top of page

The Importance of a Robust Defense Industrial Base

By Patrick Alexander

 

Defense and aerospace companies find themselves beset from all sides of the American political spectrum. In August’s Republican Presidential debate, Vivek Ramaswamy attacked fellow candidate Nikki Haley’s neoconservative foreign policy, saying it would endear her to the boards of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. Progressive voices, notably Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), have called for the national defense budget to be cut, arguing those funds could be spent better elsewhere and unfairly reward American defense contractors. Both of these attacks trade on the cynical views held by many American citizens, particularly younger voters, of these defense contractors’ roles in the Global War on Terror. As a result of viral student-led protests in recent months, many Americans associate unpopular foreign policy decisions with these companies, without considering their absence from any military or civilian chain of command, or their separation from long-term policymaking. Granted, there are some ethical concerns about how these businesses maintain connections to policymakers, though action has been taken in this area. Senator Elizabeth Warren’s Department of Defense Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act of 2023 aimed to limit the revolving door of Defense Department employees becoming defense company lobbyists. However, broad criticisms of the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) continue to ignore the crucial role it plays in supporting several American policy goals; we live in an economic and geopolitical moment when the DIB must be supported and maintained, for the sake of American security objectives, the security of our allies, and domestic prosperity.

At the time of this article’s writing, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2024 has been sent to President Biden’s desk, a $874 billion budget for Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and Intelligence Community programs. While the price tag concerns some lawmakers, it’s important to recognize that a large amount of this spending is not on military equipment; 20% of the FY2024 bill is allocated to military personnel in the form of pay raises, healthcare, and family services. As for national security-related spending, several key points within the bill have attracted headlines. Among them is an authorization for $674 million on the Army’s Self-Propelled Howitzer ‘Paladin’ program, and $380 million on new CH-47 Chinook helicopters. The bill also green-lit the search for a new manufacturer of next-generation refueling tankers after Lockheed Martin’s plan to utilize the existing KC-135 system failed. Six more Terminal High Altitude Area Defense Systems (THAAD) were also included, raising the initial Defense Department request by $100 million.

  Justifying their inclusion in the NDAA, these advanced systems have a direct effect on American defense policy across the globe. The CH-47, called “the Army’s answer to bad planning” by former pilot Paul Devincenzo, has been deployed in American combat operations since the Vietnam War, including both Iraq Wars and Afghanistan. It also has numerous civilian applications, such as hurricane recovery, search and rescue, and firefighting. This broad operational use is attributable to its Digital Automatic Flight Control System (DAFCS), enabling it to operate in low-visibility situations. Meanwhile, its advanced cargo-handling capabilities help the CH-47 carry relief goods, like in response to Hurricane Ian in 2022, or resupply combat positions in difficult Afghan conditions. The THAAD missile system represents another piece of impressive engineering for missile defense, capable of intercepting short-, medium-, and intermediate-range missiles in or just above the atmosphere. They have been accordingly deployed across American bases and allies in the Pacific in order to deter hostile actors in the region. Both systems have also been sold to American international partners as well. 20 American allies have either purchased CH-47s directly from Boeing or through deals with the Defense Department. Australia has been purchasing Chinooks since 1972 for use in combat operations and bushfire fighting, leading Boeing to set up an Australian subsidiary to help service the helicopters. THAAD systems have been likewise used by a variety of nations; the United Arab Emirates was the first foreign nation to receive and use a THAAD system, shooting down a Houthi missile in 2022.

  Beyond its direct military and diplomatic utility, the Defense Industrial Base stimulates a broad base of the U.S. economy in accomplishing its mission. Camden, Arkansas, suffered a massive blow when the International Paper plant, a decades-long fixture that made paper bags used across the country, closed its doors in 2000. Defense and aerospace manufacturers, such as Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, have since become the town’s largest employers and put Camden back on the map; despite a sector-wide shortage of skilled labor, they have been able to continue production and high employment thanks to the Biden administration’s various military aid commitments. Erik Perrin, director of operations at General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems and resident of Camden, confirms that “a lot of the frontline weapon systems we get to watch on CNN so intently come out of Camden, Arkansas, in some form or fashion.” As a result of their presence, “small businesses are interested in investing in downtown”, says Cecilia Davoren, owner of Artisana Soaps in downtown Camden. They’ve also been able to give back, with Camden’s Mayor Julian Lott praising Lockheed Martin’s “remarkable” STEM program to support local high schools and develop talent already inside of Camden. The case study of Camden demonstrates the Defense Industrial Base’s economic benefit to the communities it invests in. The Aerospace Industry Association, a trade association of 330 companies from the DIB, estimates that the sector employs over two million Americans. Huntington Ingalls, the Navy’s largest shipbuilder responsible for the upcoming Gerald R. Ford-class carriers, is the largest industrial employer in both Virginia and Mississippi, with the rest of its 43,000 employees spread across California and Alabama. Cutting defense spending would put these jobs at risk, as well as destroy communities like Camden that rely on government investment.

  The NDAA and the products it funds demonstrate that the Defense Industrial Base is not a simple debate mudsling, nor is it a worthless budgetary blackhole. Instead, it is comprised of a private-public partnership that allows the American government to meet military and diplomatic objectives abroad while economically stimulating communities that need it back home. It is not perfect; Boeing’s recent failures with the 737 Max 9 and the industry's lobbying influence are worthy of reasonable scrutiny and regulation. But to call for decreased spending in the NDAA, or for these companies to be named-and-shamed for fulfilling government purchase requests, is to put the benefits they provide at risk during a tense period in geopolitics and economics. American national security is contingent on accurate missile defense being able to neutralize the 6,329 nuclear warheads held by adversarial powers in the event of launch. To advocate for large defense cuts puts America and its allies, particularly those in the Asia-Pacific region that require strong missile defense, at risk. The DIB has proven itself time and time again to be crucial in the United States’ unpredictable security situation. The public and the policymakers they elect need to reconcile the benefits the Defense Industrial Base and their constituent companies provide with their existing views. For American economic and foreign policy goals to be met, the DIB must be embraced, not shamed.


Comments


bottom of page