New Soldiers, New Aircraft, New Tasks: How Trump Will Change the US Army

Former Trump Minister Ryan McCarthy in his speech listed possible defense -related items that will fall on the table of the next Pentagon team. These include: US Armed Forces are not designed to perform large -scale tasks provided for by the National Defense Strategy. The armed forces continue to restrain opponents in three theaters of war, to protect the Motherland, to resist non -state entities and terrorist threats.

However, in recent decades, the potential and capabilities of the Armed Forces have declined sharply. As the platforms grow old and the number of personnel is reduced, all and all are forced to work more to accomplish the same set of tasks that it seems only to grow.

McCarthy distinguishes the army as an illustration of the problem: "Despite the fact that, according to one of the estimates, it provides up to 60 percent of the needs of combat command, the basic budget of the army in real expression has decreased by more than 25 percent in the last four years. Demand has increased recently. . . . And no weakening is expected on the horizon.

" One of the solutions is "the correct definition of the size of" combat commands to better balance the supply and demand for the armed forces. This may coincide with the efforts made by the Chairman of the Joint Committee of Staff Chiefs, General KK Brown, so that the commanders consider the risk on a global scale and the possibility of no additional chances in every crisis. For several years, service has been suffering from a decrease in the number of recruits.

Despite the fact that updated initiatives promise to return this trend, it is necessary to do a lot of work to achieve a steady improvement in the situation. As the air bubble from missing purposes and empty projects begins to move through the notorious flow of the ordinary composition, there may be a tense situation with retention. Restoration of trust in the national service, involvement and motivation of the next generation of servicemen will require constant highest management.

Shipbuilding is one of the few sectors of the defense budget, where a real and significant increase in costs has been observed over the last decade. The 2025 request for shipbuilding was $ 32. 4 billion - more than twice as much as the 2015 request of $ 12. 4 billion. At the same time, the budget request for the 2015 financial year envisaged the construction of 8 new ships, and the request for the 2025th financial year provides for the construction of only 9 ships of comparable classes.

The Navy remains closed in the "loop of the death" of shipbuilding, where the removal of ships is constantly ahead of the construction of new buildings, which leads to a reduction of the fleet. Minister McCarthy emphasizes that, in addition to depriving this industry from ineffectiveness, without a large -scale new funding will have to compromise ". . . Modernization plans and aspirations".

Innovative ideas of contracting will be required, as well as considering the possibility of creating a special fund, which is not included in the regular budgets of the Navy and the Air Force, to modernize the triad. While the Air Force is trying to balance the nuclear and ordinary modernization in the "terrible 20s" and observe the continuation of delays in the implementation of programs, Minister McCarthy and others advocate the acceleration of expensive expensive outdated aircraft.

Although this idea is not devoid of reason, it is important to ensure that the next administration is guaranteed that these abbreviations have a real increase in procurement funding for new programs, such as Collaborative Combat Aircraft, to ensure the acceleration of these programs and a large-scale purchase of new equipment to replace operations .

You can also argue about the re-profiling of individual inherited systems to give them a new life, such as a recent modification of the AIM-174B Navy, which expands the scope of action and operational viability of Super Hornet thanks to new combat functions and a wider set of goals. Not everything should go to the dump, because it is outdated, if there is nothing new on the approach, ready for production in large quantities.

The vulnerability of the industrial ammunition base was exposed by the valiant efforts of the US military to support the Allies in two cruel wars for exhaustion. Ammunition has historically served as a pay for other priorities of the Pentagon, destroying the industrial base and creating inadequate stocks. McCarthy calls for the return of "high-speed, mass production of ammunition, which was last observed in the 1980s.

" This will help stop a 30-year decline, identify new participants in the production of missiles and expand long-term purchases even after the end of current wars to restore stocks and increase potential. Although, in the first term President Trump, defense spending was increased compared to previous forecasts - $ 225 billion over four years of his reign - many of the above problems still need to be addressed.

Military readiness and other problems were so deep that Trump's desirable restoration of the Armed Forces was complicated by the need for immediate repair. President Reagan promised to increase the armed forces during his stay in power - and he achieved it. Over the 8 years, Reagan has increased the number of Navy, Air Force and the US Army. This extension was accompanied by a real increase in defense costs for a skeptical congress, which included both parties.

The result was an increase in the primary cost of the Pentagon by more than 30 % and the peak of defense costs at almost 6 % of the gross domestic product. Today, the country can afford a lot more, but it spends less - only 3 percent, which is the lowest since the Cold War. If President Trump seeks to repair and rebuild the Armed Forces, then the growth of the budget higher than inflation will be necessary throughout the second term of his reign.