Public Spend Forum’s Post

The Commission on the National Defense Strategy released its final report, and it is a must-read. I couldn't agree more with the assessment that the U.S. is facing threats greater than any time since World War II and more complex than the Cold War, when it required our military to be able to execute a two-war strategy.    The Commission’s Chairwoman Jane Harman said, “We believe there needs to be fundamental change in the way the Pentagon and government agencies do business, plus a robust incorporation of technology and the tech sector, and full embrace of the capabilities of our partners and allies.”   We need to update the National Defense Strategy and force sizing approach to be able to credibly deter conflicts; if deterrence fails, our military needs to be able to fight and win at least two major theatre conflicts on a near simultaneous basis, as I have advocated for consistently. The American taxpayers and our warfighters deserve better results for the dollars we spend (and get more bang for the buck). It's essential we upgrade the strategy, and the Pentagon needs to spend its dollars smarter.   https://lnkd.in/e53KbH6K

Congress established the Commission on the National Defense Strategy to examine and make recommendations about the US National Defense Strategy. The Commission's report highlights that the US is currently facing its most challenging global environment with severe ramifications since the Cold War. Unfortunately, trends are worsening, not improving. The report emphasizes the need for an "integrated deterrence" that is not being practiced today. To address these challenges effectively, a comprehensive "all elements of national power" approach is essential to coordinate and leverage resources across various sectors. Additionally, the Commission suggests that Congress should rescind the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act spending caps. Instead, real growth for fiscal year 2025 defense and nondefense national security spending should be provided, falling within the range recommended by the 2018 NDS Commission. It is imperative to align resources cohesively across the Department of Defense, the executive branch, the private sector, civil society, and US allies and partners for a robust and effective national defense strategy.

Tomorrow, Tuesday, December 10, 2024, from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. ET, the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security’s Forward Defense initiative will host a hybrid fireside chat featuring former Congresswoman Jane Harman and former Ambassador Eric Edelman, the co-chairs of the Commission on the National Defense Strategy (NDS). The discussion will focus on the Commission’s key findings and recommendations, which was established by Congress to assess the 2022 NDS and identify the most pressing national security challenges facing the United States. In their conversation, Harman and Edelman will delve into the Commission’s report, which emphasizes the growing threats posed by China and Russia and the need for the United States to adopt a “Multiple Theater Force Construct.” This approach is designed to defend the homeland, deter adversaries, and, if necessary, defeat simultaneous threats across the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East. With a new administration on the horizon, the Commission’s insights are crucial in shaping the future of US defense policy and the next National Defense Strategy. Don’t miss this opportunity to hear from two of the leading figures in defense policy as they share their perspectives on the future of US defense in an increasingly complex global environment. Register here: https://bit.ly/3BiHnmI #ForwardDefense #DefenseStrategy #NDS #ScowcroftCenter

This a great read and gives a pretty grave assessment. "The United States faces the most challenging global environment with the most severe ramifications since the end of the Cold War. The trends are getting worse, not better." "Fundamental shifts in threats and technology require fundamental change in how DoD functions. DoD is operating at the speed of bureaucracy when the threat is approaching wartime urgency." "U.S. industrial production is grossly inadequate to provide the equipment, technology, and munitions needed today, let alone given the demands of great power conflict." "The DoD workforce and the all-volunteer force provide an unmatched advantage. However, recruiting failures have shrunk the force and raise serious questions about the all-volunteer force in peacetime, let alone in major combat. The civilian workforces at DoD and in the private sector also face critical shortfalls." "The Joint Force is at the breaking point of maintaining readiness today. Adding more burden without adding resources to rebuild readiness will cause it to break." https://lnkd.in/ggYyQ4nm

Just beginning to digest the newest Rand Report on U.S. National Defense Strategy. Look forward to insights and recommendations for future warfare and organizational constructs. https://lnkd.in/gNNWQ5A3

I've read several news articles this week summarizing a report published by Rand and conducted by the Commission on the National Defense Strategy. In each news article I found at least one statement that I believe incorrectly interpreted the report's findings. If this is a topic you are interested in, I encourage you to read (or speed read) the Rand report itself. Read the summary, chapters 1 and 2 for sure, then whatever else is of interest. Some will say it sensationalizes global US military risk. But at a minimum, its good background on the geo-political / geo-military international construct the US finds itself in. Just skip the news articles; read the report.

