The Middle East is in turmoil, conflicts are erupting in Eastern Europe, an arms race is underway in Asia, and civil wars dot the map of Africa. Even ignoring Iraq, Afghanistan and the threat of terrorism, the world looks full of trouble-spots these days.
National Intelligence director, James Clapper, testified last month that in his 50-year career in intelligence, he had not “experienced a time when we’ve been beset by more crises and threats around the globe.”
Yet, in its new budget, the Obama Administration is proposing deep cuts in defense spending. Not since before World War 2 will the Army be as small. The number of Navy ships will drop to World War 1 levels. The Air Force is slated to lose several aircraft, including the famous spy plane, the U-2.
Congress is unlikely to approve all these proposals. But with the world in such a mess, why are they even being considered?
The across-the-board spending cuts Congress enacted in 2012, when it could not agree on how to trim the Federal budget, are one reason. While many worried about their impact on social programs and public services, defense programs were targeted for half the reductions. The results are now evident.
In addition, as former Defense Secretary Robert Gates notes in his memoir, Duty, the military itself has long resisted modernizing its forces. The President and his staff, he also writes, have little background or interest in defense policy. Other than as a source of money for their districts, neither do many members of Congress. The result: sharp cutbacks.
Nonetheless, the world is still a dangerous place. And if the United States is not prepared to respond to crises, who will be?
Sources
“Worldwide Threat Assessment to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence” (Office of the Director of National Intelligence)
“Winners, Losers in Pentagon’s New Budget” (NBC News)
Gates, Robert M. Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary of War. (Knopf, 2014)
