美国战略与预算评估中心-美国的战略选择：疫情后世界的国防支出（英文）-2021.2-16页_2mb

AMERICA'S STRATEGIC CHOICES: DEFENSE SPENDING IN A POST-COVID-19 WORLD

Core Content

This document presents the findings of a strategic exercise conducted by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) and the Ronald Reagan Institute (RRI) in October 2020. The exercise involved bipartisan defense policy and budget experts who were tasked with adjusting the U.S. defense budget under two different scenarios: a severe 10% cut and a sustained 3% annual increase from FY2022 to FY2031. The goal was to assess the impact of these budget adjustments on U.S. strategy, force structure, and modernization.

Main Findings

1. Severe Budget Cut Scenario (10%)

• Total Cuts: $444 billion in Move 1 (FY2022–FY2026) and $209 billion in Move 2 (FY2027–FY2031), compared to the forecasted PB21 defense budget.
• Strategic Priorities: Teams prioritized maintaining nuclear capabilities, including the nuclear triad (bombers, submarines, ICBMs), and emphasized the importance of attack submarines for operations in A2/AD environments.
• Force Structure Reductions:
  • Navy: Reduced the carrier fleet by two, from 11 to 9 ships, to save costs and shift towards a more distributed fleet.
  • Army: Cut an average of four armored, six infantry, and five Stryker Brigade Combat Teams, reducing forward presence and protracted operational capacity.
  • Personnel: Reduced active-duty units by 17% and reserve personnel by 25%, leading to increased reliance on reserves and potential mobilization delays.
• Modernization Trade-offs: Teams had to cut funding for modernization programs, including TACAIR, large surface combatants, and Army ground units, which could undermine the joint force's ability to counter near-peer adversaries.
• Risks:
  • A 10% budget cut could lead to a force capable of only one war at a time.
  • Reduced force structure and modernization may increase reliance on nuclear deterrence.
  • The remaining force would be under strain, potentially affecting operational readiness and support for warfighters.

2. Sustained Moderate Budget Increase Scenario (3% Annual Increase)

• Modernization Focus: Teams were able to maintain existing force structure and invest in modernization, particularly in air and sea platforms.
• Investment Priorities:
  • Air and Sea Platforms: Maintained as core capabilities.
  • Research and Development (R&D): Emphasized to support innovation.
  • Munitions: Prioritized for sustained combat operations.
  • Space, Cyber, and Communications: Highlighted as critical for future operations.
• Implications:
  • The 3% increase allowed for a more balanced approach between force structure and modernization.
  • It reflected the belief that current defense strategy and force levels require more resources to be fully implemented.
  • Teams were less inclined to make major cuts, indicating satisfaction with existing programs or a strategic focus on growth.

Key Information

• Strategic Choices Tool (SCT): A decision-making tool used by CSBA to simulate budget adjustments over a 10-year period. It allows users to adjust existing DoD programs within a given budget constraint.
• Budget Scenarios:
  • 10% Cut: Led to a significantly reduced force with limited modernization and increased reliance on nuclear deterrence.
  • 3% Annual Increase: Enabled continued investment in modernization and the maintenance of current force structure.
• Implications for the Defense Industrial Base (DIB):
  • Sudden cuts could lead to a contraction of the DIB and loss of essential talent.
  • Reduced procurement could result in large job losses and long-term economic challenges.
• Conclusion: The exercise highlights the importance of aligning defense spending with strategic goals. Severe budget cuts risk undermining U.S. military readiness and global influence, while a moderate increase supports a more robust and modern joint force.

Strategic Implications

• Policymakers must carefully consider the long-term consequences of defense budget decisions.
• A balanced approach between force size and modernization is critical for maintaining U.S. strategic advantages.
• The document underscores the need for a sustainable defense strategy that can adapt to evolving threats and economic realities.