Some in the Australian defence community have called for significant changes to the Australian Defence Force structure in response to changing global strategic conditions. Before Australia considers any new long-range strike capabilities, an analysis of alternatives that examines both cost and capability is essential.
In Unrivaled: Why America Will Remain the World's Sole Superpower Michael Beckley argues not only that U.S. preeminence is safer than most contemporary commentary would have one believe, but also that it is more resilient.
As NATO finalizes its new political guidance designed to shape future military forces, it has the chance to both strengthen Europe’s commitment to burden-sharing and relieve American concern about the creation of a new European Army. Building an enhanced European capacity within NATO entails some risk, but the benefits may outweigh concerns.
Japan has not possessed an aircraft carrier in more than 70 years. But that may soon change as the Japanese government is debating retrofitting a class of destroyers to turn them into aircraft carriers. Considering both operational needs and resources limitations, does an aircraft carrier for Japan make sense?
Why is America in Afghanistan? What interests justify its sacrifices? How will the war end? If the United States finds it hard to answer such questions after nearly two decades, the coming years are unlikely to provide clarity. If a campaign has no end, it can have no objective. If it has no objective, it cannot be won.
European defense spending has been rising since 2014. NATO's two percent of GDP target for defense spending is a goal, not a commitment, and indeed a goal to be reached by 2024, not a standard allies have already failed to meet.
The growing costs of planning for Korean military contingencies place a burden on U.S. defense resources. If Tuesday's summit becomes a step toward eventual guarantees against aggression, the U.S. could remove a major Korean conflict from the top rungs of its defense planning roster, freeing resources for other worries.
Bold promises and even actions that balance the budget for the short term should not mask the fact that the U.S. government has failed to face its long-term budget problems. Without changes, the ability to pay for many functions — including defense — will rely wholly on borrowed money.
Taiwan's 2017 Quadrennial Defense Review is consistent with past reviews on defense strategy, reform of the military service system, and defense budget constraints. It also emphasizes the importance to President Tsai of Taiwan's domestic defense industry and shows uncertainty about U.S. Asia policy.
Why should America spend taxpayer dollars on foreign peacekeepers when it could use the money to increase the capabilities of its own military? It turns out that U.N. peacekeepers are an incredibly good deal when compared to U.S. forces.
Taxpayer dollars have been used for decades to maintain bases that should have been realigned or closed. If policymakers would like more efficient use of defense dollars, they might consider allowing new rounds of Base Realignment and Closure.
President Trump has proposed an increase of $54 billion in defense spending, about 10 percent more than the current budget. But what is the national security strategy that supports this reallocation of resources? A comprehensive discussion of threats to U.S. interests and strategies to address them is in order.