Public and private sector experts came together to discuss the evolving intelligence landscape at Baird’s 7th Annual Defense & Government Conference. We outline key takeaways the discussion, including perspectives from the intelligence community and threat intelligence industry leaders. https://lnkd.in/ghDYdKxW

The United States Department of Defense needs a new force construct to be able to handle multiple wars in different parts of the world, according to a congressionally mandated commission. The current two-war construct is no longer adequate to meet today's threats. The Commission on the National Defense Strategy found that the force-sizing construct in the 2022 National Defense Strategy is "inadequate." The commission proposes a "Multiple Theater Force Construct" to reflect the likelihood of simultaneous conflicts in multiple theaters, such as the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East. The commission argues that "integrated deterrence," a key concept in the 2022 NDS, is not being reflected in practice. They call for a "truly all elements of national power approach" to coordinate and leverage resources across the government, the private sector, civil society, and U.S. allies and partners. The commission's findings highlight the need for the DoD to adapt its force construct to address the changing strategic environment. This includes addressing issues with the defense industrial base, outdated military hardware, and the Joint Force's readiness. #NationalDefenseStrategy #ForceConstruct #MultipleThreatEnvironment #IntegratedDeterrence #DefenseIndustrialBase

The report that we have seen referenced the last two days has been released. I went right to my two biases: Special Operations (Special Forces) and Korea/Northeast Asia. Here is the Special Operations main entry.  There are other references to SOF as well but this is the most substantive entry. QUOTE: Special Operations During the Global War on Terrorism, the special operations community was at the forefront of the U.S. military response. The strategic environment has shifted, but special operations forces remain an essential tool of military power, both for their contributions to the remaining threat from violent extremists and because special operations forces have a vital role in great power competition—particularly in building influence with allies and partners and countering gray- zone threats.Therefore, the Commission recommends preserving the special operations force structure and funding. However, we recommend that Army Special Forces in particular shift resources from counterterrorism and direct action to unconventional warfare, special reconnaissance, and foreign internal defense. END QUOTE Although General Fenton was listed as appearing before the committee, I can find no one else listed on the commission or as members of the commission staff, or anyone else appearing before the committee with any substantive special operations expertise let alone Special Forces.  If there had been, the report would not have included the last sentence highlighted in the paragraph above. Instead a Special Forces experienced staffer would have written "We recommend Special Forces sustain as its primary operations and strategic focus unconventional warfare and foreign internal defense which are its traditional and foundational missions because these are the most relevant missions to addressing the full range of threat from violent extremist organizations to support to large scale combat operations and to the political and irregular warfare requirements in support of strategic competition in the gray zone." While CT, DA, and SR are special operations activities that Special Forces have conducted or supported, they have never been the main Special Forces activity even during the Global War on Terrorism.  It is Unconventional Warfare that informs and provides the foundation for all other activities that Special Forces may be called upon to conduct, from foreign Internal defense to counterterrorism. Commission on the National Defense Strategy https://lnkd.in/evtt5FfU

The recently released FY25 Defense Budget Request outlines key priorities that resonate with my military and civilian careers in financial management and budget. Here's a breakdown focusing on modernization, readiness, and personnel support: Modernization Initiatives: The budget proposes significant investments in new technologies and platforms. This includes advancements in cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, and procuring next-generation weapon systems. These efforts underscore a strategic pivot towards addressing the evolving threat landscape and ensuring the U.S. military maintains its technological edge. Enhancing Readiness: The request prioritizes readiness and allocating funds for training, maintenance, and operations. This ensures that our forces remain versatile, responsive, and prepared for various operational scenarios. As someone who has served on active duty and in the reserves, I understand the critical importance of sustained readiness to meet any challenge. Support for Military and Civilian Personnel: Reflecting on my time with the DHA and other defense agencies, I am particularly attentive to the budget's commitment to supporting our military and civilian workforce. This includes proposed pay raises and investments in healthcare, housing, and family support programs, which are vital for the well-being and morale of our defense community. I've seen firsthand how budget allocations impact operational capabilities and personnel welfare. The FY25 Budget Request, focusing on modernization, readiness, and support, lays a foundation for addressing future challenges while caring for those who serve. As we continue to analyze and implement this budget, we must remember that these figures are not just numbers—they represent our commitment to national security and the individuals dedicated to our nation's defense.