Balancing strategy and budgets

[Administrator]

“ Five times in the last 90 years, the United States has disarmed after a conflict: World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam and then the Cold War,” testified Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Capitol Hill in March.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2008/10/3666455

[joeabn]

The world today is increasingly permissive with threats emerging across the globe. The next administration will be forced to make difficult choices on competing priorities. The current economic crises will have serious implications that will affect the current transformation of our military. Implementation of the Army’s transformation plan has been difficult. The military has tried to transform while fighting a war. The unintended consequences has resulted in an over stretch and exhausted force that has financially strained the nation.

As a result, priority of funding and expenditures within the Department of Defense will undoubtedly be the biggest challenge in the years ahead. How much should the United States spend on its defense? What areas too fund? In order to deal with the challenges the next administration will have to answer the following:

1) Balance between the priorities in operations and force modernization
2) Determine where to take risks by reducing cost in procurement of costly and ineffective programs
3) Find a way to balance both current and future priorities

The impending competition for resource will pose critical defense policy and planning choices for the next administration. Historically, the U.S. has funded defense at much higher levels than the current 4 percent share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, federal deficits, demand for domestic spending and the cost of the GWOT will place increased pressure on future defense spending and force modernization. Additionally, the Army has to be able to develop capabilities to meet both conventional and unconventional threats.

MAJ Terrones