By Jerry Hendrix

When President Trump signed the 2018 omnibus spending bill, he committed the nation to a two-year, $1.416 trillion defense-spending plan, but his signature did not answer the larger question that has been hanging over the defense debate: Should the nation invest in increased lethal capabilities — that is, more technical solutions such as stealth aircraft and more precise intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissance systems — or expand capacity, otherwise known as growing the force? The new national-security strategy issued by the White House in December and the national-defense strategy released by the Pentagon in January both endorse building capacity — increasing the number of personnel and ships, aircraft, and vehicles overall — as a strategic goal, although the Pentagon document is muted in its phrasing.

However, capabilities proponents, from both the right and the left, make arguments, from fiscal and technology perspectives, that it is no longer possible or necessary to maintain large numbers of troops, tanks, aircraft, and ships in the active force. They advocate instead a smaller but more lethal force centered around advanced capabilities. Voices from the expanded-capacity school argue that a generation of investment in exquisite capabilities has resulted in a diminished force that is too small to maintain the peace or win a war. They advocate significantly increased defense budgets, such as the one just approved, and a larger overall force that includes a bigger Army, Air Force, and Navy.

These approaches — increased capabilities and expanded capacity — appear greatly at odds with each other and draw on dissimilar assumptions regarding the global security environment. Each deserves an honest, objective examination. Is some balance between the two approaches possible?

Read the full article on National Review.

  • Video
    • May 13, 2022
    CNAS Gaming Lab on Meet the Press

    In a special collaboration with NBC’s Meet the Press, The Gaming Lab at CNAS executed a strategic-operational game to provide critical insight into how a potential war with Ch...

  • Podcast
    • May 12, 2022
    Will Tomorrow’s Wars Be Fought by Robots?

    Artificial intelligence and autonomous systems are poised to change the battlefield, and with it, soldiers themselves. Today, the human cost of war is high. Will that be true ...

    By Paul Scharre

  • Reports
    • May 10, 2022
    Risk and Responsibility

    Washington is reimagining its global role, leading the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to make difficult choices about priorities, resources, and risk to better address the l...

    By Becca Wasser & Jennie Matuschak

  • Video
    • April 26, 2022
    Not taking risks with unmanned systems ‘may not be an option,’ says former submarine warfare officer

    Tom Shugart, senior fellow in the Defense Program at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) and former submarine warfare officer for the U.S. Navy, discusses benefits o...

    By Tom Shugart

View All Reports View All Articles & Multimedia